正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

automatic translation

litteralyme0's profile picture

Miilato

295,837 subscribers

1,467,255 次观看 • 14 天前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

12 条评论

XCO 的头像
XCO14 天前

I suggested this to grok and then like a week later it hit the app, I would like to %15 credit for my assistance in uniting the world

Ramon Biano 的头像
Ramon Biano14 天前

Viva a tradição automática

Cindy not Crawford 的头像
Cindy not Crawford14 天前

Translated from portuguese 💎

ollierad🇮🇷🇺🇦🇵🇸🌹🚘(FREE IRAN) 的头像
ollierad🇮🇷🇺🇦🇵🇸🌹🚘(FREE IRAN)14 天前

زنده باد ترجمه خودکار

Xer0 的头像
Xer014 天前

genuinely

JN226 的头像
JN22614 天前

Real

NinaMomoka 的头像
NinaMomoka14 天前

привет

Matti 的头像
Matti14 天前

Lang leve automatische vertaling

Raven 的头像
Raven14 天前

the subtitle button has become a star trek prop

El Pelado Facu 🇦🇷 的头像
El Pelado Facu 🇦🇷14 天前

Grande Elon carajo!

PeterMessier 🇯🇵🇺🇸 的头像
PeterMessier 🇯🇵🇺🇸14 天前

What is this clip?

Polar Yeet 的头像
Polar Yeet14 天前

Even as a xenophobe, it’s good to see other people’s opinions.

相关视频

Duet AI in Meet will support automatic translated captions for 18 languages. #GoogleMeet will automatically detect when another language is spoken and display the translation in real-time → #GoogleCloudNext
0:20

Duet AI in Meet will support automatic translated captions for 18 languages. #GoogleMeet will automatically detect when another language is spoken and display the translation in real-time → #GoogleCloudNext

Google Workspace

103,850 次观看 • 3 年前

VLC automatic subtitles generation and translation based on local and open source AI models running on your machine working offline, and supporting numerous languages! Demo can be found on our #CES2025 booth in Eureka Park.
0:38

VLC automatic subtitles generation and translation based on local and open source AI models running on your machine working offline, and supporting numerous languages! Demo can be found on our #CES2025 booth in Eureka Park.

VideoLAN

883,554 次观看 • 1 年前

Next up, automatic voice translation of English videos 😊 Below an example generated by our partner Sauti using our API Twi, Ewe & original English version included (CoolVision on YT) In 3 steps - 1) ASR 2) Translate 3) TTS **) NOTE all models ours, no external APIs 👍🏾
2:20

Next up, automatic voice translation of English videos 😊 Below an example generated by our partner Sauti using our API Twi, Ewe & original English version included (CoolVision on YT) In 3 steps - 1) ASR 2) Translate 3) TTS **) NOTE all models ours, no external APIs 👍🏾

Paul Azunre

52,931 次观看 • 1 年前

Today, Meta released Llama 3.2 unlocking capabilities to translate and dub videos on Reels automatically. The Gaia community is lightning-quick in putting new nodes to good use 🟣 Whisper (Speech to text) 🔵 Qwen 72b (Translation) 🟢 GPT-sovits (Text to speech) Currently, Meta only supports automatic translation from Spanish to English. But through Gaia, anyone can translate from any language to any language. The videos below are a preliminary example of how Gaia is already supporting English-to-Korean voice translation in Mark's voice. (Lip-syncing smoothing is not enabled yet but coming soon!) Check out other geeky cool stuff Gaia can do here~ 🔗
2:05

Today, Meta released Llama 3.2 unlocking capabilities to translate and dub videos on Reels automatically. The Gaia community is lightning-quick in putting new nodes to good use 🟣 Whisper (Speech to text) 🔵 Qwen 72b (Translation) 🟢 GPT-sovits (Text to speech) Currently, Meta only supports automatic translation from Spanish to English. But through Gaia, anyone can translate from any language to any language. The videos below are a preliminary example of how Gaia is already supporting English-to-Korean voice translation in Mark's voice. (Lip-syncing smoothing is not enabled yet but coming soon!) Check out other geeky cool stuff Gaia can do here~ 🔗

Gaia 🌱

33,758 次观看 • 2 年前

このAPEXのキャラクター操作チャレンジに挑戦してみました！すごく楽しかったです！日本語があまり上手でなくてごめんなさい！ I tried this APEX movement challenge and it was a lot of fun! Also trying out an automatic translation tool, I'm sorry if it isn't accurate! #apex
1:44

このAPEXのキャラクター操作チャレンジに挑戦してみました！すごく楽しかったです！日本語があまり上手でなくてごめんなさい！ I tried this APEX movement challenge and it was a lot of fun! Also trying out an automatic translation tool, I'm sorry if it isn't accurate! #apex

Ryoma Barrenwort 💳💨 NIJISANJI EN

62,749 次观看 • 4 天前

❌ Bovino: An individual approached US border patrol Agents with a 9mm semi automatic hand gun. ✅ Translation: An ICU Nurse was filming ICE agents with a concealed, legally permitted weapon that was holstered. ❌ Bovino: The agent attempted to detain the individual but he violently resisted. Fearing for his life of himself and his fella officers, he fired defensive shots. ✅ Translation: ICE tried to illegally detain him after filming their actions, After ICE agents took his permitted firearm from the holster on his wrist, ICE stood over the victim that was face down on the sidewalk in the snow and executed the unarmed nurse with multiple round from high powered hand guns.
0:35

