u/nogooduser

Any weight that Russia’s warnings ever had has been lost in the past few years.

There’s not a lot of detail in the article but it will be that they were each charged with multiple crimes.

It does mention in the article that three victims were disappeared and murdered so that could be a conviction for kidnapping and one for murder of each of the three victims. That’s six crimes each.

What’s the point of being the big boss if you can’t set your salary? You guys are so unreasonable. /s

I don’t think that the official story was that they would turn it over to the Taliban.

I think that it was that they would leave the local government to maintain their own security (knowing full well that they wouldn’t be able to).

Yeah. Previously it would have been seen as banning an extremist party. Now it would be seen as election tampering.

lots of Iranian scientists who were working with the IAEA were murdered by the Israelis

That is correlation, not causation.

They were nuclear scientists so obviously work with the international atomic energy agency.

They were nuclear scientists so were a target for anyone who wanted to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program.

It must be awful to have a job that requires you to constantly say “Stop it guys!” knowing that it’s pointless because you know that they aren’t listening.

Palestinian journalists in Israel covering the conflict with Iran that began June 12 have been accused of “working for the enemy,” barred from reporting sites, physically assaulted, and subjected to racial slurs.

So they probably didn’t notice anything different then.

That’s easy to fix… new rules where the king and queen swap roles. Although that would mean protecting a woman above the men so maybe not.

Well, they’re at least ready to let their population die.

Fuck off.

I’m sorry that I offended you. I was genuinely trying to be helpful in pointing out how what you said could be misconstrued.

But the ones that I have met expressed very overtly racist positions that were logically inconsistent in any other scenario: special pleading all the way.

I wasn't, at the time, back around a decade ago now, telling my white liberal friends 'all Israelis are racist because I met a few'.

I’m not saying that you were being racist. I’m saying that it’s very easy to come across as racist when pointing out things that you don’t like about a few people off the same race.

You are here doing the thing my former friends did: You are assuming I did and said things I did not do nor say, and are pearl clutching... because you've head canon'd in your own missing context and additional details.

I’m doing no such thing. I wasn’t judging you for your observations and I made no statement about whether I thought you were racist or not because I don’t have the information required to suggest that you are.

But did you read the entire article that is this post?

No, I didn’t need to because I was only making the comment that it’s very easy to be seen as racist when you talk about a race of people.

Meanwhile, I've been anti Zionist my whole life, and every single actual Israeli I've ever met has been a racist, anti-Islamic Zionist... and when I point this out, almost every white liberal or self described lefty has called me an antisemite.

The problem is that there is a fine line between stating your observations of a few people and racism.

I’d guess that you haven’t met many actual Israelis….. certainly not enough to be a statistically significant sample. If that’s the case then assuming that your observations apply to the whole population becomes racism.

I can only assume that interference like this reduces the chances of them electing “the right leader”.

I’m not sure that the UK would listen if he tried it independently. I think that it would give a huge boost to the anti monarchy movement if he tried to actually use his power for anything non-symbolic.

I imagine that every law that mentions the monarch of England would become redrafted to be relevant like we did with the EU laws when we left.

I think that it will be a legal protection thing.

If you say that the car hit the pedestrians then that cannot be disputed.

If you say that the driver drove into the pedestrians then you could be sued if it was later proven to be mechanical failure.

Even if it was pretty obviously intentional you don’t want to leave that decision up to the reporter. You need to wait until you are 100% sure which would only come upon conviction.

The person you replied to said that the needed to be independent of state control, not that they couldn’t be state owned.

I don’t know about SBS but it is broadcast on BBC One in the UK which is also state owned but is not directly controlled by the state.

Again with the “almost a disaster” style of wording.

It’s not “at breaking point” it’s already broken and has been for a while.

avoid war criminal status

Surely that boat has already sailed.