Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Børre St. Børresen
9.6K posts
Børre St. Børresen
@Borre_St
Samfunnsengasjert tdl. skoleleder.Tar Alltid.Uansett de svakes parti mot maktens tause A4-mur.🇺🇦Liberale demokrati styrker menneskeverdet. Spurs og TILhenger.
Austertana Katılım Eylül 2012
2K Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
@JDVance_News Who would have ever thought that Hitler's closest spiritual brothers would rule simultaneously in Iran, Israel, Russia and the USA??
This is what happens when the system wins over the individual and their genuine human dignity.🥲
English
🚨 #BREAKING: Iran is now using children as human shields around power plants and bridges — hoping to protect their military targets from U.S. strikes.
This is pure evil!
The same regime that screams “Death to America” is willing to sacrifice its own kids to shield its weapons.
President Trump made it clear:
A whole civilization may die tonight… but after 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, the Iranian people might finally be freed.
No more hiding behind children.
No more playing games with human lives.
The regime is run by vile animals.
America will not be blackmailed by terrorists using kids as shields.
Pray for the innocent.
Pray for the fall of this evil regime 🇺🇸
#USA #IranWar #Trump
English
Eternal memories.
Gandalv@Microinteracti1
Robert Mueller died last night. He was 81 years old. He had a wife who loved him for sixty years. He had two daughters, one of whom he met for the first time in Hawaii, in 1969, on a few hours of military leave, before he got back on the plane and returned to Vietnam. He had grandchildren. He had a faith he practiced quietly, without performance. He had, in the way of men who have seen real things and survived them, a quality that is increasingly rare and increasingly mocked in the country he spent his life serving. He had integrity. And tonight the President of the United States said good! I have been sitting with that word for hours now. Good. One syllable. The thing you say when the coffee is hot or the traffic is moving. The thing a man who has never had to bury anyone, never had to sit in the specific silence of a room where someone is newly absent, reaches for when he wants the world to know he is satisfied. Good. The daughters are crying and the wife is alone in the house and good. I want to speak directly to the Americans reading this. Not the political Americans. Just the human ones. The ones who have lost a father. The ones who know what it is to be in that first hour, when you keep forgetting and then remembering again, when ordinary objects become unbearable, when the world outside the window seems obscene in its indifference. I want to ask you, simply, to hold that feeling for a moment, and then to understand that the man you elected looked at it and typed a single word. Good. This is not a country having a bad day. I need you to understand that. Countries have bad days. Elections go wrong. Leaders disappoint. Institutions bend. But there is a different thing, a rarer and more terrible thing, that happens when the moral center of a place simply gives way. Not dramatically. Not with a single catastrophic event. But quietly, in increments, until one evening a president celebrates the death of an old man whose family is still warm with grief, and enough people find it acceptable that it becomes the weather. Just the weather. That is what is happening. That is what has happened. The world knows. From Tokyo to Oslo, from London to Buenos Aires, people are not angry at America tonight. Anger would mean there was still something to fight for, some remaining faith to be betrayed. What I see, in the reactions from everywhere that is not here, is something older and sadder than anger. It is the look people get when they have waited a long time for someone they love to find their way back, and have finally understood that they are not coming. America is being grieved. Past tense, almost. The idea of it. The thing it represented to people who had nothing else to believe in, who came here with everything they owned in a single bag because they had heard, somehow, across an ocean, that this was the place where decency was written into the walls. That idea is not resting. It is not suspended. It is being buried, in real time, with 7,450 likes before dinner. And the church said nothing. Seventy million people have decided that this man, this specific man who has cheated everyone he has ever made a promise to, who has mocked the disabled and the dead and the grieving, who celebrated tonight while a family wept, is an instrument of God. The pastors who made that bargain did not just trade away their credibility. They traded away the thing that made them worth listening to in the first place. The cross they carry now is a costume. The faith they preach is a loyalty oath with scripture attached. When the history of American Christianity is written, this will be the chapter they skip at seminary. Now I want