❌ Bovino: An individual approached US border patrol Agents with a 9mm semi automatic hand gun. ✅ Translation: An ICU Nurse was filming ICE agents with a concealed, legally permitted weapon that was holstered. ❌ Bovino: The agent attempted to detain the individual but he violently resisted. Fearing for his life of himself and his fella officers, he fired defensive shots. ✅ Translation: ICE tried to illegally detain him after filming their actions, After ICE agents took his permitted firearm from the holster on his wrist, ICE stood over the victim that was face down on the sidewalk in the snow and executed the unarmed nurse with multiple round from high powered hand guns.

Bricktop_NAFO

44,942 次观看 • 8 个月前

Today we’re celebrating 10 years of the Meta FAIR lab in Paris by sharing a collection of new models, datasets and some exciting milestones in the impacts of open source — all laddering up to our ongoing work to achieve Advanced Machine Intelligence (AMI). 1️⃣ Meta PARTNR is a framework for human-robot collaboration that builds on our existing work in this space with a new dataset and a large planning model enabling robots to accomplish complex tasks alongside humans. 2️⃣ Meta Audiobox Aesthetics enables the automatic evaluation of audio aesthetics, providing a comprehensive assessment of audio quality across speech, music and sound. 3️⃣ Open Source Machine Translation Benchmark is a carefully crafted collection with the aim of building an unprecedented multilingual machine translation benchmark for the community. 4️⃣ Two new breakthrough studies using AI to further our understanding of language in the brain.
2:28

Today we’re celebrating 10 years of the Meta FAIR lab in Paris by sharing a collection of new models, datasets and some exciting milestones in the impacts of open source — all laddering up to our ongoing work to achieve Advanced Machine Intelligence (AMI). 1️⃣ Meta PARTNR is a framework for human-robot collaboration that builds on our existing work in this space with a new dataset and a large planning model enabling robots to accomplish complex tasks alongside humans. 2️⃣ Meta Audiobox Aesthetics enables the automatic evaluation of audio aesthetics, providing a comprehensive assessment of audio quality across speech, music and sound. 3️⃣ Open Source Machine Translation Benchmark is a carefully crafted collection with the aim of building an unprecedented multilingual machine translation benchmark for the community. 4️⃣ Two new breakthrough studies using AI to further our understanding of language in the brain.

AI at Meta

86,004 次观看 • 1 年前

اليوم شفت مقطع عن مشروع جديد من GitHub اسمه SpecKit، صراحة ما كنت أعرف عنه إلا بعد ما أخوي يوسف Yousef Rol ذكره لي. دخلت وتابعت واحد من المساهمين وهو يشرح كيف يشتغل. الفكرة من المشروع إنه يساعدك تبدأ أي مشروع باستخدام الـ Vibe coding وأنت عندك مواصفات مكتوبة وواضحة، بدل ما تدخل بالكود على طول وتضيع في التفاصيل. كثير من المبرمجين يطيحون في نفس المشكلة، يبدأ يكتب كود بدون خطة واضحة، وبعدين يكتشف إن النتيجة غير اللي كان يبغاها. المشروع مفتوح المصدر وتقدر تشتغل عليه بأكثر من طريقة. فيه أوامر CLI تجهز لك المشروع، فيه قوالب جاهزة تقدر تستخدمها مباشرة. المميز إن كل شي تطلع فيه الأداة ينحفظ عندك في ملفات Markdown: مواصفات، مبادئ، وخطة تقنية. يعني تقدر تراجعها، تعدلها، أو تشاركها مع فريقك. والجميل بعد إنك إذا ما عجبتك النتيجة تقدر تعيد توليد المشروع بنفس المواصفات لكن بموديل أو إعدادات ثانية. هنا شرح للمشروع من أحد المشرفين عليه : هنا مستودع المشروع على Github قمت بترجمة الفيديو وأرفقته لكم هنا مع التغريدة "The video was translated for educational purposes. All rights reserved to the owner of the channel, Den Delimarsky, on YouTube. Due to YouTube's poor automatic translation, the video has been republished with an improved translation."
40:00

