【BlockBeats】 Interestingly, SBF, who recently posted from detention, raised a thought-provoking question — why do American and Western media apply completely different standards to leaders of different countries?
He compared Venezuelan President Maduro with former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández (JOH). Both have complicated backgrounds and have governed countries plagued by drug trafficking issues. But their stories later diverged completely — JOH later cooperated with the US to combat drug crimes and peacefully transferred power at the end of his term; Maduro, on the other hand, was accused of colluding with drug cartels, ignoring election results, and ultimately turning to dictatorship.
An interesting detail here is: after JOH’s term ended, the US government arrested him and extradited him back to the US, while after Maduro refused to recognize the election results, the US also chose a similar approach.
SBF’s point of questioning is that liberal media heavily criticize the legality of the US arrest of Maduro in Venezuela, but he can’t understand why, back when the US arrested JOH in Honduras, these media remained silent? He believes the root cause is highly politicized — media support Maduro and oppose JOH simply because Maduro was previously opposed by Trump, while JOH even received a pardon from Trump.
SBF’s final conclusion is that this is not a “rule of law” issue at all, but rather a matter of political stance driving the narrative choices. This view is somewhat eye-opening — regardless of how you see him, this topic is indeed worth discussing within the community.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
8 Likes
Reward
8
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MEVHunterBearish
· 01-09 10:35
NGL, this guy is still playing the double standard game even while in jail, which is honestly a bit "talented"... But to be fair, the US's selective enforcement really has a strong flavor; cooperation is clearly written in black and white, no cooperation means conviction. Alright then.
View OriginalReply0
OvertimeSquid
· 01-07 03:43
Haha, SBF is still banging his head in prison. The logic... is indeed a bit interesting.
---
It's the same old rhetoric again. Double standards definitely exist, but maybe not quite as he understands it.
---
To put it simply, anyone who cooperates with the US is a democracy defender. That's clear as day.
---
Still acting as a political commentator in prison, that's really something.
---
Instead of complaining about the media, think about how you managed to blow up FTX.
---
This guy really thinks he's a victim... Please, just focus on reducing your sentence.
---
Double standards do exist, but it's a bit funny coming from SBF's mouth.
---
Alright, alright, I’ll just listen to the mutual accusations among bad guys.
View OriginalReply0
NftRegretMachine
· 01-06 13:16
Haha, SBF is also starting to play double standards inside. This matter is indeed interesting, but hearing the excuse of selective enforcement so many times is still too much...
The enlightenment gained from reflection in prison is genuine, but using this argument to exonerate oneself always feels a bit off.
America has always been like this—cooperation means being a good country, disobedience is dictatorship. What else can this political game be played?
SBF is starting to act like a philosopher, haha. First, get your own accounts straightened out before making grand speeches, brother.
View OriginalReply0
NotSatoshi
· 01-06 13:12
SBF's statement is like reflecting on life in prison. It's not entirely unreasonable... but to be honest, he only started crying foul after being caught. This kind of rhetoric always sounds a bit suspicious.
View OriginalReply0
FlatlineTrader
· 01-06 13:07
Wait, is SBF still playing this game in prison? I'm tired of the double standards theory, but it is indeed interesting... But more than that, I want to know if he was also playing the same game back then.
Media narrative is always written by the winners, isn't that common sense?
Really? JOH was eventually arrested? Then this example actually... is quite ironic, no matter how you cooperate, you can't escape.
SBF's comments are indeed a bit shameless, but the topic really hits the point.
Politics is so dirty, those who choose sides always have a reason, and those who don't... just wait to be demonized.
Not to mention, this comparison really makes people think; Western media's double standards are truly impressive.
SBF speaks from prison: Accuses Western media of double standards, discusses US politics and selective enforcement
【BlockBeats】 Interestingly, SBF, who recently posted from detention, raised a thought-provoking question — why do American and Western media apply completely different standards to leaders of different countries?
He compared Venezuelan President Maduro with former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández (JOH). Both have complicated backgrounds and have governed countries plagued by drug trafficking issues. But their stories later diverged completely — JOH later cooperated with the US to combat drug crimes and peacefully transferred power at the end of his term; Maduro, on the other hand, was accused of colluding with drug cartels, ignoring election results, and ultimately turning to dictatorship.
An interesting detail here is: after JOH’s term ended, the US government arrested him and extradited him back to the US, while after Maduro refused to recognize the election results, the US also chose a similar approach.
SBF’s point of questioning is that liberal media heavily criticize the legality of the US arrest of Maduro in Venezuela, but he can’t understand why, back when the US arrested JOH in Honduras, these media remained silent? He believes the root cause is highly politicized — media support Maduro and oppose JOH simply because Maduro was previously opposed by Trump, while JOH even received a pardon from Trump.
SBF’s final conclusion is that this is not a “rule of law” issue at all, but rather a matter of political stance driving the narrative choices. This view is somewhat eye-opening — regardless of how you see him, this topic is indeed worth discussing within the community.