fit2rule

54 ms·

241.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The fact that they also had a navy base in the area to protect the nuclear weapons, maybe? Anyone who has lived in the area knows that it is a Russian stronghold, and has been for hundreds of years. Remind me again, when did America have a
242.
by fit2rule 6y ago
I'm genuinely happy to be hearing that the PineBook is genuinely nice .. I'd switch to it from my MBPro in an instant, if I could. Maybe I will, soon. My intention was not to slag off Pines' efforts. Its just, once you se
243.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Which ones are still operational and armed with nuclear weapons?
244.
by fit2rule 6y ago
2000's: caught a virus from a Virus.
245.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Because Assange has not been allowed to defend himself, by any stretch of the imagination whatsoever.
246.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>how is it in any way reassuring to other countries in its vicinity Because Russia's nuclear base, that had been there for decades, is still in Russia's hands and was not taken over by Ukraine fascists. I mean, that's as g
247.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Russia isn't taking over Eastern Europe. I work in the region and have friends all over the Balkan states, from Vienna to Pristina, and nobody in my circle has any misconceptions about what Russia is up to - its very generally accept
248.
by fit2rule 6y ago
As someone with a drawer full of these types of devices, from the neo1973 to the Creative Labs Zii Egg and Google G1, I'll definitely be picking up one of these phones when its available .. I've had a lot of fun with my PineTime w
249.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The corruption of the DNC is a very real thing. >How does knowing lunch orders from random DNC employees help reveal war crimes, corruption, or spying? Right, corruption never happens during lunchtime.
250.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>_federal agency_ ... political reasons Federal agencies only exist due to political expediencies. If the public no longer wish for the policies to be enforced, why keep the agency? Such is democracy.
251.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Show me anything that Wikileaks released that did not, in some way, involve either a) a war crime, b) corruption, or c) spying. Wikileaks is not a judiciary body. It never had any intention other than to provide an ill-informed public (r
252.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The order to murder these people was given long before the camera lens was observable by those who murdered them. "They could have had a rocket launcher" is an agitprop straw man intentionally proffered in order to minimise the ma
253.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Evidence?
254.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The fact is, as of today, there is NO EVIDENCE that any American life was put in danger by the leaks. There IS evidence that a LOT of American lives were put in danger by the war crimes and other crimes against humanity committed in th
255.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Will the defence include the video? I hope they do.
256.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Indeed, there is very little actual evidence of him having committed crimes in order to function as a publisher - and yet there is massive amounts of evidence of him functioning perfectly well in his capacity as a journalist and a publisher
257.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>Wikileaks intent was not to document war crimes, it was seemingly to reveal all state secrets. That is your opinion but its not the truth. Wikileaks own manifesto states: WikiLeaks is a multi-national media organization and associat
258.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>a government incapable of addressing it's own crimes is our biggest threat I agree with you, with one caveat: it is the people who must prosecute the governments crimes. Lets see if America today is brave enough to do so...
259.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Your opinion that the murder of innocent civilians and an attack on their children is a 'regrettable, mistake' is utterly abhorrent to anyone who has watched that video and can clearly see, for themselves, that these people were a
260.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Sure, the leaks must become public. But the leakers don't. And the outrage over the crimes committed is so large that I am fairly confident, within a year, we will see the American public tearing those responsible into shreds. If,
261.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The real reason he wasn't disappeared long ago, is that he had access to such gargantuan quantities of very real evidence of very real crimes that he was able to surf the shock wave, and he successfully leaked it in a way that would gu
262.
by fit2rule 6y ago
I concur, Assange is being slowly tortured to death while awaiting this sham trial. But I do think the leaks will continue. Those of us paying attention to the Assange saga have seen a new wave of evidence of crimes against humanity being
263.
by 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
264.
by fit2rule 6y ago
Either he IS a journalist/publisher and thus protected from prosecution for revealing evidence of real crimes, or he isn't . The US Government, by omitting this video from evidence, is making a tacit admittance that he is a pub
265.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>highly unfortunate mistake A bit like what happened to the WTC in 2001. I mean, what were they doing, navigating those buildings into the path of a couple of innocent planes, eh?
266.
by fit2rule 6y ago
The magnitude of America's crimes against humanity is scary to comprehend - it is analogous to the situation of 1930's Nazi Germany and that is not hype . The sheer magnitude of the numbers of innocent victims is AN UTTER ATROC
267.
by fit2rule 6y ago
It is going to be very interesting to watch how this trial proceeds - if indeed, Julian doesn't succumb to the Belmarsh torture and perishes, before the trial can run its course. For those of us who have been paying attention to Juli
268.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>American lives at risk Failing to prosecute legitimate war crimes puts American lives at risk. This is duplicity at its finest. Assange is not really on trial here. The Wests' public opinion of American war criminals is, however.
269.
by fit2rule 6y ago
>there are already thousands Are there? Got a reference to some of these bulletproof documents? EDIT: crickets ..
270.
by fit2rule 6y ago
You know what else speaks to a fundamental disinterest in the law and its uniform enforcement? The Gunship Video itself.

More ›