to talk about the men who stand next to him. Because this is the part that actually breaks my heart. JD Vance is not a bad man. I have to say that, because it is true, and because the truth matters even now, especially now. Marco Rubio is not a bad man. Lindsey Graham is not a bad man. They are idiots, but not bad, as in BAD! These are men with mothers who raised them and children who love them and friends who remember who they were before all of this. They are not monsters. Monsters are simple. Monsters do not cost you anything emotionally because there is nothing in them to mourn. These men are something more painful than monsters. They are men who knew better, and know better still, and will get up tomorrow and do it again. Every small compromise they made had a reason. Every moment they looked the other way had a justification that sounded, at the time, almost reasonable. And now they have arrived here, at a place where a president celebrates the death of an old man and they will find a way, on television, to say nothing that means anything, and they will go home to houses where children who carry their name are waiting, and they will say goodnight, and they will say nothing. Their oldest friends are watching. The ones who knew Rubio when he still believed in something. Who knew Graham when he said, out loud, on the record, that this exact man would destroy the Republican Party and deserve it. Who sat next to Vance and thought here is someone worth knowing. Those friends are not angry tonight. They moved through anger a long time ago. What they feel now is the quiet, irrecoverable sadness of watching someone disappear while still being present. Of watching a person they loved choose, again and again, to become less. That is what cowardice costs. Not the coward. The people who loved him. And in the comments tonight, the followers celebrate. People who ten years ago brought casseroles to grieving neighbours. Who stood in the rain at gravesides and meant the words they said. Who told their children that we do not speak ill of the dead because the dead were someone's beloved. Those people are tonight typing gleeful things about a man whose daughters are not yet done crying. And they feel clean doing it. Righteous. Because somewhere along the way the thing they were given in exchange for their decency was the feeling of belonging to something, and that feeling is very hard to give up even when you can no longer remember what you gave for it. When Trump is gone, they will still be here. Standing in the silence where the noise used to be. Without the permission the crowd gave them. Without the pastor who told them their cruelty was holy. They will be alone with what they said and what they cheered and what they chose to become, and there will be no one left to tell them it was righteous. That morning is coming. Robert Mueller flew across the Pacific on military leave to hold his newborn daughter for a few hours before returning to the war. He came home. He buried his dead with honour. He served presidents of both parties because he understood that the institution was larger than any one man. He told his grandchildren that a lie is the worst thing a person can do, that a reputation once lost cannot be recovered, and he lived that, every day, in the quiet and unglamorous way of people who actually believe what they say. He was the kind of American the world used to point to when it needed to believe the story was true. He died last night. His wife is alone in their house in Georgetown. His daughters are learning what the world is without him in it. And somewhere in the particular hush that falls over a family in the first hours of loss, the most powerful man and the biggest loser on earth sent a message to say he was glad. The world that loved what America was supposed to be is grieving tonight. Not for Robert Mueller only. For the country that produced him and then became this. For the distance between what was promised and what was delivered. For the suspicion, growing quieter and more certain with each passing month, that the America people believed in was always partly a story, and the story is over now, and there is nothing yet to replace it. That is all it needed to be. A man died. His family is broken open with grief. That is all it needed to be. Instead the President said good. And the country that once stood for something looked away 🇺🇸 Gandalv / @Microinteracti1
English
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Hva vi vet, hva vi ikke vet og hvorfor forskjellen betyr noe i Mette-Marit-saken
Min påstand er at vi i iveren etter å dømme hopper over det mest grunnleggende: evnen til å skille mellom hva vi vet, hva vi ikke vet, hva vi antar, og hva vi håper.
Når nesten hele det offentlige ordskiftet allerede har felt sin dom, er det begrenset verdi i bare å gjenta den. Det har større verdi å prøve den. Har vi egentlig dømt på grunnlag av det som er bevist, eller har vi gitt tvilen motsatt vei av det vi ellers mener rettsstaten skal gjøre?
