Seppius Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 1 hour ago, rattlesnake said: He was a convicted crook who had a long-standing history of corruption and embezzlement with his brother Oleg. Russian investigators accuse Alexei and Oleg Navalny of defrauding a Russian subsidiary of the French cosmetics company Yves Rocher out of about 26m roubles (about $811,000; £505,000). [...] In a further charge, the Navalny brothers are charged with laundering 21m roubles (about $656,000, £408,000) in funds. [...] In that case, he was found guilty of heading a group that embezzled timber worth 16m roubles from the Kirovles state timber company, while working as an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region, Nikita Belykh. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24731503 And Putin got his reportedly $40 Billion from the salary of President 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabas Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 54 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: He was a convicted crook who had a long-standing history of corruption and embezzlement with his brother Oleg. Russian investigators accuse Alexei and Oleg Navalny of defrauding a Russian subsidiary of the French cosmetics company Yves Rocher out of about 26m roubles (about $811,000; £505,000). [...] In a further charge, the Navalny brothers are charged with laundering 21m roubles (about $656,000, £408,000) in funds. [...] In that case, he was found guilty of heading a group that embezzled timber worth 16m roubles from the Kirovles state timber company, while working as an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region, Nikita Belykh. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24731503 Hero anyway, or maybe even because of... His 'convictions' were suspended but came at critical times as he was was running for election against Putin cronies. WIKI "Both criminal cases were widely considered politically motivated and intended to bar him from running in future elections[15][16]" Maybe even Super Hero for his efforts against Vladimir Putin. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattlesnake Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 7 minutes ago, rabas said: Hero anyway, or maybe even because of... His 'convictions' were suspended but came at critical times as he was was running for election against Putin cronies. WIKI "Both criminal cases were widely considered politically motivated and intended to bar him from running in future elections[15][16]" Maybe even Super Hero for his efforts against Vladimir Putin. You can't expect to know the truth if you read sources such as Wikipedia. Here is what its co-founder Larry Sanger says about it: Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/wikipedia-founder-larry-sanger-democrats-b1885138.html 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TallGuyJohninBKK Posted February 17 Popular Post Share Posted February 17 57 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia Of course, nowhere in the almost 3-year-old article you linked to does Larry Sanger actually say what the Independent's headline claims him to have said. “Can you trust it to always give you the truth? Well, it depends on what you think the truth is,” said Mr Sanger, who co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 alongside Jimmy Wales." Not quite the same sentiment. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattlesnake Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: Of course, nowhere in the almost 3-year-old article you linked to does Larry Sanger actually say what the Independent's headline claims him to have said. “Can you trust it to always give you the truth? Well, it depends on what you think the truth is,” said Mr Sanger, who co-founded Wikipedia in 2001 alongside Jimmy Wales." Not quite the same sentiment. And the next three paragraphs: He told Lockdown TV that “if only one version of the facts is allowed then that gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control of things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that.” He said it (Wikipedia) “seems to assume that there is only one legitimate defensible version of the truth on any controversial question. That’s not how Wikipedia used to be.” Wikipedia is visited by millions every day and is the first online repository of information for many. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post candide Posted February 17 Popular Post Share Posted February 17 Anyone else has identified the MAGA instructions received about this issue? 😅 They cannot directly support Putin eliminating his main opponent, so they use indirect arguments: Navalny is stupid, he should have stayed outside Russia, he's corrupt, etc... 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post daveAustin Posted February 17 Popular Post Share Posted February 17 12 hours ago, john donson said: which head of state is not a crook, name one... It wouldn’t matter what name one put forth, with that kind of sentiment confirmation bias would have you shoot down any and all named. As a pm, Thanathorn could be running things here, Navalny in Russia—both decent people. With the latter rightful leader in Russia, all you’d need then is to replace the cancerous ccp with a few good men (or one) and the world would instantly be a happier place. Anyone who thinks that utter egotistical pissant of a guy running things in Russia is a cool dude, or justified in what he is doing, or feels any empathy for him whatsoever (Carlson, Brand, Chomsky etc) seriously need to get their head read. You are being played! 