3 ms·

Frankly you are completely wrong: having touched private property, having violated funding principles of western values have only a meaning: the west can't be t

by kkfx 5y ago

Frankly you are completely wrong: having touched private property, having violated funding principles of western values have only a meaning: the west can't be trusted. On contrary the fact that both Russia and China have talked stability that means they do their own interests like anyone else, but they are less unreliable than the west. Western neoliberals have done so much damage to us westerner that we MUST jail them for life for crimes not different than the original nazi ones who happen to be payed effectively by the same cohort of people who rule us today, their crimes are much worse against us than those from others blocks at their own homes and neighborhoods. Personally as an EU Citizen I have exactly ZERO trust in anything coming from neoliberals, especially from "English world" right now, and I'm not alone seeing the autarchic trend ongoing at any level, from States who try to reshoring to private people who look for as much autonomy as they can. That's in our terms have a name: high treason. Where civil servants act against their own people for saving/favoring a small cohort of rulers. It's nothing new of course, it happen every time in the history but that's is from the point of view of our Democratic values.

rich_sasha 5y ago
What exactly are the principles violated? Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. To freeze assets, rather than confiscate for good, you typically only need a substantial suspicion of a crime, not a court order - which again is necessary. This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour, likely it is committing atrocities. Various international courts are investigating these atrocities, with full legal process. The only immediate forum that could sanction Russia is the UN where Russia has a veto, and a massive majority of UN members, by count, population and GDP, condemned Russia in a separate resolution. These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. And they came gradually, giving Russia a chance to back off. Any country evaluating whether they are at risk of sanctions has to answer to itself: will I be pig-headedly invading a NATO partner with no regard for human rights and due diplomatic process after being repeatedly warned to not do so, and against a massive majority of UN members? If yes, hmm well better store reserves in crypto. Or CNY - China surely wouldn’t use their currency as leverage. The only law under which these sanctions look questionable is the Russian one: I see, I take, none of your business.
- kkfx 5y ago
  > Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. So for you confiscate assets from PRIVATE PEOPLE with no political nor military role in Russian Gov. is applying a tool to fight crime? That's not only violate westerners principles of private property AND innocence until proven guilty, but expose EU Gov. to EU Justice because such actions are illegal and unmotivated here and those who will pay rightful compensation to the angry owners are EU Citizens. > This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour Really? Following OFFICIAL, governmental entities, like https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/7/233896.pdf https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/7/233896.pdf the peaceful neighbor is actually an enemy, armed, trained and indoctrinated by USA an UK (mostly) intelligence, so the invasion, well warned in advance, is not only perfectly legit but needed to protect Russian territory. With a rightful excuse of acting to stop crimes committed by nazis militias against civil, witch is a better excuse than the Iraqi mass destruction weapons lie, talibans protecting bin laden lie, ... > likely it is committing atrocities They probably do, like any army have done in wars, surely if youb read official reports they are just responding to other atrocities committed against civil. It's not a moral justification, but certainly is on the international political scene. > These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. As Russia have warned ad nauseam they can't allow NATO at their own borders, like the USA have not allowed Cuba's missiles. And they give all the possible option to AVOID a war USA and UK government and private sector need, against NATO allies and their own people. Witch is actually an act of treason, by them. And also nothing new, if you re-read the recent neoliberal gov. history starting from the old "Operation Unthinkable" and "Operation Dropshot" to the recently released CIA report https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/AERODYNAMIC%20%20%20VOL.%205%20%20(DEVELOPMENT%20AND%20PLANS)_0004.pdf https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/AERODYNAMIC%20%20%20VOL... on op. AERODYNAMIC or the far more recent coup https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2008.00343.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2008.00343.x with the famous leak https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 Supporting such action by European Gov. is an act of high treason of our Constitutions (those anti-fascist JP Morgan CEO hate, the same JP Morgan co who have attempted a nazi coup in the 1930 in USA) by supporting nazi-alike actions ang government. From USA and UK people point of view is an act of high treason because their corporatocratic government act against their people interests to push their agenda's witch are themselves for the USA a violation of USA Constitutions and principle of Freedom. Sorry, you just report NATO-neoliberal propaganda witch is as real as russian one, a neighborhood of zero.
lostmsu 5y ago
This is laughable. Confiscation of assets is not to be trusted, but invasion is? I am sorry, but your comment is a wall of nonsense, that starts with a clearly false premise, and continues at the same level.
- kkfx 5y ago
  If you read my reply below to another users you'll see how officially westerner governments declare and admit that "the invasion" is perfectly legit and provoked by the NATO government as another step of a decade old strategy against Russia. Given that and the fact that Russia have alerted COUNTLESS times what it need to do to protect it's own legitimate national interests yes: confiscating PRIVATE assets basing just on anti-Russian (in the people sense) stanzas is not to be trusted, while an invasion well alerted and well avoided by any means for years by the invader who is finally forced to act is trustable. So the wall of nonsense you see is just the wall of Bernaysian propaganda narrative we all know, not the real nonsense.
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    I was referring to specific claims. The new ones you brought are unrelated, and are about as substantiated.
    - kkfx 5y ago
      You are not, sorry for being rude: you have stated clearly "confiscations vs invasion" as the confiscations are rightful and the invasion is not, I give below proofs from OFFICIAL westerners public bodies of the contrary. There is nothing unrelated.
      - lostmsu 5y ago
        First of all, no, I did not imply rightfulness anywhere. It is the opposite, the comparison of someone stealing from you vs someone invading you for no reason. You claim stealing is bad. Is invasion worse? To me the answer is obviously yes. Then you say EU and US are not to be trusted because they are "stealing", and that it's better to trust Russia. But Russia is invading. And since despite that you believe Russia is more trustworthy, I find your reasoning deeply flawed. I do not even need to argue if it was stealing or justified arrest, because there's no need to prove the justification for your claim to be obviously false. Cause even unjustified stealing is magnitudes better than land invasion. And the other countries already decided who is the trustworthy party after this: the US dollars are being bought in large quantities throughout the world as we speak as a hedge against the looming recession.