اليوم شفت مقطع عن مشروع جديد من GitHub اسمه SpecKit، صراحة ما كنت أعرف عنه إلا بعد ما أخوي يوسف Yousef Rol ذكره لي. دخلت وتابعت واحد من المساهمين وهو يشرح كيف يشتغل. الفكرة من المشروع إنه يساعدك تبدأ أي مشروع باستخدام الـ Vibe coding وأنت عندك مواصفات مكتوبة وواضحة، بدل ما تدخل بالكود على طول وتضيع في التفاصيل. كثير من المبرمجين يطيحون في نفس المشكلة، يبدأ يكتب كود بدون خطة واضحة، وبعدين يكتشف إن النتيجة غير اللي كان يبغاها. المشروع مفتوح المصدر وتقدر تشتغل عليه بأكثر من طريقة. فيه أوامر CLI تجهز لك المشروع، فيه قوالب جاهزة تقدر تستخدمها مباشرة. المميز إن كل شي تطلع فيه الأداة ينحفظ عندك في ملفات Markdown: مواصفات، مبادئ، وخطة تقنية. يعني تقدر تراجعها، تعدلها، أو تشاركها مع فريقك. والجميل بعد إنك إذا ما عجبتك النتيجة تقدر تعيد توليد المشروع بنفس المواصفات لكن بموديل أو إعدادات ثانية. هنا شرح للمشروع من أحد المشرفين عليه : هنا مستودع المشروع على Github قمت بترجمة الفيديو وأرفقته لكم هنا مع التغريدة "The video was translated for educational purposes. All rights reserved to the owner of the channel, Den Delimarsky, on YouTube. Due to YouTube's poor automatic translation, the video has been republished with an improved translation."

Mohamed

28,743 次观看 • 1 年前

During the Oxford-style debate at the "Interpreting Europe Conference 2025," I persuaded many professional interpreters to reject the motion: "AI-powered interpretation will never replace human interpretation." Before the debate, the audience was 60-40 in favor of the motion; after, it was about 50-50. The full video is on Youtube. Here is a rough transcript of my speech: Thanks to Gry Gry Hasselbalch for her thoughtful presentation. She argued that AI-supported interpretation will never replace human interpretation. I can't believe that. Today's automatic translators are based on algorithmic methods that my team published at TUM in 1990-1991. Back then, compute was about 10 million times more expensive than it is today, and there wasn't much you could do with our methods - automatic translators at the time could do almost nothing. But since 1941, when the first general-purpose computer was completed, compute has become 10 times cheaper every 5 years. In 2011, compute was already 10,000 times cheaper than in 1991, but the automatic translators still sucked. The Chinese laughed at the automatic translations from Google and other providers. But just five years later, in November 2016, they were no longer laughing, because compute was now 100,000 times cheaper than in 1991, and that was enough: Google suddenly achieved a huge improvement in translation quality through our neural network called LSTM. A year later, everyone was doing it: in 2017, Facebook was using our LSTM to translate 4 billion messages every day. The translations were still not perfect, but now they were getting significantly better every year. Today, a decade after the breakthrough, we have gained another factor of 100, and the translations are already much better than those of 2016. They are certainly better than my own. That's why I also used an AI to translate this text :-) Of course, AI interpreters are already superhuman in some respects, as they can translate for thousands of people simultaneously in dozens of different languages. No human can do that. But when it comes to translation quality, the best human interpreters are still better than the best AIs. But for how much longer? The aforementioned trend will not stop in the coming decades, because the known physical limits of computing are still a long way off. In the next 30 years, compute will again become a million of times cheaper. Everything that seems impressive to us today will seem trivial in retrospect. For this reason alone, no one can seriously believe that AI-supported interpretation will _never_ replace human interpretation. What about the most outstanding of all translations? My favorite example is “The Catcher in the Rye” by Nobel Prize winner J.D. Salinger. Who translated it congenially into German? It was another winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, Heinrich Böll. One might now hope that such congenial translations are only possible for true people who really know through personal experience what it means to walk barefoot through a field and have all the profoundly human experiences that befall the protagonist of the story. But even in this area, human dominance is not assured. I suspect that the best machine translators will be those who have not only read all the world's literature, who are not just encoders and decoders of sentences, but also have experience in controlling complex humanoid agents that not only have cameras and microphones, but also millions upon millions of touch and pain sensors, and can act in the real world and in principle experience much of what humans experience, interacting with real humans, and learning to better predict their behaviors. These do not yet exist today, but at least simple variants of them have been around for a long time and the prototypes are getting better and better: artificial agents whose main purpose in life is to learn from experience, avoid pain and maximize reward, just like humans. When such agents combine their experience in the real world with the art of expressing themselves like a typical Nobel Prize winner in literature, which can already be acquired today through diligent reading, it seems absurd to assume that AI-supported high quality interpretation will never replace human interpretation. “Never” is such a bold, presumptuous word! Just a few decades ago, many believed that AI would never pass the Turing test, never play chess superhumanly well, never solve difficult math problems formulated in natural language, and so on. All this proved to be a misconception. Consider again that AI gets a million times better per euro every 30 years. It seems inevitable: soon, interpreting AIs will eclipse almost all human interpreters in every important way. Thank you. Final remark: "Unfortunately, Juergen didn't have time to participate in this debate, so he sent me, his avatar." The debate led the charming moderator Andrea Grosso to accept the possibility that AIs will eclipse human interpreters. However, he pointed out that this will take a very long time. My avatar said: "I agree that it will take a long time. This could take months, if not years.”
7:48

