It was not Assange who put lives at risk. He went to great lengths to redact names and any other information that could identify individuals at risk.
It was two Guardian 'journalists' who later published the unredacted files.
You seriously overestimate the competence of the UK government in removing failed asylum seekers.
https://news.sky.com/story/fewer-than-half-of-failed-asylum-seekers-are-removed-from-the-uk-study-says-11603672
I'm with you up to your last sentence. It's a generational thing.
But greed has ruled the world since Adam & Eve. It may have been less blatant or obvious in our younger days but it was still there, make no mistake.
I'm with you up to your last sentence. It's a generational thing.
But greed has ruled the world since Adam & Eve. It may have been less blatant or obvious in our younger days but it was still there, make no mistake.
"However, concerns about his age and health have lingered, with voters questioning his fitness for office alongside incumbent President Biden and former President Trump"
Compared to the other two?? You cannot be serious!
You could be right, although markets tend to anticipate these things and price them in advance. In any case only one way to go for the baht from here, which I suppose will make a lot of expats happy.
So you would found it perfectly acceptable for the Soviet Union to station troops and missiles in Cuba?
Why is it ok in China's backyard but not in the US's?
The two main objective of any bureaucratic organisation such as NATO:
1. The survival of the organisation
2. To extend the power and therefore the budget of the organisation.
Makes perfect sense to me.
I'm not looking to invest in gilts. I can do that through my investment portfolio. This is a current account to park spare cash and earn a decent rate of interest.
I understand perfectly. I'm happy to pay slightly over the odds for a gilt fund that pays me a better rate on my cash than UK bank deposits and allows me to access my funds immediately at any time.