Russian Court Sentences Meta Spokesperson To Six Years in Absentia, Calls Meta 'Extremist Organisation' (reuters.com) 115
A military court in Moscow on Monday sentenced Meta spokesperson Andy Stone to six years in prison for "publicly defending terrorism," a verdict handed down in absentia, RIA news agency reported. Reuters: Meta itself is designated an extremist organisation in Russia and its Facebook and Instagram social media platforms have been banned in the country since 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine.
[...] Russia's interior ministry opened a criminal investigation into Stone late last year, without disclosing specific charges. RIA cited state investigators as saying Stone had published online comments that defended "aggressive, hostile and violent actions" towards Russian soldiers involved in what Moscow calls its "special military operation" in Ukraine.
[...] Russia's interior ministry opened a criminal investigation into Stone late last year, without disclosing specific charges. RIA cited state investigators as saying Stone had published online comments that defended "aggressive, hostile and violent actions" towards Russian soldiers involved in what Moscow calls its "special military operation" in Ukraine.
We have always... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Georgia has applied to join the European Union, just saying.
Putin's small man syndrome is worsening (Score:2, Insightful)
he lied about not wanting to annex Crimea, he lied about the "polite people" aka the "Little Green Men" & the purpose of his bullshit "special military operation"
What about (Score:2)
Putin being tried for war crimes at The Hague
Re:What about (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes
*looks left*
*looks right*
A stroke. Right.
Re: What about (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That election was the most fraudulent in the history of russia.
Re: (Score:2)
You're assuming that the votes are legitimate or that voters were even given a choice. Ignore the vote count, the numbers are unreliable. And yes, it is likely most of the population supports him (though it's impossible to gauge how many given that it's dangerous to be seen as opposed to Putin), but likely due to the tight media crackdown so that only positive stories of Putin are ever told. At the higher levels though, it's iffy. So many in the higher ranks may owe a lot of Putin (for advancing them in
Re: (Score:2)
There's still a high likelihood of there being a trial in absentia for Putin. Can't say for sure whether OP was trying to draw a parallel but this Meta trial looks like whataboutism.
Re: (Score:2)
Bigger chance for them to nuke themself with nuclear bombs that have no maintenance due to no money and corruption
Re: (Score:2)
Getting rockets up into space, at suborbital velocities- even easier.
So no, I'm quite sure their nuclear arsenal is still plenty operational.
Re: (Score:2)
All components that make up nuclear weapons have expiration dates and most of the money is in the pockets of Putin's collaborators
Re: (Score:2)
Despite the corruption, they're not having trouble getting rockets into space. I have no doubt their warheads, ICBMs, and RVs are in workable shape.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm talking about the warhead
Re: (Score:2)
Russia has demonstrated current development of advanced technology (including tactically deployed hypersonics), as well as a very cool Gen4 fighter jet.
This means it's unlikely that the technology to keep the warheads working (which really comes down to one thing- replacing them once they're past their expiration date) has been lost by them. It's further unlikely that they have let their nuclear
Re: (Score:2)
Rockets with nuclear warheads are less complicated than rockets without nuclear warheads...
Rockets are rockets.
Nuclear warheads plus rockets isn't an additional complication. ICBM RVs are a static load. That's why ballistic missiles existed long before any other kind of rocket to enter space.
Because those rockets make money. And are seen to be working all the time, or they will stop making money. Many parts and steps, all of them have to work. It's very hard to fake a successful rocket launch. Ticking a box on some paperwork to say your nuclear missile still works trust me bro, and pocketing the money is far far easier to do. And far far harder to notice. Many parts and steps, only one of them has to fail, and none of them have to actually work since they're never tested.
You're an idiot.
Russia and the US regularly do ICBM test launches.
We notify each other when we do it, and when one fails, we love to broadcast it.
Russia's last launch was this month.
Solid fueled rockets that deploy a payload on a ballistic suborbital trajectory are simple devices.
There's very little to
Re: (Score:2)
Let's go over it.
The term "ad hominem", broadly meaning, "insult", does not in any way take from or add to an argument. It's merely syntactical sugar.
Trying to imply that it does, is fallacious reasoning, and means you're stupid.
Now, an ad hominem argument is a fallacious argument that uses the personal attack as a point in the argument.
Example: You're wrong, because you're a fucking moron.
Though I'm educated enough not to use
Re: (Score:2)
Because that brings in cold hard $US
Sure, each launch provided Russia with about 0.004% of its GDP.
Russia, like the US, utilizes solid-fueled ICBMs.
Russian birds are built to fight a war, just like ours were.
China, which has a no-first-use official nuclear doctrine, served just as a deterrent.