During the Oxford-style debate at the "Interpreting Europe Conference 2025," I persuaded many professional interpreters to reject the motion: "AI-powered interpretation will never replace human interpretation." Before the debate, the audience was 60-40 in favor of the motion; after, it was about 50-50. The full video is on Youtube. Here is a rough transcript of my speech: Thanks to Gry Gry Hasselbalch for her thoughtful presentation. She argued that AI-supported interpretation will never replace human interpretation. I can't believe that. Today's automatic translators are based on algorithmic methods that my team published at TUM in 1990-1991. Back then, compute was about 10 million times more expensive than it is today, and there wasn't much you could do with our methods - automatic translators at the time could do almost nothing. But since 1941, when the first general-purpose computer was completed, compute has become 10 times cheaper every 5 years. In 2011, compute was already 10,000 times cheaper than in 1991, but the automatic translators still sucked. The Chinese laughed at the automatic translations from Google and other providers. But just five years later, in November 2016, they were no longer laughing, because compute was now 100,000 times cheaper than in 1991, and that was enough: Google suddenly achieved a huge improvement in translation quality through our neural network called LSTM. A year later, everyone was doing it: in 2017, Facebook was using our LSTM to translate 4 billion messages every day. The translations were still not perfect, but now they were getting significantly better every year. Today, a decade after the breakthrough, we have gained another factor of 100, and the translations are already much better than those of 2016. They are certainly better than my own. That's why I also used an AI to translate this text :-) Of course, AI interpreters are already superhuman in some respects, as they can translate for thousands of people simultaneously in dozens of different languages. No human can do that. But when it comes to translation quality, the best human interpreters are still better than the best AIs. But for how much longer? The aforementioned trend will not stop in the coming decades, because the known physical limits of computing are still a long way off. In the next 30 years, compute will again become a million of times cheaper. Everything that seems impressive to us today will seem trivial in retrospect. For this reason alone, no one can seriously believe that AI-supported interpretation will _never_ replace human interpretation. What about the most outstanding of all translations? My favorite example is “The Catcher in the Rye” by Nobel Prize winner J.D. Salinger. Who translated it congenially into German? It was another winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, Heinrich Böll. One might now hope that such congenial translations are only possible for true people who really know through personal experience what it means to walk barefoot through a field and have all the profoundly human experiences that befall the protagonist of the story. But even in this area, human dominance is not assured. I suspect that the best machine translators will be those who have not only read all the world's literature, who are not just encoders and decoders of sentences, but also have experience in controlling complex humanoid agents that not only have cameras and microphones, but also millions upon millions of touch and pain sensors, and can act in the real world and in principle experience much of what humans experience, interacting with real humans, and learning to better predict their behaviors. These do not yet exist today, but at least simple variants of them have been around for a long time and the prototypes are getting better and better: artificial agents whose main purpose in life is to learn from experience, avoid pain and maximize reward, just like humans. When such agents combine their experience in the real world with the art of expressing themselves like a typical Nobel Prize winner in literature, which can already be acquired today through diligent reading, it seems absurd to assume that AI-supported high quality interpretation will never replace human interpretation. “Never” is such a bold, presumptuous word! Just a few decades ago, many believed that AI would never pass the Turing test, never play chess superhumanly well, never solve difficult math problems formulated in natural language, and so on. All this proved to be a misconception. Consider again that AI gets a million times better per euro every 30 years. It seems inevitable: soon, interpreting AIs will eclipse almost all human interpreters in every important way. Thank you. Final remark: "Unfortunately, Juergen didn't have time to participate in this debate, so he sent me, his avatar." The debate led the charming moderator Andrea Grosso to accept the possibility that AIs will eclipse human interpreters. However, he pointed out that this will take a very long time. My avatar said: "I agree that it will take a long time. This could take months, if not years.”

Jürgen Schmidhuber

36,279 次观看 • 1 年前

🇺🇸 Air Force One: when the Empire speaks, Europe remains silent By Brainless Partisans 🏴‍☠️☢️☣️🪆 On board Air Force One, Donald Trump does not engage in diplomacy. He engages in strategic accounting. "We can do whatever we want." Official translation: we are the international order. European translation: yes, sir. The scene is now familiar. Trump speaks. Europe screams. Then Europe sits back down. And finally, Europe explains that this wasn't really what he meant, that it all deserves nuance, dialogue, and enhanced transatlantic cooperation. European dignity now hangs by a Twitter thread and an impromptu press conference. 1 - Automatic indignation, chronic impotence In Brussels, Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen, people were outraged in unison. Sovereignty! International law! Territorial integrity! The same words, worn out from overuse, uttered at every strategic humiliation. Then nothing. Because after words, action is needed. And there, there is no one. Greenland? An American missile base, a central part of NATO's Arctic defense system, a territory already militarily locked down by Washington. Trump isn't stealing anything. He's simply reminding us that the safe is already his. The Europeans are discovering the bill, but they signed the contract long ago. 2 - NATO: Europe's strategic straitjacket The European Union loves to talk about sovereignty... as long as it doesn't involve any autonomous decision-making. Security: United States. Deterrence: United States. Intelligence: United States. Arctic: United States. And then Europe is surprised that Washington decides alone. How dare they. When Trump says "we can do whatever we want," it's not a threat. It's a mathematical statement of fact. Europe has outsourced its power, privatized its defense, and subcontracted its geopolitics. You don't challenge an owner when you live in their house. 3 - The great comedy of firmness So we play the usual game: — indignant statements, — emergency meetings, — improbable trade threats, — imaginary "European bazooka." Then comes the magic phrase: "we must avoid escalation." Understand: we have absolutely no real leverage. Europe will never sanction the United States. Europe will never break with NATO. Europe will never defend Greenland other than through tweets. And Trump knows it. That's why he speaks without gloves. Trump is not the problem, he is the mirror. Trump shocks because he removes the makeup. Where his predecessors wrapped American domination in morality, values, and multilateral summits, he throws the raw truth from a presidential plane. The rules-based order? His rules. Respect for allies? Conditional. European sovereignty? Decorative. And the EU, true to form, still confuses respect with voluntary submission. Conclusion: assumed vassalage Europeans can continue to shout, express outrage, and pretend to exist diplomatically. But as long as they remain militarily dependent, economically aligned, and strategically absent, Trump can do whatever he wants. Greenland is not an annexation. It is a wake-up call. A brutal, humiliating, but perfectly consistent wake-up call: when you give up your power for thirty years, all that remains is indignation as foreign policy. And Trump does not negotiate with the indignant.
1:02

