First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Julian Asange has his internet cut by "state party"
runec 
29474 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/23/16

RaisedInACult wrote:
Are you aware that appeal to incredulity is a logical fallacy?


No offence, but you are the absolute last person on these forums that gets to invoke logical fallacies.
20238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/19/16
You can take Ecuador's reasoning for cutting off Assange's internet access at face value. I doubt it was diplomatic wrangling so much as a decision from Correa himself.

If you go back a few years, Correa was a darling of Latin America's anti-imperialist left. He was seen as being aligned with Hugo Chavez, when Chavez was still alive and retained some popularity outside of Venezuela. Chavez died, however, and his successor Maduro turned out to be much less popular abroad. He criticizes his neighbors left and right, gets into disputes with the OAS and leaders like Jose Mujica, and has overseen a collapse of both the economy and political stability in Venezuela itself.

Fast forward to today, and no-one wants to associate themselves with Maduro or his Venezuelan regime. The old Chavez allies are abandoning Maduro, Colombia is moving towards peace with the FARC, Brazil has its own scandals to worry about, and even Cuba is reaching something of a detente with the US. It's no wonder that Correa wants to avoid going down with Maduro's ship - it's time for him to realign himself closer to the center of Latin American politics.

In this light, Ecuador's decision makes sense. It shows that their foreign policy is more subtle and more nuanced than the basic Anti-American rhetoric of someone like Maduro. It paints Ecuador as a state that can have its cake and eat it too. They protect Assange without doing so for purely anti-American reasons. That can appeal to both pro- and anti-American sentiment. If you like America, then you know that Ecuador isn't meddling in its election. If you hate America, you know that Assange is still protected from sexual assault charges.

Of course, it could also be that Ecuador prefers a Clinton presidency to a Trump presidency. Trump calling most Mexicans rapists was the first thing that should have tipped you off. Trump projects the image of a hateful racist, and insulting Mexicans isn't too far off from insulting Latin Americans in general. That combined with Trump's "America first" rhetoric implies that Trump wouldn't exactly have Ecuador's interests in mind. Correa would be wise not to be seen as Trump enabler - if Trump did somehow get elected, it would lead to domestic criticism of Correa if he was seen as pro-Trump. Just look at the backlash that ensued when president Nieto met with Trump.


For the Trump supporters: your candidate's entire foreign policy is basically, "let's screw over everyone else, allies included." It should come as no surprise when everyone else wants to screw over Trump.
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16
And he follows it up with an ad hom, *thumbsup* You've got some style....blatantly obvious, and not a particularly palatable style, but style nonetheless. You know "to invoke" means to call forth - its not scoring you any points misusing language, kiddo.
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/20/16

nomnombiyori wrote:

You can take Ecuador's reasoning for cutting off Assange's internet access at face value. I doubt it was diplomatic wrangling so much as a decision from Correa himself.

If you go back a few years, Correa was a darling of Latin America's anti-imperialist left. He was seen as being aligned with Hugo Chavez, when Chavez was still alive and retained some popularity outside of Venezuela. Chavez died, however, and his successor Maduro turned out to be much less popular abroad. He criticizes his neighbors left and right, gets into disputes with the OAS and leaders like Jose Mujica, and has overseen a collapse of both the economy and political stability in Venezuela itself.

Fast forward to today, and no-one wants to associate themselves with Maduro or his Venezuelan regime. The old Chavez allies are abandoning Maduro, Colombia is moving towards peace with the FARC, Brazil has its own scandals to worry about, and even Cuba is reaching something of a detente with the US. It's no wonder that Correa wants to avoid going down with Maduro's ship - it's time for him to realign himself closer to the center of Latin American politics.

In this light, Ecuador's decision makes sense. It shows that their foreign policy is more subtle and more nuanced than the basic Anti-American rhetoric of someone like Maduro. It paints Ecuador as a state that can have its cake and eat it too. They protect Assange without doing so for purely anti-American reasons. That can appeal to both pro- and anti-American sentiment. If you like America, then you know that Ecuador isn't meddling in its election. If you hate America, you know that Assange is still protected from sexual assault charges.

