She is about as much a journalist as Karoline Leavitt in the US.

Calling her journalist is a stretch. She is the token woman mouth piece of the Ayatollah regime. When the Zan zendegi azadi protests were going on, she called for the protestors to be shot.

She is objectively an evil person who is now sitting in the bed she helped make.

Israel is bad and this unprovoked attack is a move by Netanyahu and Trump to distract from their domestic problems. But in the giant pile of shit that this situation is, that bitch getting scared is one of the few nuggets of pure karma.

I hope Khamenei dies too btw. Is that a problem too?

German law says that if you are in Germany, you can be tried for crimes against humanity anywhere.

After he has served his sentence he may return to Syria to be tried there or the Syrian government may petition for his extradition before his sentence is up. Note that he can not be extradited if he’s under threat of receiving the death penalty at the destination. But all that is theoretical.

Yes. Iranians hate their government and want regime change, it’s dubious wether this will help. Most likely it will be used by the regime for more crackdowns and cheap propaganda.

It is dubious wether bombing from afar can even achieve the stated goal (stopping the nuclear program). Hoping it will somehow magically bring about regime change is a stretch.

Just to be clear: When you build a nuclear plant you always have a massive environmental and public health liability to deal with. It’s just that “if things go sour” the liability is also not producing electricity.

I have never learnt to bike with hands on the handle

my hands at 10 to 10

I’m not sure if you are a terrible driver and bad typer or great driver and good typer…

All answers are correct then.

1. Claiming the BfV is biased against the AfD has to be your attempt at satire. The same BfV that was run by Maaßen for 6 years? The same BfV that covered up their involvement with the NSU?

2. For the assessment of the BfV the publicly stated policy goals of the AfD may or may not have mattered (if I wanted to destroy German democracy I wouldn’t write that into my election program either). The BfV has come to the conclusion that the AfD’s actual goals are incompatible with the FDGO, because they are based on their understanding of what “German” means (which for the AfD is primarily an ethnic designation).

3. Here are two examples of policies that the AfD fought for (its from their Grundsatzprogramm):

• No more citizenship for persons who are born in Germany and reach adulthood while living here unless one of their parents is German. This is discrimination based on ethnicity. This violates Art.3 Abs. 3 of the Grundgesetz.
• AfD wants to suspend the right to Asylum. This violates Art 16a, Abs 1 of the Grundgesetz.

“The ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order,”

The report was intended for publication at a later date specifically because it had not passed the full review process yet. That’s why it’s not public. A news magazine with a reputation for investigative reporting (think German NYT but a bit more conservative leaning) has gotten their hands on at least part of the report and chose to write about it.

That is why the report is not public (yet), because it is still undergoing the internal audits you are asking for.

Yes it matters how it’s done. And they are trying to do it right. How the report got to the magazine and the motives of potential leakers are pure speculation at this point.

From what I have read (hence from what is known) it’s a 1000 page document compiled by an organisation that has had it in the past trouble when it came to persecuting right wing extremism (they covered up their involvement with a right wing terror group and a former head of the BfV was kicked out for passing information about the early stages of this investigation into the AfD to the AfD, to name just two recent examples).

If such a report makes it through such an organisation I expect it to hold more than just hear say and speculation.

no legal implications follow from this report,

That is not entirely correct. If the BfV internally accepts the report as factual it can use a wider array of tools to observe and investigate the AfD. It’s content could (again, after the review process has been completed) be published and used as evidence for administrative and legal proceedings of whatever nature. (eg a prospective teacher was prohibited from joining the Bavarian education system because of her left wing extremist political views. If the AfD is classified as a right wing extremist organisation the same could happen to AfD members).

The Bundesverfassungsschutz has released a 1000 page report detailing their investigation and assessment. I find it unsurprising that the AfDs advertising material for an election hides their anti democratic aspects.

No. Banning opposition parties BECAUSE THEY ARE OPPOSITION PARTIES would be undemocratic. Banning opposition parties because they are anti democratic is not.

What you are saying is like “killing someone is murder”, while ignoring the fact that self defence is a thing that happens, is legal and is moral and IS NOT MURDER.

Germany is Europes biggest country by population and GDP (not counting Russia and Turkey for population). It makes perfect sense for them to be the biggest spenders on defence as well.

Ironically the ultra right wing AfD party is actually against the rearmament, but that is mostly because they are Putin’s puppets. (They claim fiscal responsibility concerns but this is a laughably transparent excuse)

Yes. It was a Neonazi from Britz doing it. He primarily targeted foreign cars, vehicles of local left politicians (Die Linke and SPD candidates of Neukölln both had their cars burned). He also lit up a few expensive cars, but that might have been because he ran out of “legitimate” targets.

What is the use case you are looking for?

Is it for accessibility to read out text on a website? Recording voice lines for YouTube videos?

It’s almost like you could check out the linked campaign and answer that question with a couple of minutes reading.

The money goes to supporting pixelfed, loops and sup development, with the goal being financing full time development for the entire team.

Specifically where it relates to violent crime.

Essentially it is supposed to make statements like the following a rule violation:

“If someone murdered [fictional person] they would totally get acquitted because any jury would just nullify the charges.”

While the following sentence would not be a violation of TOS:

“The murderer of UHC CEO Brian Thompson should get acquitted via Jury Nullification because [reasons] and this is super dope.”

The first example could be read as a call to violence, while the 2nd is not calling for a crime.

As I understand it “All future jurors in money laundring cases should nullify, because tax evasion is… like… super cool” would also be legal, because money laundring is not a violent crime.

Unfortunately, the only hardware component you can actually download is RAM. And increased hardware prices are going to be the primary cost factor.

The toolset they use to run their containerlike system wrapping the games is called “pressure vessel”.

Membership fee? For shaving?