🇺🇸 Air Force One: when the Empire speaks, Europe remains silent By Brainless Partisans 🏴‍☠️☢️☣️🪆 On board Air Force One, Donald Trump does not engage in diplomacy. He engages in strategic accounting. "We can do whatever we want." Official translation: we are the international order. European translation: yes, sir. The scene is now familiar. Trump speaks. Europe screams. Then Europe sits back down. And finally, Europe explains that this wasn't really what he meant, that it all deserves nuance, dialogue, and enhanced transatlantic cooperation. European dignity now hangs by a Twitter thread and an impromptu press conference. 1 - Automatic indignation, chronic impotence In Brussels, Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen, people were outraged in unison. Sovereignty! International law! Territorial integrity! The same words, worn out from overuse, uttered at every strategic humiliation. Then nothing. Because after words, action is needed. And there, there is no one. Greenland? An American missile base, a central part of NATO's Arctic defense system, a territory already militarily locked down by Washington. Trump isn't stealing anything. He's simply reminding us that the safe is already his. The Europeans are discovering the bill, but they signed the contract long ago. 2 - NATO: Europe's strategic straitjacket The European Union loves to talk about sovereignty... as long as it doesn't involve any autonomous decision-making. Security: United States. Deterrence: United States. Intelligence: United States. Arctic: United States. And then Europe is surprised that Washington decides alone. How dare they. When Trump says "we can do whatever we want," it's not a threat. It's a mathematical statement of fact. Europe has outsourced its power, privatized its defense, and subcontracted its geopolitics. You don't challenge an owner when you live in their house. 3 - The great comedy of firmness So we play the usual game: — indignant statements, — emergency meetings, — improbable trade threats, — imaginary "European bazooka." Then comes the magic phrase: "we must avoid escalation." Understand: we have absolutely no real leverage. Europe will never sanction the United States. Europe will never break with NATO. Europe will never defend Greenland other than through tweets. And Trump knows it. That's why he speaks without gloves. Trump is not the problem, he is the mirror. Trump shocks because he removes the makeup. Where his predecessors wrapped American domination in morality, values, and multilateral summits, he throws the raw truth from a presidential plane. The rules-based order? His rules. Respect for allies? Conditional. European sovereignty? Decorative. And the EU, true to form, still confuses respect with voluntary submission. Conclusion: assumed vassalage Europeans can continue to shout, express outrage, and pretend to exist diplomatically. But as long as they remain militarily dependent, economically aligned, and strategically absent, Trump can do whatever he wants. Greenland is not an annexation. It is a wake-up call. A brutal, humiliating, but perfectly consistent wake-up call: when you give up your power for thirty years, all that remains is indignation as foreign policy. And Trump does not negotiate with the indignant.

Brainless Partisans 🏴‍☠️☢️☣️🪆

10,921 次观看 • 8 个月前

Mahmoud Qamati, the senior Hezbollah leader, explicitly threatens the Lebanese government with civil war in a new interview. He says that the leadership of Hezbollah only sent about 10% of its fighters to the front with Israel, keeping 'tens of thousands' of Hezbollah militiamen to protect the militia against internal threats; meaning, efforts by the Lebanese state to implement the Lebanese government decision to ban the military activities of Hezbollah. A few weeks ago, the Israeli news website Walla! reported that Hezbollah has a plan in place to take over Beirut. The article doesn't explain under which scenario Hezbollah will carry out the coup, but Qamati's threats in the interview make it clear that the militia intends to respond to efforts to disarm the militia with overwhelming force. Qamati's words also explain one of the big mysteries of the ongoing war - Hezbollah's poor performance. Hezbollah is able to kill less Israelis per day than Hamas was able to during the nearly two-year ground war in the Gaza Strip (in Lebanon: 23 soldiers + 4 civilians divided by 86 days = 0.31 killed Israelis per day; In Gaza 472 soldiers killed in 2 years of ground operations, about 0.65 Israelis killed per day). Hamas is obviously a smaller militia & operated in a highly unfavorable environment without any constraints on Israel's use of force. The answer is that Hezbollah simply does not prioritize fighting Israel. It did lose "several thousands" of fighters in the current war, according to 2 Hezbollah officials quoted by Reuters on May 3, but it has many more forces it could have thrown to the front to try to liberate the 6% of Lebanese territory the militia ceded to Israel's occupying forces. However, Hezbollah's top priority, and where Hezbollah put 90% of its forces, is to counter efforts of the Lebanese state to disarm the militia and end its era of dominance through the use of weapons. This decision aligns perfectly with Hezbollah's record: the militia has killed more Lebanese than it ever killed Israelis to ensure its dominance over Lebanon and the Shia sect in Lebanon. See The full interview (The translation is automatic and not ideal, but gets the gist across)
2:43

