Russian opposition activist Alexei Navalny dies in Arctic prison

Russian opposition leader and activist Alexei Navalny had died in prison.

Russian opposition activist Alexei Navalny dies in Arctic prison

My respects to this great Russian hero who like Boris Nemtsov, championed democracy and free speech, and attained martyrdom doing the same.

Hopefully, this will show that not all Russians are pro-Putin and there are potent opposition voices as well. The Russian civilians brought down the autocratic Soviet leadership, and they should be trusted to bring down present dictatorial forces as well.

Generalizing all Russians as evil and tyrannical, as some are doing, is clearly infantile and short-sighted, and suggests propaganda and cleverly crafted narratives to manipulate the thought process of intended victims.

 

Yes, Navalny was a much better potential leader than Putin though there's a record of him being very right wing.

Sure that's what have done here and many elsewhere with regard to Palestinians and Hamas. Generalising that all Palestinians are Hamas is absolutely wrong.
I would suggest it's not so much infantile and short-sighted but it's delusional and ignorant and clearly the person is more keen to state their view than properly to form one based on reality. and knowledge.
A bit like many who post on reviews sites. Their ability to state an opinion is much greater than their ability to have an informed opinion.

 

Wonder if it was --the window solution--( oooo--look out there)or the drink solution. ( drink this--it's real good) 47 years old? Guess it was old age.

 

Perhaps Putin is getting like one of those old ladies who I just mentioned on my reply on the other thread.

 

Anton Shekhovtsov: Why Ukraine is wary of the Russian opposition

Ukrainians have many reasons to distrust Navalny and his movement.

4 March 2023

Navalny, as Ukrainians and liberal Russians remember well, vehemently supported the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 and even used derogatory, dehumanising terms to refer to the Georgian people. Several years later, he would apologise for the terms he used, but never for his support of the Russian war on Georgia.

Navalny was nominally against the Russian aggression in Ukraine, but his “anti-war” position was underpinned by economic, rather than moral, considerations: “Russia can ill afford waging the war”. That position expectedly did not entail any empathy towards the Ukrainian people – something that was also reflected in his use of ethnic slurs against them.

He saw the Russian people as victims of injustice under Putin’s regime, not the Ukrainians. In his view, no wrong had been committed against Ukraine that was worth righting. […]

But the troubles of Navalny and his followers did not resonate with Ukrainians, as his past remarks, as well as the Navalnists’ arrogance and disdain, offered little hope that “the wonderful Russia of the future” would have any respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. […]

As the majority of Navalnists were forced to seek refuge in the West, where many influential figures adopted a “Ukraine First” policy in communicating with self-identified “Russian democrats”, the Navalnists could no longer afford to publicly express their disdain for Ukraine because they risked losing all Western sympathy towards their movement.

Why Ukraine is wary of the Russian opposition


Screenshot from Navalny's material on LiveJournal for 2014 (see long article below):


Alexei Navalny and Ukraine: how the Russian “opposition” leader’s team sees the end of the war

September 15, 2023

How oppositional is Alexei Navalny’s team? Calling themselves the opposition, this Russian group talks about fundamental democratic beliefs and the end of Russia’s war against Ukraine. But a closer look at their statements shows that this is far from their main focus.

This is why the Civil Network OPORA team decided to conduct a thorough study of the media activity of Russians who claim to be in opposition to the current Russian government. This research aims to discover who the Russian “opposition” really is, whether its public position is really aimed at establishing justice, and what challenges the world will face if it comes to power. This article focuses on Russia’s most prominent “opposition” leader, Alexei Navalny, and his team. […]

The authors of this study reviewed this publication and found many other questionable statements by Navalny. Before even getting to the topic of Crimea, the so-called opposition leader calls Ukrainians “khokhols” (an insulting imperialist term used by Russians for Ukrainians) and devotes an entire paragraph to the fact that Ukrainians, Belarusians, and Russians are “brothers in different apartments, not just neighbours” and that “brotherly” relations with Ukraine and Belarus are “Russia’s strategic advantage in this world.” He said this after Russian troops invaded Ukraine in 2014, so it is unclear what kind of brotherhood he was talking about. And in 2022, Ukrainians once again felt this brotherhood — in Bucha, Mariupol, Izium, and other settlements. […]

The study results show that there is no reason to believe that members of Navalny’s team have understood either the threat their country poses to the architecture of global peace or what it has already done to Ukraine over several centuries of terror. But these Russian “oppositionists” have already begun to lobby for resources for the post-war reconstruction of Russia — competing with the country they are destroying. The Navalny team’s attempts to advocate for their own current and future interests by taking advantage of the global attention on Russia’s war against Ukraine only come across as weak and chauvinistic.

Alexei Navalny and Ukraine: how the Russian “opposition” leader’s team sees the end of the war • Ukraїner

 

Perhaps like most Russians, Navalny supporters and Navalny himself are victims of the ceaseless Kremlin propaganda since childhood. So now they are hopefully more "woke" to the lies they hear everyday.

