Yes, that is why I had a question mark-{this is a question mark, "?"}-after my statement.
Kramnik - Kasparov beef?
Sort:
Well, Kasparov didn't make Ilyumzhinov trade with ISIS, did he ?
Maybe he used his influence to get back at him (I don't know if that is true but it might be possible), but even if he did, so what ?
If Ilyumzhinov was involved in criminal activity, how can acting against that be a bad thing ? Is Kasparov supposed to ignore his criminal activities just because he has beef with him ?
What's next ? I can't report a thief to police because I had beef with him in the past ?
Feb 24, 2016
0
#24
JasonCarnage wrote:
Well, Kasparov didn't make Ilyumzhinov trade with ISIS, did he ?
Maybe he used his influence to get back at him (I don't know if that is true but it might be possible), but even if he did, so what ?
If Ilyumzhinov was involved in criminal activity, how can acting against that be a bad thing ? Is Kasparov supposed to ignore his criminal activities just because he has beef with him ?
What's next ? I can't report a thief to police because I had beef with him in the past ?
I looked for any type of verification that Ilyumzhimov had anything to do with Daesh. I couldn't find any. It's probably just a figment of Kasparov's imagination.
trysts wrote:
I looked for any type of verification that Ilyumzhimov had anything to do with Daesh. I couldn't find any. It's probably just a figment of Kasparov's imagination.
Well, that topic is a difficult one for independent research I guess.
From what I have gathered, a lot more has been going on both in who let Daesh go on unchecked for so long and the financial aspects of their oil trading.
A lot of covert influence seems to have been exerted there, so I doubt anyone without top notch intelligence reports knows the truth about it.
But I don't think those sanctions would have been imposed unjustly just because Kasparov asked for it. I do not believe he has enough influence for that, but even if he had, Daesh oil trade is far too sensitive a matter to be used trivially.
It would probably have been easy to accuse Ilyumzhinov of the same type of corruption as Sepp Blatter in the FIFA scandal and few would have questioned it. So why bring up something so sensitive like ISIS oil trade unless there is some actual connection to that?
But I agree we normal citizens are not likely to ever see irrefutable proof.
trysts wrote:
Although I do agree with a lot of his views on Putin and Russian politics
So you think Putin is Hitler too, JavierGil?
Not the same, but there are certainly some disconcerting similarities between the 2!
kramnik - kasparov battlerap
Although I do agree with a lot of his views on Putin and Russian politics
So you think Putin is Hitler too, JavierGil?
Well, lets see...
I'm a fan of a lot of NBA players. Roy Hibbert is an NBA player. Does that necessarily mean that I'm a fan of Roy Hibbert?
Is that what you teach your students in troll school, macer, that logic is not only a handicap but that you don't know what logic is anyway?
Well, then tell me: what is the correct logic in your example or mine?
How about this:
'I agree with Kasparov 's views on Putin.'
'So do you agree with his view that Putin is Hitler?'
And then, in response, the person who made the original statement would tell me if he agreed with Kasparov concerning that particular view or not. Is that simple enough?
There's a difference between "I agree with Kasparov's views on Putin" and "I agree with a lot of Kasparov's views on Putin."