3 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveAustin Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 6 hours ago, rattlesnake said: He was a convicted crook who had a long-standing history of corruption and embezzlement with his brother Oleg. Russian investigators accuse Alexei and Oleg Navalny of defrauding a Russian subsidiary of the French cosmetics company Yves Rocher out of about 26m roubles (about $811,000; £505,000). [...] In a further charge, the Navalny brothers are charged with laundering 21m roubles (about $656,000, £408,000) in funds. [...] In that case, he was found guilty of heading a group that embezzled timber worth 16m roubles from the Kirovles state timber company, while working as an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region, Nikita Belykh. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24731503 If you are any sort of opposition in Russia, you will have all sorts slung your way and be blamed for everything to the nth degree. Even if the above were a thing, it would pale in comparison to what little botox napoleon has done. Murdering thousands for a start. But that’s ok, right! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 6 hours ago, rattlesnake said: You can't expect to know the truth if you read sources such as Wikipedia. Here is what its co-founder Larry Sanger says about it: Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/wikipedia-founder-larry-sanger-democrats-b1885138.html Your own BBC link says the same thing. "While the appeal verdict left him a free man, the conviction itself was upheld, meaning he is barred from running for public office. Alexei Navalny has always insisted the accusations against him are politically motivated." "Navalny first came to prominence as a blogger exposing corruption which he identified with Vladimir Putin - who returned as president of Russia last year - and his allies. He helped organise a wave of street protests after the December 2011 parliamentary election was marred by reports of abuses." What did you expect would happen to him from a man who rose to fame in Russia exposing Putin's massive corruption? Why do you think Putin's corrupt regime won't release his body? Alexei Navalny death: Team accuses Russia of 'hiding' his body https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68326784 The regime is so scared of him in Russia that they haven't even shown an image of his face on TV networks when announcing his death. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rabas Posted February 17 Popular Post Share Posted February 17 (edited) 7 hours ago, rattlesnake said: You can't expect to know the truth if you read sources such as Wikipedia. Here is what its co-founder Larry Sanger says about it: Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/wikipedia-founder-larry-sanger-democrats-b1885138.html I agree we live in a world of hard found truth. My understanding about Russia comes from Russia, Russian friends, Russian experts. more Russians, and the USSR where I traveled in my youth. What WIKI"s founder really said was "he cautioned that the website can’t always be trusted to give people the truth” He's mostly refers to US politics. Never trusting anything from WIKI is like never trusting Rattlesnake because he echos Covid misinformation. About Navalny. Even if his highly suspicious convictions were real, which I doubt, it has no bearing on his numerous hero activities like exposing Putin's deep secrets, for which he eventually gave his life. Edited February 18 by rabas 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabas Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 Mass rally for Navalny in Georgia where Putin can't lock people up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuamRudy Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 9 hours ago, rattlesnake said: He was a convicted crook who had a long-standing history of corruption and embezzlement with his brother Oleg. Russian investigators accuse Alexei and Oleg Navalny of defrauding a Russian subsidiary of the French cosmetics company Yves Rocher out of about 26m roubles (about $811,000; £505,000). [...] In a further charge, the Navalny brothers are charged with laundering 21m roubles (about $656,000, £408,000) in funds. [...] In that case, he was found guilty of heading a group that embezzled timber worth 16m roubles from the Kirovles state timber company, while working as an adviser to the governor of the Kirov region, Nikita Belykh. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24731503 $656k? Not a very ambitious crook then. Of course , the intention of such stories is to discredit the individual but the size of the allegation is so small in relation to the actual graft that goes on in Russia that you have to wonder why suggest such a minute figure. Could it be that they couldn't actually tie him to any corruption so had to settle for a more believable (to masses) figure? Although I am sure that there are very few in Russia who are unaware of the rampant corruption that pollutes every layer of Russian society. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rattlesnake Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 10 minutes ago, rabas said: I agree we live in a world of hard found truth. My understanding about Russia comes from Russia, Russian friends, Russian experts. more Russians, and the USSR where I traveled in my youth. What WIKI"s founder really said was "he cautioned that the website can’t always be trusted to give people the truth” He's mostly refers to US politics. Never trusting anything from WIKI is like never trusting Rattlesnake because he echos Covid misinformation. About Navalny. Even if his highly suspicious convictions were real, which I doubt, it has no bearing on his numerous hero activities like exposing Putin's hidden secrets, for which eventually gave his life. What Sanger says is that Wikipedia is not an objective outlet and overwhelmingly leans towards the political views of those who run it. Based on this premise, it is not a valid source to be quoted as fact. I am sorry for Navalny, his wife and children. But as always, I am wary of simplistic dichotomies and am aware of the nuances and gray areas of someone who is clearly a very dubious character. And I can only laugh cynically at the hypocrisy of those who hail him as a hero because the media says that is how it is, but will readily turn a blind eye to Julian Assange who is facing the same fate in the UK and USA, which are of course incredibly democratic countries without a drop of blood on their hands. 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rabas Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 (edited) 49 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: What Sanger says is that Wikipedia is not an objective outlet and overwhelmingly leans towards the political views of those who run it. Based on this premise, it is not a valid source to be quoted as fact. I am sorry for Navalny, his wife and children. But as always, I am wary of simplistic dichotomies and am aware of the nuances and gray areas of someone who is clearly a very dubious character. And I can only laugh cynically at the hypocrisy of those who hail him as a hero because the media says that is how it is, but will readily turn a blind eye to Julian Assange who is facing the same fate in the UK and USA, which are of course incredibly democratic countries without a drop of blood on their hands. It's Russians claiming Navalny is a hero. Did you see the mass rally in Georgia? Mostly Russians. The only link between Navalny and Assange is that Assange was functionally a Putin stooge. Had Assange released information only related to wrongdoing, not mass information damaging legitimate US interests, I might consider him a hero too. I doubt Navalny and Assange would like each other. OTH, Navalny was friends with Garry Kasparov, a truly brilliant Russian who also works tirelessly to expose Putin and save his country. Kasparov is in exile in part because he too tried to run for office. Putin would probably kill him if he could. Here is Kasperov on why Putin killed Navalny. If you really want to understand Russia, Putin, and the threat to the West, start here. If you don't trust media, you need to listen to folks like Kasperov. Edited February 18 by rabas 2 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post eisfeld Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 4 hours ago, rattlesnake said: What Sanger says is that Wikipedia is not an objective outlet and overwhelmingly leans towards the political views of those who run it. Based on this premise, it is not a valid source to be quoted as fact. As usual you are twisting things around. He said no such things as you are claiming. But I'm not surprised that a notorious covid misinformation spreader is also spreading misinformation on other topics. In fact, the use of Sanger as a anti-Wikipedia argument grew from the covid conspiracy corner. If you want to dispute the facts quoted from Wikipedia then provide facts from other trusted sources to the contrary. The claims against Navalny have to always be seen as highly suspect given the long history of Putin brutally crushing any opposition and the many people murdered because they became a threat to his authority. Putin is responsible for thousands and thousands of deaths. He made Russia a society which is incredibly corrupt and abusive. An absolutely evil person. 2 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Hamus Yaigh Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 19 hours ago, john donson said: which head of state is not a crook, name one... Wrong thread mate. There's crooks and this thread is about cold blooded killers. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newnative Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post candide Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 6 hours ago, rattlesnake said: What Sanger says is that Wikipedia is not an objective outlet and overwhelmingly leans towards the political views of those who run it. Based on this premise, it is not a valid source to be quoted as fact. I am sorry for Navalny, his wife and children. But as always, I am wary of simplistic dichotomies and am aware of the nuances and gray areas of someone who is clearly a very dubious character. And I can only laugh cynically at the hypocrisy of those who hail him as a hero because the media says that is how it is, but will readily turn a blind eye to Julian Assange who is facing the same fate in the UK and USA, which are of course incredibly democratic countries without a drop of blood on their hands. A Wikipedia article is no more nor less reliable than the sources used. That's what smart people do when they use Wikipedia: check the sources. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattlesnake Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 (edited) 10 hours ago, rabas said: It's Russians claiming Navalny is a hero. Did you see the mass rally in Georgia? Mostly Russians. The only link between Navalny and Assange is that Assange was functionally a Putin stooge. Had Assange released information only related to wrongdoing, not mass information damaging legitimate US interests, I might consider him a hero too. I doubt Navalny and Assange would like each other. OTH, Navalny was friends with Garry Kasparov, a truly brilliant Russian who also works tirelessly to expose Putin and save his country. Kasparov is in exile in part because he too tried to run for office. Putin would probably kill him if he could. Here is Kasperov on why Putin killed Navalny. If you really want to understand Russia, Putin, and the threat to the West, start here. If you don't trust media, you need to listen to folks like Kasperov. Kasparov is a great chess player and he should stay at the chessboard, the "regime change" he advocates is a thing of the past, Pax Americana and everything it entails is over and "the West" no longer calls the shots, it should be obvious by now. Edited February 18 by rattlesnake 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattlesnake Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 6 hours ago, eisfeld said: As usual you are twisting things around. He said no such things as you are claiming. But I'm not surprised that a notorious covid misinformation spreader is also spreading misinformation on other topics. In fact, the use of Sanger as a anti-Wikipedia argument grew from the covid conspiracy corner. If you want to dispute the facts quoted from Wikipedia then provide facts from other trusted sources to the contrary. The claims against Navalny have to always be seen as highly suspect given the long history of Putin brutally crushing any opposition and the many people murdered because they became a threat to his authority. Putin is responsible for thousands and thousands of deaths. He made Russia a society which is incredibly corrupt and abusive. An absolutely evil person. From the article: He told Lockdown TV that “if only one version of the facts is allowed then that gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control of things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that.” He said it (Wikipedia) “seems to assume that there is only one legitimate defensible version of the truth on any controversial question. That’s not how Wikipedia used to be.” [...] Mr Sanger cited the example of an article about US President Joe Biden and says it doesn’t include information from the Republicans’ perspective. I'll pass on the Pavlovian anti-Putin drivel. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bkk Brian Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 40 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: From the article: He told Lockdown TV that “if only one version of the facts is allowed then that gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control of things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that.” He said it (Wikipedia) “seems to assume that there is only one legitimate defensible version of the truth on any controversial question. That’s not how Wikipedia used to be.” [...] Mr Sanger cited the example of an article about US President Joe Biden and says it doesn’t include information from the Republicans’ perspective. I'll pass on the Pavlovian anti-Putin drivel. More Putin apologist talking points? Putin Escalates Pressure On New Information Foe: Wikipedia Russian President Vladimir Putin advised Russians to not trust Wikipedia Thursday, continuing the Kremlin’s campaign against the volunteer-run online encyclopedia after it refused to remove information about the country’s invasion of Ukraine. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2022/05/05/putin-escalates-pressure-on-new-information-foe-wikipedia/?sh=2cf18572285f 2 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattlesnake Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 13 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said: More Putin apologist talking points? Putin Escalates Pressure On New Information Foe: Wikipedia Russian President Vladimir Putin advised Russians to not trust Wikipedia Thursday, continuing the Kremlin’s campaign against the volunteer-run online encyclopedia after it refused to remove information about the country’s invasion of Ukraine. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2022/05/05/putin-escalates-pressure-on-new-information-foe-wikipedia/?sh=2cf18572285f Direct quote from Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 50 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: From the article: He told Lockdown TV that “if only one version of the facts is allowed then that gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control of things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that.” He said it (Wikipedia) “seems to assume that there is only one legitimate defensible version of the truth on any controversial question. That’s not how Wikipedia used to be.” [...] Mr Sanger cited the example of an article about US President Joe Biden and says it doesn’t include information from the Republicans’ perspective. I'll pass on the Pavlovian anti-Putin drivel. More precisely, he cited the "Ukraine scandal". If one wants to keep to facts, it's difficult to leave much room to the "Republican perspective" about it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 minute ago, rattlesnake said: Direct quote from Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger. Straight over your head then............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ballpoint Posted February 18 Popular Post Share Posted February 18 16 hours ago, candide said: Anyone else has identified the MAGA instructions received about this issue? 😅 They cannot directly support Putin eliminating his main opponent, so they use indirect arguments: Navalny is stupid, he should have stayed outside Russia, he's corrupt, etc... They're using exactly the same victim blaming argument they do for the cause of the Ukraine war: The war is Ukraine's fault because it provoked Putin by existing. Navalny's death is his own fault because he returned to Russia, therefore provoking Putin. They're effectively saying he knew he would be killed if he returned, but still did so, so he's only got himself to blame, which rather begs the question; just what sort of twisted world does one have to live in to think it's perfectly fine for the leader of a country to ruthlessly murder any opponents, or anyone who looks at him in a funny way, and is not only perfectly within his rights to do so to anyone in his country, but the victim is entirely at fault for having the audacity to step foot there? (A position their hero is presently trying to claim that he should have the same right to do in the US). 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleskerins Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 On 2/16/2024 at 8:48 PM, Tug said: He was a Russian patriot who wanted to bring Russia out of the dark into the free world he was a brave man who was willing to die for his principles a respectable man in my book rip sir my condolences to your loved ones and the Russian nation very brave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleskerins Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 34 minutes ago, ballpoint said: They're using exactly the same victim blaming argument they do for the cause of the Ukraine war: The war is Ukraine's fault because it provoked Putin by existing. Navalny's death is his own fault because he returned to Russia, therefore provoking Putin. They're effectively saying he knew he would be killed if he returned, but still did so, so he's only got himself to blame, which rather begs the question; just what sort of twisted world does one have to live in to think it's perfectly fine for the leader of a country to ruthlessly murder any opponents, or anyone who looks at him in a funny way, and is not only perfectly within his rights to do so to anyone in his country, but the victim is entirely at fault for having the audacity to step foot there? (A position their hero is presently trying to claim that he should have the same right to do in the US). Ass kissers of Fascism 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleskerins Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 2 hours ago, rattlesnake said: From the article: He told Lockdown TV that “if only one version of the facts is allowed then that gives a huge incentive to wealthy and powerful people to seize control of things like Wikipedia in order to shore up their power. And they do that.” He said it (Wikipedia) “seems to assume that there is only one legitimate defensible version of the truth on any controversial question. That’s not how Wikipedia used to be.” [...] Mr Sanger cited the example of an article about US President Joe Biden and says it doesn’t include information from the Republicans’ perspective. I'll pass on the Pavlovian anti-Putin drivel. yes the R perspective Smironov! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleskerins Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 2 hours ago, rattlesnake said: Kasparov is a great chess player and he should stay at the chessboard, the "regime change" he advocates is a thing of the past, Pax Americana and everything it entails is over and "the West" no longer calls the shots, it should be obvious by now. When did America call the shots in Russia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleskerins Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 13 hours ago, RuamRudy said: $656k? Not a very ambitious crook then. Of course , the intention of such stories is to discredit the individual but the size of the allegation is so small in relation to the actual graft that goes on in Russia that you have to wonder why suggest such a minute figure. Could it be that they couldn't actually tie him to any corruption so had to settle for a more believable (to masses) figure? Although I am sure that there are very few in Russia who are unaware of the rampant corruption that pollutes every layer of Russian society. "Russian investigators" and who do they answer to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now