Pardon the necroposting, but I had to give this list some thought.
1,2, and 4: how do you verify evidence like this from a country you expect to lie and fabricate? There's no way to certify a chain of custody for this stuff from the Russian capture in a Ukrainian lab. There will always be room for reasonable doubts, since the sites are in Russian control, and the evidence could have been planted.
3: Would probably be a Ukrainian scientist who is a POW. So this would violate the Geneva conventions, and (as you point out) be a coerced confession.
5: This is the only reasonable expectation for evidence. A document trail of western funding from western sources. The fact that you aren't focused on this, when there's paperwork for NIH funding of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan institute of virology is frustratingly naïve. Analogous documents will exist if the Russian allegation is true. I predict we won't have access to them until well after the Ukraine incident is in the memory hole. I would bet that this information is also classified.
6: A good thesis about higher standards that shouldn't be part of the list, even though I agree with it as a general statement.
1-5, That's the evidence you'd accept. Where is the evidence a KIA poster could reasonably offer to verify 1-5?
Classified or in Russian hands.
You're asking for a level of evidential certainty that can't be reached and getting upset when people don't reach it.
This strikes me as a bad faith.
Resource depletion means that the economy has to be scaled back.
It's not just 'useless eaters,' getting culled either. Lowering the level of economic activity to preserve depleted non-renewable resources in the name of 'sustainability' means fewer people across the board, Georgia Guidestone-style.
A nuclear exchange to achieve that end wouldn't be off the table.
I don' t think the anointed are actively planning WW3, but they've long ago proven that no crisis will be allowed to go to waste. I'm sure they've got contingencies for finding the silver lining of any irradiated mushroom cloud.
Still a lot of flames there, but you've selected some contexts that I can parse-- so thanks. I was having no luck sorting through your history.
Evidence that russia is telling the truth. all the evidence they provided was nmothing.
You seem to be fuming about this an awful lot. Understandably, as it's the latest talking point. W/E, I guess I'll bite-- what would constitute evidence that Russia-- a country you believe (per the above links) 1) is evil and 2) often lies-- is telling the truth in the particular case of Ukrainian bio labs? What are the claims you believe Russia has made about these labs? What would you accept as evidence of Russia being truthful about these claims, given their unreliability as a source?
I ask because I get the feeling you're setting people up by asking them to produce a motherfucking unicorn, and telling them 'told you so' when they don't deliver. I don't understand your motives, let alone the point-- what are you after, exactly?
I'm looking through your post history.
It's not easy to see context through the flames-- how far back should I be looking? 90%+ of your last three pages or so of post history have been abbreviated replies or demands for an evidentiary standard you'd need to violate your security clearance to provide, RE: the Russian bioweapons claim.
I don't see any of your replies to demanding you support Russia because Azov battalion. I admit that your vociferous opposition to 'stormcuckery' probably provoked such rhetoric at some point. Something along the lines of challenging your moral fiber because now that there's actual neo-nazis, you support their side in the form of Azov Battalion/Ukraine?
How far back should I slog for context?
I haven't seen this particular false dichotomy being pushed.
I've seen people who are sympathetic to Russia because they're mounting regional resistance to Western/Globalist expansion. I've seen people voice concerns that Ukraine is too corrupt to be worth the struggle bringing them into NATO would provoke. I've seen people try to smear anyone with Russian sympathies as FSB shills, or supporters of the Chechen Islamic volunteer brigade.
I think there's a lot of room for all combatants to be in the wrong here, and more than enough propaganda to deepen the moral fog when you try to judge the issue.
I know you've been wading hip-deep in flamewars on this one, so where did you see a demand for you to have that kind of black or white thinking on the subject?
Yep.
No bad tactics, only bad targets--
... for tactics up to and including neo-Nazism.
Anything is excusable as long as it's practiced against the right enemy, because the narrative is about power and control, not morality.
In the case of a full collapse, sure, you're right.
I don't really expect mad max level anarchy, we won't be so lucky. I expect a half-collapsed monstrosity of a government smothering its people rather than having the decency to die gracefully.
It's not just the value of property increasing, it's the value of fiat currency falling.
There's a reason Bill Gates is the largest owner of farmland, and I suspect it has less to do with wanting everyone to go vegetarian, and more to do with the land itself holding value in a way no other asset can in an economic collapse. If the soft-landing 'Great Reset' fails, and we end up with neo-feudalism... Billy boy is well positioned.
Criminals also tend to think they won't get caught, therefore deterrent measures won't ever apply to them. Their stupidity literally means they don't imagine how punishments will wreck their lives. It's survivorship bias all the way down, with shocked Pikachu faces just before life slaps them in the face like a live fish.
The brave homepage splashes 'sponsored images' by default, which you can change by hitting the customize option on the bottom right and hitting the slider for sponsored images.
Don't like it? Turn it off. Woke shit wouldn't have options like that.
I don't intend to actually stop subversion or ideological possession. That's actually a trap in and of itself, in exactly the way you mentioned. Creating a hard partisan boundary can cause violence and division. The better solution is to allow subversion and ideological possession to manifest itself, and allow it to fail.
Yep. Exposure is the only way to ensure awareness and continued vigilance.
Glad you're on the mod team, given your attitude on the subject.
Thanks for engaging in the dialogue about it.
That's the point I'm dancing around, and one that most feminists try very hard not to acknowledge. They fear doing so because they'll have to chose between TERFdom and staying in the narrow graces of the trans movement.