by kkfx 5y ago

rich_sasha 5y ago

What exactly are the principles violated? Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. To freeze assets, rather than confiscate for good, you typically only need a substantial suspicion of a crime, not a court order - which again is necessary. This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour, likely it is committing atrocities. Various international courts are investigating these atrocities, with full legal process. The only immediate forum that could sanction Russia is the UN where Russia has a veto, and a massive majority of UN members, by count, population and GDP, condemned Russia in a separate resolution. These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. And they came gradually, giving Russia a chance to back off. Any country evaluating whether they are at risk of sanctions has to answer to itself: will I be pig-headedly invading a NATO partner with no regard for human rights and due diplomatic process after being repeatedly warned to not do so, and against a massive majority of UN members? If yes, hmm well better store reserves in crypto. Or CNY - China surely wouldn’t use their currency as leverage. The only law under which these sanctions look questionable is the Russian one: I see, I take, none of your business.

kkfx 5y ago
> Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. So for you confiscate assets from PRIVATE PEOPLE with no political nor military role in Russian Gov. is applying a tool to fight crime? That's not only violate westerners principles of private property AND innocence until proven guilty, but expose EU Gov. to EU Justice because such actions are illegal and unmotivated here and those who will pay rightful compensation to the angry owners are EU Citizens. > This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour Really? Following OFFICIAL, governmental entities, like https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/7/233896.pdf https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/7/233896.pdf the peaceful neighbor is actually an enemy, armed, trained and indoctrinated by USA an UK (mostly) intelligence, so the invasion, well warned in advance, is not only perfectly legit but needed to protect Russian territory. With a rightful excuse of acting to stop crimes committed by nazis militias against civil, witch is a better excuse than the Iraqi mass destruction weapons lie, talibans protecting bin laden lie, ... > likely it is committing atrocities They probably do, like any army have done in wars, surely if youb read official reports they are just responding to other atrocities committed against civil. It's not a moral justification, but certainly is on the international political scene. > These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. As Russia have warned ad nauseam they can't allow NATO at their own borders, like the USA have not allowed Cuba's missiles. And they give all the possible option to AVOID a war USA and UK government and private sector need, against NATO allies and their own people. Witch is actually an act of treason, by them. And also nothing new, if you re-read the recent neoliberal gov. history starting from the old "Operation Unthinkable" and "Operation Dropshot" to the recently released CIA report https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/AERODYNAMIC%20%20%20VOL.%205%20%20(DEVELOPMENT%20AND%20PLANS)_0004.pdf https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/AERODYNAMIC%20%20%20VOL... on op. AERODYNAMIC or the far more recent coup https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2008.00343.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2008.00343.x with the famous leak https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 Supporting such action by European Gov. is an act of high treason of our Constitutions (those anti-fascist JP Morgan CEO hate, the same JP Morgan co who have attempted a nazi coup in the 1930 in USA) by supporting nazi-alike actions ang government. From USA and UK people point of view is an act of high treason because their corporatocratic government act against their people interests to push their agenda's witch are themselves for the USA a violation of USA Constitutions and principle of Freedom. Sorry, you just report NATO-neoliberal propaganda witch is as real as russian one, a neighborhood of zero.

lostmsu 5y ago

This is laughable. Confiscation of assets is not to be trusted, but invasion is? I am sorry, but your comment is a wall of nonsense, that starts with a clearly false premise, and continues at the same level.

kkfx 5y ago
If you read my reply below to another users you'll see how officially westerner governments declare and admit that "the invasion" is perfectly legit and provoked by the NATO government as another step of a decade old strategy against Russia. Given that and the fact that Russia have alerted COUNTLESS times what it need to do to protect it's own legitimate national interests yes: confiscating PRIVATE assets basing just on anti-Russian (in the people sense) stanzas is not to be trusted, while an invasion well alerted and well avoided by any means for years by the invader who is finally forced to act is trustable. So the wall of nonsense you see is just the wall of Bernaysian propaganda narrative we all know, not the real nonsense.
- lostmsu 5y ago
  I was referring to specific claims. The new ones you brought are unrelated, and are about as substantiated.
  - kkfx 5y ago
    You are not, sorry for being rude: you have stated clearly "confiscations vs invasion" as the confiscations are rightful and the invasion is not, I give below proofs from OFFICIAL westerners public bodies of the contrary. There is nothing unrelated.
    - lostmsu 5y ago
      First of all, no, I did not imply rightfulness anywhere. It is the opposite, the comparison of someone stealing from you vs someone invading you for no reason. You claim stealing is bad. Is invasion worse? To me the answer is obviously yes. Then you say EU and US are not to be trusted because they are "stealing", and that it's better to trust Russia. But Russia is invading. And since despite that you believe Russia is more trustworthy, I find your reasoning deeply flawed. I do not even need to argue if it was stealing or justified arrest, because there's no need to prove the justification for your claim to be obviously false. Cause even unjustified stealing is magnitudes better than land invasion. And the other countries already decided who is the trustworthy party after this: the US dollars are being bought in large quantities throughout the world as we speak as a hedge against the looming recession.