Hele debatten har i stor grad kretset rundt én setning: «Googlet deg etter forrige e-post. Enig, det så ikke bra ut :).» Denne setningen er blitt behandlet som et fellende bevis, som selve beviset på at Mette-Marit visste hva Epstein var, og likevel fortsatte kontakten.
Men les setningen på nytt. «Enig» betyr at hun svarer på noe Epstein allerede har sagt. «Etter forrige e-post» viser til en e-post vi ikke har sett. Meldingen er altså et fragment fra en pågående samtale. Hva skrev Epstein i e-posten før? Hva var konteksten? Og kanskje viktigst: Hva skjedde etterpå?
I NRK-intervjuet 20. mars sier kronprinsessen at hun ikke husker hva hun googlet eller fant, og at hun skulle ønske hun hadde resten av korrespondansen. Det er frustrerende, men det er også ærlig nok til å fortjene refleksjon.
Hvis hun faktisk hadde funnet det vi i dag vet om Epstein, og likevel skrevet et smilefjes, ville det vitnet om en bemerkelsesverdig kynisme. Det harmonerer dårlig med at hun kort tid senere tok opp bekymringene sine med Epstein selv.
Det finnes imidlertid en annen lesning som også er fullt forenlig med meldingen: at Epstein, som hadde et innøvd repertoar for å bortforklare dommen sin, allerede hadde forberedt henne på hva hun kom til å finne. Da kan smileyen like gjerne uttrykke lettelse over at det fantes en forklaring, ikke en kynisk avfeiing av overgrep.
Er dette bevist? Nei. Men det er heller ikke den motsatte tolkningen. Poenget er ikke at den ene lesningen nødvendigvis er riktig. Poenget er at én setning, revet ut av en samtale vi mangler resten av, ikke er tilstrekkelig grunnlag for den skråsikkerheten vi har sett.
Vi mangler det meste
Epstein-dokumentene inneholder nær 400 meldinger mellom Mette-Marit og Epstein. Det høres mye ut. Men materialet er fullt av hull. Det er et gap på nesten et helt år, fra oktober 2011 til september 2012, uten direkte korrespondanse, til tross for tegn på at de hadde kontakt også i denne perioden. Enkelte svar er lagret med tidligere tidspunkt enn meldingene de tilsynelatende svarer på. Samtaler begynner midt i en tråd. Konteksten mangler gjennomgående.
Det er som å lese annenhver side i en bok og tro at man har forstått handlingen. Vi har Mette-Marits reaksjoner, men ikke alltid det hun reagerte på. Vi har svarene hennes, men ikke alltid spørsmålene som utløste dem. Mette-Marit har selv pekt på dette. Hun sier at hun har brukt mye tid på å forsøke å finne konteksten, uten å lykkes. Det er et poeng som fortjener langt mer oppmerksomhet enn det har fått: Vi dømmer et menneske på grunnlag av fragmenter, der noen andre har bestemt hva vi får se.
Spørsmålet ingen stiller
Alt dette utspiller seg i en helt bestemt geopolitisk kontekst som nesten ingen snakker om. Kort tid før Epstein-dokumentene om norske forbindelser dukker opp, er Donald Trump rasende på Norge. Fredsprisen gikk ikke til ham. Han truer Danmark over Grønland. Forholdet til Norden er på et bunnpunkt.
Så frigir det amerikanske justisdepartementet ufullstendige logger som insinuerer, men ikke beviser. Hullene som skaper insinuasjonene forklares ikke. De bare er der. Og likevel har jeg ennå ikke hørt noen stille det åpenbare spørsmålet: Kan det ligge motiver bak nettopp dette frislippet, til nettopp denne tiden, rettet mot nettopp dette landet?
Vi vet at Trump er hevngjerrig. Vi vet at han bruker statsapparatet til å straffe dem han opplever som illojale. Er det virkelig utenkelig at utvalget og tidspunktet for disse dokumentene er noe annet enn tilfeldig?