Of course, it could also be that Ecuador prefers a Clinton presidency to a Trump presidency. Trump calling most Mexicans rapists was the first thing that should have tipped you off. Trump projects the image of a hateful racist, and insulting Mexicans isn't too far off from insulting Latin Americans in general. That combined with Trump's "America first" rhetoric implies that Trump wouldn't exactly have Ecuador's interests in mind. Correa would be wise not to be seen as Trump enabler - if Trump did somehow get elected, it would lead to domestic criticism of Correa if he was seen as pro-Trump. Just look at the backlash that ensued when president Nieto met with Trump.


For the Trump supporters: your candidate's entire foreign policy is basically, "let's screw over everyone else, allies included." It should come as no surprise when everyone else wants to screw over Trump.


I love how some people look at a bunch of data in the face, and decide the opposite

Kerry shows up and right away they shut up Assange and try to say they're not going to mess with american politics, just like the horse face told him.

*talks out side of mouth* I made him an offer he couldnt refuse...

24583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Online
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/20/16
qwueri 
16972 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/20/16

MysticGon wrote:

Yeah well, shutting the whole Sanders campaign out of the DNC email list because of the misdeed of one staffer shows there was no love for Bernie from early on. Only after they saw how much support he generated with young voters did they even consider reaching out to him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dnc-sanders-campaign-improperly-accessed-clinton-voter-data/2015/12/17/a2e2e14e-a522-11e5-b53d-972e2751f433_story.html


Yes, the DNC was very slow in treating Bernie seriously until he drummed up his own support base. Didn't stop Obama from sweeping Hillary eight years ago. But then Obama appealed to more than grassroots college students.


RaisedInACult wrote:

DNC Chair Donna Brazille told Podesta 7 months before Hillary had the nomination that she was 100% in the tank for hillary and would help publicly once Bernie was out of the way. Hillary never had a chance without superdelegates and electoral/voter fraud


Clearly Hillary winning 55.2% of the popular vote was fraud. Because reasons.
11963 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16
What? Why!? Julian Assange isn't even the one who publishes or has the documents/e-mails, whatever. This isn't going to change anything and everybody knows that. So why is Ecuador doing this? To be able to say "we weren't supporting Wikileaks" ? You're just making this situation worse Ecuador.
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/20/16
qwueri go look at some of the un-hacked polls and get back to us after you see them going 79% or better for trump. its a relief seeing that the general populace isnt that freakin stupid after all
24583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Online
Posted 10/19/16

qwueri wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

Yeah well, shutting the whole Sanders campaign out of the DNC email list because of the misdeed of one staffer shows there was no love for Bernie from early on. Only after they saw how much support he generated with young voters did they even consider reaching out to him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dnc-sanders-campaign-improperly-accessed-clinton-voter-data/2015/12/17/a2e2e14e-a522-11e5-b53d-972e2751f433_story.html


Yes, the DNC was very slow in treating Bernie seriously until he drummed up his own support base. Didn't stop Obama from sweeping Hillary eight years ago. But then Obama appealed to more than grassroots college students.


RaisedInACult wrote:

DNC Chair Donna Brazille told Podesta 7 months before Hillary had the nomination that she was 100% in the tank for hillary and would help publicly once Bernie was out of the way. Hillary never had a chance without superdelegates and electoral/voter fraud


Clearly Hillary winning 55.2% of the popular vote was fraud. Because reasons.


So what are your thoughts on this?

http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/wary-of-loss-in-illinois-primary-clinton-hit-up-obama-wikileaks/


RaisedInACult wrote:

qwueri go look at some of the un-hacked polls and get back to us after you see them going 79% or better for trump. its a relief seeing that the general populace isnt that freakin stupid after all


I'm going to call bullshit on that.
46789 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16

RaisedInACult wrote:

qwueri go look at some of the un-hacked polls and get back to us after you see them going 79% or better for trump. its a relief seeing that the general populace isnt that freakin stupid after all


I don't care to participate in this thread. Just wanted to comment that I can't wait to see how you react when Donald loses. A conspiracy perhaps!?
Posted 10/19/16
yeah even though I just posted two that were the case
Posted 10/19/16

rawratl wrote:


I don't care to participate in this thread. Just wanted to comment that I can't wait to see how you react when Donald loses. A conspiracy perhaps!?


you dont care to hear anything that disagrees with the worldview you've been programmed with, more like it. you cant refute what I'm saying on substantive grounds, you've come back with a bunch of logical fallacies, and now you dont want to participate! *joker claps*



if DT loses....I really dont think they'll be able to pull off that much electoral fraud, but if they do, you can expect sites like brietbart and drudge to go dark, any other "alternative" media sites that dont conform to the MSM that puts ol 80s pravda to shame. That was the reason for Obama assuming more powers that he doesnt have and doing the ICANN handover......because they couldnt get it through congress! now that means the globalists will have control over the internet's dns servers, good job little obama lackey, do the globalists bidding.

russia fully expects nuclear war if hillary wins and they arent joking. russia is not on board with the globalist plan and that's why they're being targeted and have been for the last bunch of years. but dont worry their economy has survived well and they are self sustainable unlike the US, and unlike the US, has been stocking gold at their central bank hand over fist just WAITING for the collapse of the counterfeit unbacked western currencies.

why do you think it got backed by oil, it got backed by the flow of oil, and that's why the war machine has rolled on, because like rome unless the expansion continues, the deflation begins.

I probably wont have the means to escape the country, and might just catch other truth seekers at the fema camps, or perhaps meet up in one of those millions of black coffin liners that fema bought within the last 4 years and stockpiled.

now call me crazy because I've seen evidence of these things and have written about them, and then make the further assumption that I am saying all of this with 110% confidence and certainty. I'm sure you can toss in some more appeal to incredulity in there, you seem to really like that one.
46789 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16 , edited 10/19/16

RaisedInACult wrote:


rawratl wrote:


I don't care to participate in this thread. Just wanted to comment that I can't wait to see how you react when Donald loses. A conspiracy perhaps!?


you dont care to hear anything that disagrees with the worldview you've been programmed with, more like it. you cant refute what I'm saying on substantive grounds, you've come back with a bunch of logical fallacies, and now you dont want to participate! *joker claps*



if DT loses....I really dont think they'll be able to pull off that much electoral fraud, but if they do, you can expect sites like brietbart and drudge to go dark, any other "alternative" media sites that dont conform to the MSM that puts ol 80s pravda to shame. That was the reason for Obama assuming more powers that he doesnt have and doing the ICANN handover......because they couldnt get it through congress! now that means the globalists will have control over the internet's dns servers, good job little obama lackey, do the globalists bidding.

russia fully expects nuclear war if hillary wins and they arent joking. russia is not on board with the globalist plan and that's why they're being targeted and have been for the last bunch of years. but dont worry their economy has survived well and they are self sustainable unlike the US, and unlike the US, has been stocking gold at their central bank hand over fist just WAITING for the collapse of the counterfeit unbacked western currencies.

why do you think it got backed by oil, it got backed by the flow of oil, and that's why the war machine has rolled on, because like rome unless the expansion continues, the deflation begins.

I probably wont have the means to escape the country, and might just catch other truth seekers at the fema camps, or perhaps meet up in one of those millions of black coffin liners that fema bought within the last 4 years and stockpiled.

now call me crazy because I've seen evidence of these things and have written about them, and then make the further assumption that I am saying all of this with 110% confidence and certainty. I'm sure you can toss in some more appeal to incredulity in there, you seem to really like that one.


I don't know that you fully understand what a logical fallacy is. I made no actual argument, I just stated that I can't wait to see your reaction. That isn't exactly a "bunch of logical fallacies." As to the rest of your largely incoherent rant, no one wants or expect nuclear war. Though I'm curious to know how you are so tapped into Putin that he must have told you this personally.

Posted 10/19/16
lol...its called reading news from other sources around the world and not just the filtered US news!


lol 911....its seriously funny that people still believe the commission report had much of any facts in it. yah, the top 20 floors crushed and pulverized the bottom 90 into dust! smh, if you dont get that buildings dont just accidentally drop into their own footprints without expert coordination, then you really must shy away from any material that's physics oriented.
46789 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/16


HAHAHAHA. Point proven. Sorry brother, I missed the class on crematory math.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.