Mahmoud Qamati, the senior Hezbollah leader, explicitly threatens the Lebanese government with civil war in a new interview. He says that the leadership of Hezbollah only sent about 10% of its fighters to the front with Israel, keeping 'tens of thousands' of Hezbollah militiamen to protect the militia against internal threats; meaning, efforts by the Lebanese state to implement the Lebanese government decision to ban the military activities of Hezbollah. A few weeks ago, the Israeli news website Walla! reported that Hezbollah has a plan in place to take over Beirut. The article doesn't explain under which scenario Hezbollah will carry out the coup, but Qamati's threats in the interview make it clear that the militia intends to respond to efforts to disarm the militia with overwhelming force. Qamati's words also explain one of the big mysteries of the ongoing war - Hezbollah's poor performance. Hezbollah is able to kill less Israelis per day than Hamas was able to during the nearly two-year ground war in the Gaza Strip (in Lebanon: 23 soldiers + 4 civilians divided by 86 days = 0.31 killed Israelis per day; In Gaza 472 soldiers killed in 2 years of ground operations, about 0.65 Israelis killed per day). Hamas is obviously a smaller militia & operated in a highly unfavorable environment without any constraints on Israel's use of force. The answer is that Hezbollah simply does not prioritize fighting Israel. It did lose "several thousands" of fighters in the current war, according to 2 Hezbollah officials quoted by Reuters on May 3, but it has many more forces it could have thrown to the front to try to liberate the 6% of Lebanese territory the militia ceded to Israel's occupying forces. However, Hezbollah's top priority, and where Hezbollah put 90% of its forces, is to counter efforts of the Lebanese state to disarm the militia and end its era of dominance through the use of weapons. This decision aligns perfectly with Hezbollah's record: the militia has killed more Lebanese than it ever killed Israelis to ensure its dominance over Lebanon and the Shia sect in Lebanon. See The full interview (The translation is automatic and not ideal, but gets the gist across)

Elizabeth Tsurkov

67,528 次观看 • 4 个月前

🚨 THE US REGULATORY SYSTEM JUST BROKE In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: ➮ 2000 Dotcom ➮ 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.
0:30

🚨 THE US REGULATORY SYSTEM JUST BROKE In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: ➮ 2000 Dotcom ➮ 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.

Reflection🪩

4,972,187 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 THE US REGULATORY SYSTEM JUST BROKE In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: ➮ 2000 Dotcom ➮ 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.
0:40

🚨 THE US REGULATORY SYSTEM JUST BROKE In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: ➮ 2000 Dotcom ➮ 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.

WhaleTwits

13,406 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 WARNING: THE NEXT 48 HOURS WILL CRASH GLOBAL MARKETS!! In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: - 2000 Dotcom - 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.
0:32

🚨 WARNING: THE NEXT 48 HOURS WILL CRASH GLOBAL MARKETS!! In 48 hours, SpaceX goes public at $1.77 TRILLION - the biggest IPO ever I've been trading for over a decade, and I have never seen them rewrite the rulebook like this Nasdaq, MSCI, and the biggest brokers in America all bent their own rules for ONE private company That doesn't happen by accident Let me show you exactly what they did: First, Fidelity dropped its minimum account size from $500,000 to $2,000 A 99.6% cut Think about that: The most exclusive door on Wall Street, thrown wide open to millions of small investors - days before the biggest debut in history. Ask yourself one question Why do they suddenly want YOU in? Because somebody needs people to sell to. SpaceX reserved 30% of the deal for retail THREE TIMES the normal share And even then, most people didn't get a full allocation. So to grab more at Thursday's open, they're dumping everything else TODAY to raise cash. That's half of the selling you're seeing. The other half? The smart money front-running July. Here's the trick: SpaceX doesn't join the Nasdaq 100 on day one. It joins 15 days later, because Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days Just for this. The moment it joins, every QQQ fund on Earth is FORCED to buy. $22–27 billion in automatic buying. Translation: imagine 50 buses all forced to pull into the same gas station on the same morning. The funds know the stampede is coming. So they're selling now to free up cash for it. Retail selling. Institutions selling. At the exact same time. THAT is your selloff. Now here's the part nobody will say out loud: When the most connected money on the planet builds a $1.7T exit door and hands the keys to the smallest investors in the market… That's NOT generosity That's distribution at the top. We've seen this movie twice: - 2000 Dotcom - 2021 SPAC mania Insiders cash out at insane valuations while the crowd chases the hype. The math ain't mathing. So you've got two choices in the next 48 hours: Chase the most expensive IPO in history at the open… Or read the prospectus and realize you might BE the exit. The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.