Re: What about (Score:2)
Everything you don't like is extremist (Score:5, Insightful)
Every group you want to ostracize is terrorist.
Re:Exactly, brother. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Exactly, brother. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Don't they know we have an apostrophe shortage? And it's all Biden'''s fault for wasting the American Apostrophe Reserve.
Re: (Score:2)
Well maybe the MAGA group should stop having such a large amount of overlap with what Nazis want then.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course MAGA twits aren't Nazis... well, at least not a majority of them. Nazis sure do march with them too.
And there's a reason for that.
The real Nazis aren't afraid to stand next to what they support.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You've got to be fairly significantly partisan to think any of what you just said. It really doesn't reflect well.
If Trump was a fascist dictator, he was the absolute worst fascist dictator - or dictator of any kind - ever.
Re: (Score:2)
If Trump was a fascist dictator, he was the absolute worst fascist dictator - or dictator of any kind - ever.
Oh, I agree.
If he had one iota of fucking balls, he'd have did what he openly said he'd do, or wanted to do, or did.
And then yes, he would have been a dictator.
Fortunately, he's a fucking cuck. But that doesn't change the fact that people voted for him hoping he wasn't, and those people are worth having a discussion about.
Re: (Score:2)
If Trump was a fascist dictator, he was the absolute worst fascist dictator - or dictator of any kind - ever.
Our favorite Godwin reference had a rehearsal, too. Even went to prison afterwards where he had time to think. The second time around is when the government was corrupted, democracy subverted, and the hounds released.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia invaded Ukraine. This forced many citizens of both countries into a years-long exercise in mass murder - which encountered even once causes grief that can't be adequately described or measured.
Putin regularly expresses willingness to engage in nuclear war. He has critics assassinated. He uses the Russian courts to kidnap foreigners and ransom them in exchange for arms-dealers and other operatives. He's just demonstrated his intent to do more of that, but to skip the part where he waits for people to
Antifa not real (Score:2)
Conversely, Donald Trump leads "MAGA" and Marjorie Taylor Greene is a member. Donald Trump has raised millions by selling hats, shirts, etc. emblazoned with "MAGA" and I see people wearing that all the time. I've never seen an Antifa shirt.
Re: (Score:2)
Who is the Antifa equivalent of Enrique Tarrio? What is the handiwork you're vaguely referencing? Like the time Antifa attacked the Capitol on January 6?!? [npr.org]
There isn't even a freaking Wikipedia page for "Antifa". Right-wing anti-government extremest groups exist. They're tangible (Boogaloo Boys, Proud
Re: (Score:3)
America is already great. MAGA is focused on the opposite. Make America Great Again For Us But Not Them. A political movement based upon conspiracy theories and a fanatical devotion to a leader will not have a long life. In none of Trump's campaign could he be locked down on what political plans he had, he was always evasive, but always promising the impossible without having a plan.
Right now, he's opposed to beefing up border security, not because he's opposed to border security, but because he's oppose
We are not far behind (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
NYTimes is paywalled.
The fire alarm accusation is pure mind-reading speculation. People make mistakes with alarms near other levers when in a hurry, and mistake cannot be ruled out. Felonies require "beyond reasonable doubt" and I've seen nothing that strong against Bowman. If you have a BRD argument, bringItOn!...
"Reasonable doubt" (Score:2)
> Are you saying he's so fucking stupid he "got confused" as an intelligent adult raised in a modern society and didn't know he was pulling a fire alarm at a key moment during a legislative session?
No! I'm only saying one cannot rule out an accident "beyond a reasonable doubt". I 100% agree it looks suspicious, but not "beyond a reasonable doubt" of an accident. I've made really dumb mistakes myself when in a hurry. You didn't answer my request for BRD justification. Why is that? Are you in a hurry?
Turn
Clarifications Re:"Reasonable doubt" (Score:1)
Re: Turn off Fox and read legal book
Minor correction: read a legal book. [or more]
Re: " This is because civil charges have a lower threshold of evidence."
as compared to a felony, which often involves jail time. Civil charges generally only require monetary compensation.
Also, the (paywalled) NYT article appears to be an opinion piece. Different legal analysts say different things. Do you have a reason to trust ONLY legal analysts who say the DOJ is doing fishy things? Otherwise it looks like you are cherry-p
Re: "Reasonable doubt" (Score:2)
I think he knew exactly what he was doing but "not guilty" doesn't mean innocent, it just means you can't prove mens rea.
Re: (Score:1)
> "not guilty" doesn't mean innocent, it just means you can't prove mens rea.
Didn't claim it did. And what's this have to do with sinij's original point?
