Microsoft suspended the email account of an ICC prosecutor at The Hague

Post by AlecSchueler » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 9:05 PM UTC

throw310822 wrote: post #157

krapp wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "Epstein/Israel/Trump blackmail conspiracy?" It's already known that Trump is in the Epstein files. He's already admitted to sexual assault, has been found liable of sexual abuse and is a convicted felon. He's one of the most openly venal and corrupt Presidents in history. There's literally nothing Israel could have on him that would surprise anyone. Every American President will defend Israel at any cost. The A…

Correct, but let's not forget that at the end of all this complicated mess it's Israel that reaps the benefits (money, territory, its enemies reduced to rubble). It's hardly by chance.

Post by pydry » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 9:07 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #220

1shooner wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>some APAC conspiracy This is not a binary of either NWO conspiracy or paranoid antisemitism . AIPAC is a lobby, just like many other lobbies. They boast on their website[1] that they've paid $53M to politicians. Just like any other lobby, the electorate has a right and responsibility to judge whether the influence it has bought is in their best interests. 1. https://www.aipacpac.org/home

> AIPAC is a lobby, just like many other lobbies Sure. One among many. They’re influential, but not deterministic. > that they've paid $53M to politicians No, they don’t. They’re reporting campaign donations. There is a tendency, when we disagree with an election, to tally up the donations made to the other side while ignoring all the times the best-funded candidate got trounced. (Jeb!) The influence of money in poli…

Post by SllX » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 9:08 PM UTC

freeopinion wrote: post #255

SllX wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought I was clear on this, but I guess not: it was entirely appropriate. They lost so thoroughly and the Holocaust was so repulsive that it was arguably necessary . Germany itself was also in such a precarious position that the continued existence of the German State was in jeopardy, and probably the only way it could continue to exist in any form even after being divided was to go through the Nuremberg Trials fi…

You are becoming incoherent. By your own argument, the Nuremberg trials were not necessary. Anybody lacking the military might to defy the U.S. can be summarily executed without a trial. Anybody enjoying the support of the U.S. military is exempt from any courtroom regardless of their actions. Then here you write that Nurenmberg was appropriate and necessary. You don't seem to be able to hold the thread of your own a…

Post by danieljacksonno » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 9:09 PM UTC

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #228

StefanBatory wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

When did the US make that threat?

Post by kragen » Sat, Jun 21, 2025, 9:11 PM UTC

SllX wrote: post #212

kragen wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're imagining this happening in a world where the US has the political status it had ten years ago, not the political status it will have ten years in the future.

We’re only talking about today, bruh. There’s no sense worrying about a tomorrow that may never come, but I’m willing to bet that 10 years from now we still have the strongest military in and around The Hague and even beyond, very very few would ever be willing to threaten war with us to back up the ICC. Now, 20 years from now? 30 years from now? 50? Who knows.