DANNY

2,061,169 次观看 • 3 个月前

Wow! Declassified text of Ukrainian court verdict in March 2025 confirms false flag shooting of Maidan activists in Khmelnytsky by far-right Maidan activists during Maidan massacre & confirms my study findings. Expert examination of videos, forensic ballistic and medical examinations, on-site investigative experiments, and witness testimonies & investigations by SBU & Ukrainian military prosecutor showed that gunshots made from SBU veranda, which was occupied by Maidan activists, killed elderly female Maidan protester & wounded 4 others. Verdict acquitted ex-head of Khmelnytskyi SBU & SBU Alfa officer for shooting of these Maidan activists because of lack of evidence and because of such evidence of false flag shooting. The verdict cites various eyewitnesses who testified that several Maidan activists broke into veranda (extension) of SBU building, that gunshots at Maidan activists came from this veranda when it was occupied by "radical" Maidan activists & that accused SBU officers did not make these gunshots. The verdict states that investigation after it was transferred to the same special department of Prosecutor General Office that investigated Maidan massacre "was not conducted fully and comprehensively, and was also obviously biased" and "committed a number of significant violations of the requirements of the Criminal Code, as well as the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which entailed the recognition of evidence as inadmissible." Relevant parts of verdict: (automatic translation): - Security Service of Ukraine "commission, based on the results of an official investigation involving specialists in firearms and tactical and special training of the CSO "A" of the SBU, concluded that "the burst of shots from automatic weapons that rang out on February 19, 2014 at 12:36 p.m. and as a result of which some civilians who were near the administrative building were injured, was fired from the vestibule of the central entrance of the Department, where at that time unidentified individuals from among the aggressive protesters were located"; - expert's conclusion based on the results of the ballistic examination of weapon traces, gunshot traces and situational circumstances of the shot under No. 5935/5936/16-33 dated 01.07.2016, from which it follows that: 1. According to the results of the investigative experiment dated 12.04.2016, 18.03.2016 and 25.02.2016, it can be concluded that under the known circumstances and materials of the criminal proceedings, it was not possible to fire shots into the lower right static sash of the glass extension to the central entrance to the department, nor from the second floor of the administrative building, nor from the steps between the first and second floors of the Department. 2. The shots were fired from the middle of the glass extension of the central entrance of the Department of the Security Service of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi region, outside. 3. The shots were fired from inside the glass extension of the central entrance of the Security Service of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi region, to the outside; the weapon, at the time of the shots, was behind the back of the victim PERSON_131, at the level (or below) of the belt; - expert opinion based on the results of the forensic examination of the video recording dated 12.08.2016 No. 10358/10359/16-35, from which it follows that... according to their general and individual acoustic parameters, the experimental shots fired in the extension of the USBU administrative building in Khmelnytskyi region correspond to the shots of the second stage (out of eight shots) recorded in the studied video recordings; - protocols of investigative experiments with the participation of PERSON_22 [accused SBU Alfa officer] as a witness dated 09.03.2016, conducted by the previous pre-trial investigation body, from which it follows that from the place where PERSON_22 was on the 2nd floor, it was not possible to fire shots at the lower part of the door of the central entrance of the office covered by an anti-vandal roller shutter. Under such circumstances, the court finds the information from the aforementioned investigative experiments and expert conclusions not refuted. On the morning of February 19, 2014, Colonel PERSON_21 was informed by the head of the USBU in the Ternopil region, Colonel PERSON_141, about the movement to the city of Khmelnytskyi of a group of radical individuals numbering about 80 people, whose goal was to organize the seizure of the USBU building in the Khmelnytskyi region and gain access to the storage areas of weapons and ammunition. This information was confirmed by the ZND department of the USBU, in addition, it was established that in the courtyards of residential buildings located near the administrative building of the Department, radical individuals who arrived from the western regions of Ukraine were preparing for future active actions, in particular, filling glass bottles with an incendiary mixture. Taking into account the available information, the leadership of the USBU concluded that radically minded protesters were preparing to implement a planned scenario of seizing the building of the Department, as happened on February 18, 2014 in Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, and Ternopil regions. Under such circumstances, the defense's claim, with reference to the evidence presented, regarding the possibility of causing bodily harm to the victim on February 19, 2014, at 12:36 p.m., near the USBU in Khmelnytskyi region by third parties is not excluded, which in turn makes it impossible for the court to make a decision beyond reasonable doubt on the involvement and guilt of PERSON_22 in the charges brought. Taking into account the above, the court comes to the firm conviction that the conclusions of the pre-trial investigation body on the guilt of PERSON_21 [Khmelnytsky SBU head] and PERSON_22 [SBU Alfa officer] in the presented accusation were based mainly on assumptions not confirmed properly by admissible, reliable and sufficient evidence. Not only the involvement of the accused in the commission of the criminal offenses with which they are incriminated, that is, the causal connection between the actions of the accused and the consequences in the form of causing bodily harm to the victim, but also the generally unlawful nature of the actions of the accused remained unproven."
1:41