It implied there was a legal double-standard and/or something nefarious going on in the courts. So far nobody has demonstrated such with regard to AlarmGate.
Re: "Reasonable doubt" (Score:2)
The courts aren't even relevant. No court will hear any case that it hasn't been asked to. A prosecutor, who is part of the executive branch and is otherwise not affiliated with the court, would need to, in order:
1) believe a crime has been committed
2) believe he can prove it
3) at his discretion determine if it should be prosecuted even if the other two have been met
4) indict, prosecute, etc
Re: (Score:2)
And what's this have to do with sinij's original point?
I thought it was obvious - selective application of justice. Now, don't go pulling fire alarms anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's called plausible deniability, it's been around for as long as "beyond a shadow of a doubt".
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, pulling the fire alarm is exactly the same thing as violently attacking police officers, vandalizing a government building and attempting to hang the vice president.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
For example, Biden's justice department manufacturing novel legal theories [nytimes.com] to imprison non-violent political protesters...
Unlike Farty Don, who merely wants to shoot them.
Re: (Score:2)
Those terrorists went to the Capitol to deliberately and knowingly disrupt the official proceeding of Congress. They weren't there on a field trip to look at the sights.
If you're claiming those people shouldn't be jailed because they were non-violent, then the same applies to all the people at Columbia who did nothing more than exercise their First Amendment right to criticize Israel's deliberate targetting of civilians, medical personnel, and journalists, such as the almost 300 bodies found buried in a ma
Re: (Score:2)
Those terrorists went to the Capitol to deliberately and knowingly disrupt the official proceeding of Congress. They weren't there on a field trip to look at the sights.
You're completely right.
However, I am however inclined to agree with the criticism invoked in the conservative Justices questioning.
The law is in fact written so broadly, that even a peaceful protest would be subject to this rather harsh penalty. That means the law itself is bullshit. If i were one of the fuckwits being charged with this shit, I'd want to attack it from this angle too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There was a diverse group of people there, intention wise.
Some were there with the intent of forcing a regime change (overturning an election they saw as fraudulent, via extralegal means).
Some were there merely to disrupt in protest that varies from peaceful, to violent.
Some were there because it was a mob, and mobs are fun for pieces of shit.
The punishments should fit the crime, all crimes are based on intent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm particularly annoyed with the President at the time for fomenting it, when he knew it could grow out of control, which it did.
That being said, "no harm, no foul" should absolutely apply to those who didn't commit overt acts of violence or arguable overthrow of the government.
The people who were there with bad intentions, should be rounded up and assfucked with the law. The rest should be let off, and look at them as an e
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, pulling the fire alarm is exactly the same thing as violently attacking police officers, vandalizing a government building and attempting to hang the vice president.
Not in MAGA land. Pulling a fire alarm if you are a D is much worse.
Re: (Score:2)
While we can recognize evil of Putin's regime when it engages in totalitarian crackdowns on free speech, the sad truth is that we are not far behind. For example, Biden's justice department manufacturing novel legal theories [nytimes.com] to imprison non-violent political protesters while ignoring similar cases [reuters.com] elsewhere.
Ignoring that prosecutors have broad authority to decide what to charge someone with based on the actions of the person, if the conservative textualist, such as Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, stick to their "the text is what counts and not inferring intent" championed by Scalia they should uphold the use of the law in these cases.
Re: (Score:2)
Which non-violent political protesters were jailed? Surely you can't be referring to the January 6th rioters, who tresspassed in the capitol building, vandalized it, and assaulted the capitol police? All three acts are clearly illegal under any rational reading of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Which non-violent political protesters were jailed? Surely you can't be referring to the January 6th rioters, who tresspassed in the capitol building, vandalized it, and assaulted the capitol police? All three acts are clearly illegal under any rational reading of the law.
Every single one of them did all these things?
Re: (Score:2)
They're not prosecuting every single one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As for the charge of "Obstructing an official proceeding" being used with a rather liberal interpretation, that really stems back to 2019 with several high-profile cases tried by the Trump Justice Department.
As for the congress-critter, I'm inclined to agree with you.
However- that one is a bit tricky. Congresscritter says it was an accident.
Even if it obviously wasn't, the burden of proof is on the Government to prove othe
What an honor (Score:4, Interesting)
I hope that someday I will have the honor of being convicted in absentia by a Russian court. It means you are doing something very right.
Re: (Score:2)
Stick around the West long enough and you'll have a chance to be convicted while present for political crimes, too. It's already happening throughout Europe and the UK for years.
Re: (Score:2)
Not even remotely the same situation, and such false equivalences are a favorite tactic of Russian trolls.
