There's plenty of more recent examples, but I'm not going to go to the effort to dig up more in a conversation where the majority of the replies I get boil down to "nuh-uh, I saw different online stupid tankie."

If 2006 is the year that you landed on, I'll again point you to the two specific names I dropped, Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, both of whom experienced this with the US and allies more recently.

Do you see why I wouldn't bother putting the effort into finding a better source? The low effort replies and baseless personal attacks are all over this thread. Even the people I gave the benefit of the doubt to while replying didn't reply in good faith.

What do you feel like you've added to the conversation by trying to personally attack me? Does it feel good to attack someone behind the protection of anonymity? I wonder, if we did meet face-to-face, would you have the courage and strength of character to engage with me in a conversation as a fellow human worthy of respect despite our differences in belief or would you still hide behind weak, uninspiring insults as you have here?