Wow! Declassified text of Ukrainian court verdict in March 2025 confirms false flag shooting of Maidan activists in Khmelnytsky by far-right Maidan activists during Maidan massacre & confirms my study findings. Expert examination of videos, forensic ballistic and medical examinations, on-site investigative experiments, and witness testimonies & investigations by SBU & Ukrainian military prosecutor showed that gunshots made from SBU veranda, which was occupied by Maidan activists, killed elderly female Maidan protester & wounded 4 others. Verdict acquitted ex-head of Khmelnytskyi SBU & SBU Alfa officer for shooting of these Maidan activists because of lack of evidence and because of such evidence of false flag shooting. The verdict cites various eyewitnesses who testified that several Maidan activists broke into veranda (extension) of SBU building, that gunshots at Maidan activists came from this veranda when it was occupied by "radical" Maidan activists & that accused SBU officers did not make these gunshots. The verdict states that investigation after it was transferred to the same special department of Prosecutor General Office that investigated Maidan massacre "was not conducted fully and comprehensively, and was also obviously biased" and "committed a number of significant violations of the requirements of the Criminal Code, as well as the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which entailed the recognition of evidence as inadmissible." Relevant parts of verdict: (automatic translation): - Security Service of Ukraine "commission, based on the results of an official investigation involving specialists in firearms and tactical and special training of the CSO "A" of the SBU, concluded that "the burst of shots from automatic weapons that rang out on February 19, 2014 at 12:36 p.m. and as a result of which some civilians who were near the administrative building were injured, was fired from the vestibule of the central entrance of the Department, where at that time unidentified individuals from among the aggressive protesters were located"; - expert's conclusion based on the results of the ballistic examination of weapon traces, gunshot traces and situational circumstances of the shot under No. 5935/5936/16-33 dated 01.07.2016, from which it follows that: 1. According to the results of the investigative experiment dated 12.04.2016, 18.03.2016 and 25.02.2016, it can be concluded that under the known circumstances and materials of the criminal proceedings, it was not possible to fire shots into the lower right static sash of the glass extension to the central entrance to the department, nor from the second floor of the administrative building, nor from the steps between the first and second floors of the Department. 2. The shots were fired from the middle of the glass extension of the central entrance of the Department of the Security Service of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi region, outside. 3. The shots were fired from inside the glass extension of the central entrance of the Security Service of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi region, to the outside; the weapon, at the time of the shots, was behind the back of the victim PERSON_131, at the level (or below) of the belt; - expert opinion based on the results of the forensic examination of the video recording dated 12.08.2016 No. 10358/10359/16-35, from which it follows that... according to their general and individual acoustic parameters, the experimental shots fired in the extension of the USBU administrative building in Khmelnytskyi region correspond to the shots of the second stage (out of eight shots) recorded in the studied video recordings; - protocols of investigative experiments with the participation of PERSON_22 [accused SBU Alfa officer] as a witness dated 09.03.2016, conducted by the previous pre-trial investigation body, from which it follows that from the place where PERSON_22 was on the 2nd floor, it was not possible to fire shots at the lower part of the door of the central entrance of the office covered by an anti-vandal roller shutter. Under such circumstances, the court finds the information from the aforementioned investigative experiments and expert conclusions not refuted. On the morning of February 19, 2014, Colonel PERSON_21 was informed by the head of the USBU in the Ternopil region, Colonel PERSON_141, about the movement to the city of Khmelnytskyi of a group of radical individuals numbering about 80 people, whose goal was to organize the seizure of the USBU building in the Khmelnytskyi region and gain access to the storage areas of weapons and ammunition. This information was confirmed by the ZND department of the USBU, in addition, it was established that in the courtyards of residential buildings located near the administrative building of the Department, radical individuals who arrived from the western regions of Ukraine were preparing for future active actions, in particular, filling glass bottles with an incendiary mixture. Taking into account the available information, the leadership of the USBU concluded that radically minded protesters were preparing to implement a planned scenario of seizing the building of the Department, as happened on February 18, 2014 in Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, and Ternopil regions. Under such circumstances, the defense's claim, with reference to the evidence presented, regarding the possibility of causing bodily harm to the victim on February 19, 2014, at 12:36 p.m., near the USBU in Khmelnytskyi region by third parties is not excluded, which in turn makes it impossible for the court to make a decision beyond reasonable doubt on the involvement and guilt of PERSON_22 in the charges brought. Taking into account the above, the court comes to the firm conviction that the conclusions of the pre-trial investigation body on the guilt of PERSON_21 [Khmelnytsky SBU head] and PERSON_22 [SBU Alfa officer] in the presented accusation were based mainly on assumptions not confirmed properly by admissible, reliable and sufficient evidence. Not only the involvement of the accused in the commission of the criminal offenses with which they are incriminated, that is, the causal connection between the actions of the accused and the consequences in the form of causing bodily harm to the victim, but also the generally unlawful nature of the actions of the accused remained unproven."

Ivan Katchanovski

295,988 次观看 • 1 年前