4 ms·

It’s more boring than that. It’s about making a slam dunk case for the jury. Criminal cases are not tried against a general moral standard. It begins with a rea

It’s more boring than that. It’s about making a slam dunk case for the jury. Criminal cases are not tried against a general moral standard. It begins with a reading of the specific statute offended. Including any evidence ancillary to the case, and that will not emotionally sway the jury for your case, undermines your case. There are several venues for trying “war crime” cases, this is not one of them. I think if anybody really cared about the journalists who died you’d see lawfare leveraging UCMJ, but I’ve yet to see that. Seems the outrage is rather performative.

fit2rule 6y ago
An un-informed public cannot get outraged about its governments crimes nor serve as the final stop-gap against criminal behaviour by removing those responsible for the abuses of power required to commit crimes against humanity at such scale as we have seen the USA and its War Coalition commit in the last two decades. This is why publishers are important and should be protected. The Wests' citizens have been utterly scammed into complicity with these crimes against humanity - the imperative to mis-inform, and thus divert the outrage potential, is very, very high in this case.