 

Not much difference between Putin and Biden.... Putin successfully got Novalny in Prison, where he could kill him. Biden has now been working for years to do the same thing to Trump

 

Considering how Trump thinks about betraying America's decades long partnership with Europe, he deserves to go. Anyway, you shouldn't lie on your loan applications, man. Tsk tsk, naughty naughty.

News: Widow Yulia Navalnaya will continue her late husband's work.

Yulia Navalnaya vows to continue husband Alexei’s fight and says Putin killed him

 

So it sounds like you also support the use of political assassination as a way to silence your political enemies? Liberals have NEVER believed in Democracy. Seems they only believe in the power of government to crush opposing views.

 

Assassination? Me thinks you're a bit delusional, if you think Trump's gonna get whacked in the pokey. You're not russia yet, even if your republicans seem to do their damndest to make it happen.

 

Absolutely!!!!!!!!!

 

Democrats took out Scalia, and the Clinton assassination list is horrendously long. Democrats are infamous for doing the Jimmy Hoffa to their opposition. Letitia James, Fanni Willis etc are ALL trying to get Trump in jail so they can execute him.

 

A video is making the rounds in which Biden boasts at a 1987 rally, “I went to law school on a full academic scholarship…[and] ended up in the top half of my class.”

Biden also maintained that he “graduated with three degrees from undergraduate school” and was the “outstanding student in the political science department.”

Not one of those claims was true, as newscasters at the time affirmed. In fact, Biden graduated 76th of 85 students in his law school class, had only a partial scholarship and did not win top honors in his undergraduate discipline.

Biden explained in his 2007 autobiography “Promises to Keep” that he had been angry at that rally since “it sounded to me that one of my own supporters doubted my intelligence.” According to a 1987 Newsweek piece, a supporter had “politely” asked Biden what law school he attended and how well he had done.

Biden bristled, saying “I think I have a much higher IQ than you do,” reeled off his fabricated accomplishments and concluded “I’d be delighted to sit down and compare my IQ to yours if you’d like, Frank.”

The episode reminds us of Biden recently snapping “You’re full of sh*t” at an auto worker who dared to challenge Biden’s stance on guns; or calling an Iowa voter a “damn liar” for insinuating that Biden had helped his son gain access in Ukraine.

The Newsweek reporter wrote that Biden appears “hyper, glib and intellectually insecure,” and says the 1987 encounter was critical to understanding why Biden’s first run at higher office flopped. “The clip…reflects a view of Biden’s character widely shared in the community. Reporters and political consultants long ago concluded that Biden’s chief character flaw was his tendency to wing it. He seems to lack a crucial synapse between brain and tongue, the one that makes the do-I-really-want-to-say-this decision.”

That commentary holds up well, as today more than ever Biden blunders into conversational crevasses, with no way out. (Think: “If they believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn’t vote for me.” A new Harvard-Harris poll shows 55 percent of the country believes Tara Reade. Game. Set. Match.)

Biden’s 1987 campaign foundered also because he was caught lifting passages of a speech given by Neil Kinnock. Biden echoed (falsely) the British Labor leader’s history that he was the first “in a thousand generations” to graduate from college and repeated virtually verbatim the same story about his wife, just as Kinnock had.

More shocking, Biden claimed: “My ancestors…worked in the coal mines of Northeast Pennsylvania and would come up after 12 hours and play football for four hours,’’ even though no one in Biden’s family tree ever worked underground. That was Kinnock’s family.

It wasn’t the first time; Biden had also been caught plagiarizing during law school. He “borrowed” an entire five pages from a published law review article without attribution and had to beg not to be expelled.

Interestingly, just last summer complaints arose about Biden “borrowing” the work of others, in putting together his climate plan. As Vox reported, Biden’s plan “contains a number of passages that seem to have been copied and pasted, at times with very superficial changes” from a variety of sources.

Biden supporters will dismiss these episodes as being in the distant past. But Biden’s tendency to mislead did not expire in 1988. More recently, the former vice president has told audiences that after his stint in the White House, “I became a teacher. I became a professor.” While it is true that he took a lofty salary to make a handful of speeches for the University of Pennsylvania, Biden has never taught students.

Then there was the inspiring tale of visiting Afghanistan to honor a heroic naval officer. Biden described the officer’s actions in detail, adding, “This is God’s truth, my word as a Biden.” But according to a review in the Washington Post, no such incident occurred. Biden was lucky not to be hit by lightning.

There were also Biden’s claims of having been arrested in the 1970s because he tried to visit Nelson Mandela in prison. Nope, didn’t happen. He has also cast himself as a civil rights activist and co-sponsor of the Endangered Species Act; those things aren’t true either.

Character does not change. Biden’s winning smile and genial nature have granted him license to mislead. But as Biden denies alleged misdeeds related to General Flynn, to his son Hunter’s involvement in Ukraine or to Tara Reade, his history of bending the truth is informative.

Courtesy: The Hill BY LIZ PEEK, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 05/22/20 8:00 AM ET

 

...

 

...

 

*yawn*

Yeah, whatever. You're being off-topic.