Silly stuff (Score:2)
You'd think that if you're making propaganda, you'd try something a little more impressive than an in-absentia criminal conviction you can never enforce against a guy who might not even care enough to even be aware of it.
Russia can give me consecutive life sentences if it wants, there's no way I'd ever visit it while it still has a government that would care about enforcing that.
Re: Silly stuff (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not all Russians are awful people, I've known some nice immigrants. We are mostly hearing about people who are trying to get by in an authoritarian state where they are both heavily propagandized and when that doesn't work, aware that speaking up gets them a long prison sentence or a short trip to Ukraine.
I've always wanted to visit, but it's always been a generation or two behind where I'd feel comfortable, even when the government seemed a bit more relaxed than today's.
Reverse (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Russia is an extremist organisation.
Many Republicans outwardly support Russia. Many others secretly support Russia. What does that mean for Republicans?
Re: Reverse (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Laughing at the Canadian family (they bizarrely have MAGA up there, do they think they're just a US state?) who moved to Russia to get more freedom, then weren't welcomed with open arms, have their freedoms severely restricted, and only have temporary visitors visas and will have to leave soon. Some people act before thinking, or even act before failing to think.
Re: (Score:2)
Laughing at the Canadian family (they bizarrely have MAGA up there, do they think they're just a US state?) who moved to Russia to get more freedom, then weren't welcomed with open arms, have their freedoms severely restricted, and only have temporary visitors visas and will have to leave soon. Some people act before thinking, or even act before failing to think.
Sadly, then expected the Canadian government to bail them out from their own stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
Are these republicans, or merely MAGA? Most Republicans (the traditional kind) are highly opposed to Russia-under-Putin. It's just the conressional freshmen MAGA corps who mysteriously are devoted to that dictator. And the ex-Fox host but he's probably clinically insane and so has an excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
I noticed that you have to reverse everything the Russian government says to get the truth. In this case: Russia is an extremist organisation. It works suprisingly well.
"It isn't confirmed until the Kremlin denies it" has been a truism for some time.
But they are (Score:2)
They push Agile and DevOps many kilometers past beyond.
Go ahead, argue with me. On my side, I suggest you try to use faceplant.
Re:But they are (Score:4, Funny)
You do English beyond.
And THAT is why we in the US need Section 230 (Score:1)
A military court in a foreign country has tried, found guilty, and sentenced a person who has not been there for committing a crime there, and that crime is that they are the public-facing person of a multinational corporation that allows people to post their thoughts and opinions.
Imagine how many things are wrong with that... and then say "Oh but it couldn't happen in the US" except our elected representatives are working hard to make as many holes in CDA's Section 230 (FOSTA, SEXTA, etc.) so that it reall
They're not wrong. (Score:4, Interesting)
Meta IS an extremist organisation. Their primary objective is advertising. They achieve it by amplifying the most loud and controversial content because that's what sells and attracts attention the most. They use extreme, heated topics for personal gain. They are extremists.
Re: (Score:2)
Both yes and no. Meta doesn't have one specific ideology other than enriching themselves. They don't care if that means America beats up Russia or Russia beats up America; they don't care if Israel beats up Gaza or Gaza beats up Israel. They just want money.
As such I would say that they are not extremists; they are mercenaries.
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. It's been shown that Meta is extremely partisan, and anyone who's even moderate can plainly see it. They openly banned hundreds of satire and news sites during the last election, largely under the banner of "fake news and disinfo". Was it? Sure, much if not most of it was. Some of it wasn't, though - and it isn't their job to do that. What it was, was a highly partisan purge.
Thought once... then thought again. (Score:2)
Was going to post something silly, like, "Well, as the ruler of my detached single family home, I declare Putin to be a convicted felon, and if he sets foot in my home he'll be arrested.
But then it occurred to me that one of us has access to polonium, and possesses both the willingness to deploy it, and the people to make it happen in other nations... these circumstances are not equivalent!
Re: (Score:2)
But then it occurred to me that one of us has access to polonium, and possesses both the willingness to deploy it, and the people to make it happen in other nations... these circumstances are not equivalent!
Polonium is readily available:
https://amstat.com/products/an... [amstat.com]
context (Score:2)
"A military court in Moscow...
I had no idea Andy Stone was enlisted in the Russian national military. Does Stone know?
\o/ (Score:1)
Maybe what's needed is not weapons but a thumbs-down button to downvote posts by those killing foreigners?
Charge me, too! (Score:2)
I'd napalm your troops and drone strike your officers.
Welcome to honest sentiment against the new Soviets.
Die, Putin, die, you small person.