18 Feb '21 11:28>1 edit
This post is unavailable.
Please refer to our posting guidelines.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThat's what I bet at the bookies.
Was that a verdict given in a court of law?
(Rhetorical).
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThe UK blew up the story so much no jury over there would be unbiased.
Was that a verdict given in a court of law?
(Rhetorical).
@phil-a-dork saidThe point remains that if a relative of yours was run over and killed by somebody driving on the wrong side of the road you'd expect them to face a day in court.
The UK blew up the story so much no jury over there would be unbiased.
The post that was quoted here has been removedAppreciate that (no really) but if somebody doesn't try to do something๐คทโ๏ธ I've two boys (14 & 12) [edit] IF, that happened to mine... Governments playing with lives and the U.S.A. are supposed to be are closest allies. Not on that level, let's just drop bombs, shift some sand and carry on๐ King media, Orwell Twa.'.
@phil-a-dork saidWhat a lame reason !!!!
Allies?
Y'all allowed Assange to avoid US prosecution.
Ya two faced clowns.
Your judges ruling was "the USA can't prevent Assange from taking his own life in US custody"
What a lame reason ๐
So don't get mad when the USA let's Sacoolas go free.
The post that was quoted here has been removedThe decision has to whether she had diplomatic immunity regarding the criminal charges was made by the US embassy, not Mrs. Sacoolas, and they were surely aware what position she held at the base:
The post that was quoted here has been removedDisinterested party or not, it is the US embassy which makes such decisions under international law. Not Mrs. Sacoolas. Your backpedaling doesn't change what you wrote: