Comments by "abyfkk" (@abyfkk) on "They Want Julian Assange to Die in Prison for Embarrassing the CIA" video.

  1.  @natalileon979  And smart, and billions... Is this trolling? Maybe I'll come back later, if I'm in the mood
    1
  2. @@juliapoland it is very similar to the psychopathy of Kiev propaganda, they generally assured everyone that they dug up the Black Sea with spoons)) Why should everyone believe that you didn't run away from Ukraine to Poland? I am not a historian, but Churchill called Poland the hyena of Europe. By the decision of the Potsdam Conference, East Prussia was divided between Poland and Russia. (this is about Kaliningrad) And for what reason did Poland get the land, what did it do at all?))) And Russia owned Kaliningrad before, until 1762. And he does not read the comments, he would go crazy if he read everything, and there is no time) He runs around waving a white handkerchief ... That the Poles, that part of the Ukarins who were always called with the letter H, were always the same)) It's like there are African Americans in America, but there are completely different letters))
    1
  3. @@juliapoland But Poland did something before the start of the war, they let Germany enter without a single shot, and all this under the guise of attacking Poland)) Why? In order to move closer to the borders of the USSR and fight on the side of nazi Germany, as other European countries did by default)) It was then that Germany held negotiations with the USSR, their essence was simple - if you want, take half of Poland, if you don't want, we will take it all. A simple choice. This is a "secret" agreement around which there was a lot of noise and discussion. And there's nothing to discuss. And the whole point is simple - they will move closer to the line of contact with the USSR in any case. For what? To start a war and conduct military operations)) So why did Poland get the lands of East Prussia? They should be given to Germany))) And drive the Poles into the sea to be cured of greed and arrogance))) And in general, the topic here is different, about Assange) But knowing such psychos for a long time, I'm not even surprised))
    1
  4. The topic with Assange is very strange. I don't know why Tucker took it or why. I know very little, and I do not share the general enthusiasm, I will explain why. In my opinion, Assange is a publicist. This is not a journalist, this is a publicist. And most likely a hacker-publisher)) In 1991, he was brought to court for hacking the server and released. After that, silence... how is that possible? But maybe he completely stopped messing around hacking servers (I can hardly believe it)) And there is another option - he started working behind the scenes for someone to fulfill some orders, and this ensured silence))
    1
  5. I don't even know where he lived at that time, there is information about what he was doing, but we don't write where he was and lived... only since England and the history with Sweden, everything is clear here. And until that moment, they either don't know themselves, or they think it's not important)) I just once heard a story that he was almost taken away from the hands of the American special services by the Russians, rescued, and not allowed to be captured. I don't know exactly what time it was, 5 minutes, 10, an hour or a day. I don't remember where it happened either, but I was surprised when something related to him and Europe, namely Sweden, appeared later. I thought he was lured from somewhere to some kind of negotiations and he came from some countries where he was safe)) I did not follow the course of events, only occasionally found out by accident. And now I'm just amazed that it turns out he was in Europe at all, in England))
    1
  6. Because there was another story before all this. I heard that he was offered to move to Russia, but refused. I think he found life in Russia not comfortable enough for him, and completely out of line with his popularity and social status. And he believed that nothing was threatening him. Although it is clear to me that if such a proposal was followed, then one of the professionals assessed the situation as extremely dangerous for Assange. Apparently he didn't believe it) Or maybe he decided that if he shouted in an American court, "I'd rather go to prison than in Russia!" he would immediately be released to applause)))
    1
  7. Yes, maybe that's why Tucker came to Russia)) Not to interview Putin, it was just a cover. And to personally make sure if he can live there if there is a critical situation)))) Such a situation will certainly not come, but just in case I decided to find out))
    1
  8. Tucker asked Assange why he thinks he ended up in prison without committing a crime. And Assange tells him in response at what point Wikileaks became popular)) That is, Assange did not say goodbye to all the best features of his character and now any questions echo his ego)) And that in America, posting secret documents in the public domain is not a crime?)) (what a good country you need to move there urgently))) And ... probably a crime, but it was just done by a citizen of another country who runs around Europe, and therefore is absolutely inaccessible to America with all its influence and special services, not even I know what to say sometimes.... That is, the very place where America can do nothing and is powerless to do it.... Europe!!))) (it is interesting to form the views of the media among people))
    1
  9. In Russia, there was no hype related to Assange's materials, there was a hype around Assange's name. And what new things have we learned... the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, something else from the past, nothing new. Maybe there's a difference in mentality, I don't know... but there was a video where 10 civilians were killed during the US Air Force operation in Iraq, which caused a huge resonance and made a lot of noise. But I'm sorry, if the police detain someone alone with a cart in a supermarket and 10 people die at the same time, I understand. The USAF operation accidentally kills 10 people.... In general, in the early days, Baghdad was bombed and shelled. What do you think civilians died, or how everyone imagines it (and it's even convenient for the media, only 10 people died civilians , I don't know maybe there were flying saucers that fired lasers and it was impossible to miss and no one nearby could get hurt by accident , maybe everyone used to imagine that)
    1
  10. If it's calm. Secret documents can be different, both in terms of secrecy and content. You can classify an empty sheet. There will be nothing in it, but it will be a secret document. This is due to the fact that when the word secret document is used, everyone always has the same general idea of extreme importance, secrecy and value, and this is not always the case) But the very fact of distributing secret documents in bundles, in any case, will compromise the special services and the US government. The fact itself, because these documents must be protected and stored appropriately, and even more so not to be publicly available. And how was it supposed to end up?
    1
  11. You understand one thing, let's say some intelligence gets important secret information that is important, it will not publish them, and even more so say that it owns them, so that they do not find out about it and take measures to reset their value. For example I'm standing in one place, and it's a secret. Tucker says I know where you're standing. And I'll go straight to another place. And what Assange published apparently affects public opinion that they are not being told everything, or they are being told the wrong way. That governments sometimes lie)) And lie on purpose and intentionally So it hasn't started now. This has been happening for a long time, throughout history)) And people deceive each other and lie And it happens) You know all this
    1
  12. It seems to me that it is much more important to explain current events)) Moreover, a lot of things are happening openly, they don't hide much anymore. But what's the beauty of it, they still manage to deceive many)) Therefore, it is more important to teach people to understand something themselves. It's such a rivalry, a duel, some tell the truth, others tell lies The winner is the one who is more convincing (or who will show his advertisement a thousand times, repeat a lie a thousand times - they will believe in it more)) And sometimes there is a rivalry between two liars. And each of them claims that he is telling the truth. And no one tells the truth from them)) And some people try to figure out which of them is lying, then the second one will be considered honest Therefore, I want to ask you a question - what did Assange teach you, hacking servers? And goes out on the balconies with appeals enjoying his fame and popularity? What did he teach you?
    1