I fully agree that my post did not bring anything new to the table. I really felt distressed by what I was reading by the time I wrote it. That's why I signaled

I fully agree that my post did not bring anything new to the table. I really felt distressed by what I was reading by the time I wrote it. That's why I signaled it as rant which I think is a good compromise : I do think facts and arguments matter in a discussion and we should not let our emotions take the seat of reasoning but if that's what's happening well you better say it rather than starting to bend facts or telling some things you are not so sure about but would like to be true are absolutely true. Furthermore, it seems my rant expressed a more general feeling about the thread, so at least it served that purpose. I thought the bit about powerlessness (that seems to be the common lot for most individuals) and pseudo-wisdom would at least make it a little funny to read to certain people. I did not mean to be condescending, I do regret writing that bit now. I guess that what I tried to express was that one's education does not seem to prevent falling for basic tricks in the realm of politics such as a smear campaign. I was really frustrated to read repeatedly such shallow arguments as nobody is above the law or why do they think they are entitled to a seat? or just reading that one did not sympathize with Assange hardly ever explaining why or just calling him a russian agent. Whether you sympathize with Assange as a person is irrelevant. Even if Assange was a rapist and Putin's best friend, which I very much doubt on the base of what I have read so far (links welcomed), I don't see how it matters in the case of exposing a war based on a lie. the killing of civilians ans journalists, extra-judiciary kidnapping and torture and so much more... And those are facts, not mere allegations.