Jeg påstår ikke at det er tilfellet. Men jeg konstaterer at ingen synes å finne det verdt å undersøke. Og det er i seg selv bemerkelsesverdig.
Hva dommen faktisk sa og hva Epstein sa om den
Her er det et poeng som har fått altfor lite oppmerksomhet, og som er avgjørende for hvordan man vurderer Mette-Marits handlinger.
Jeffrey Epstein ble i 2008 dømt for å ha skaffet en person under 18 år til prostitusjon, og for oppfordring til prostitusjon. Det er alvorlige tiltalepunkter. Men dommen i seg selv sier ikke at Epstein bevisst oppsøkte mindreårige. Den sier ikke at han visste at ofrene var under 18. Og det var nettopp dette gapet Epstein utnyttet.
Overfor venner, forretningsforbindelser og bekjente hadde Epstein en innøvd forklaring: han hadde vært involvert i prostitusjon, noe som er legalt i store deler av verden, og ble lurt av jenter som løy om alderen sin. At noen av de involverte faktisk ble oppfordret til å lyve om alderen, ga historien troverdighet. At politiet identifiserte over 35 mindreårige ofre, at Epstein eksplisitt ba om yngre jenter, at han avviste en 23-åring fordi hun var «for gammel», det visste ikke kretsen hans. Det kom frem langt senere.
Hvis man kjøpte Epsteins versjon, og det gjorde svært mange intelligente, innflytelsesrike mennesker, så hadde man med å gjøre en mann som hadde lagt forholdene til rette for at mindreårige havnet i en prostitusjonssituasjon, uten å vite det selv. Det er moralsk tvilsomt. Men det er en helt annen kategori enn systematisk misbruk av barn. Det er forskjellen mellom en mann med dårlig dømmekraft og et monster.
Bill Gates møtte Epstein gjentatte ganger etter dommen. Prominente akademikere, forretningsfolk og politikere opprettholdt kontakten. Mette-Marit var ikke en anomali, hun var del av et bredt mønster av mennesker som lot seg overbevise av en eksepsjonelt dyktig manipulator. At vi i dag vet at bortforklaringen var en løgn, betyr ikke at den var gjennomskuelig den gangen.
Når vi vurderer «det så ikke bra ut» i lys av dette, endrer bildet seg. Innenfor rammen av det hun sannsynligvis visste og ble fortalt, var reaksjonen hennes langt mindre oppsiktsvekkende enn det offentlige ordskiftet har fremstilt den.
Hva om vi tar feil?
For her er det ubehagelige tankeeksperimentet: Hva om det om noen år viser seg at loggene ble frigitt ufullstendig, nettopp for å ramme Norge? Hva om helheten, den korrespondansen vi ikke har sett, i stor grad bekrefter Mette-Marits versjon?
Da vil vi stå igjen med et monarki som ble felt, ikke av sannheten, men av fragmenter servert av en fremmed makts justisdepartement i en periode preget av politisk fiendtlighet mot landet vårt. Og vi vil ha gjort jobben selv.
Når man ærlig innrømmer at man ikke helt forstår hvorfor det amerikanske justisdepartementet frigir akkurat disse dokumentene og ikke andre, hvorfor de er så ufullstendige, og hva de faktisk forteller oss kontra hva vi mistenker at de sier, da bør man også være ærlig om konsekvensen av den innrømmelsen: Vi vet ikke nok til å være skråsikre.
Usikkerheten er poenget
De som hevder det ikke finnes tvil her, lyver. Man kan lyve og likevel ende opp med å få rett. Men man skal ikke avgjøre slike saker på ren flaks. Man skal avgjøre dem på grunnlag av det man vet. Og det vi vet, er langt mindre enn det vi later som.
Sannheten er at usikkerheten regjerer. Ikke som en svakhet i argumentet, men som selve argumentet. Det er nettopp fordi vi ikke vet nok, at våre konklusjoner har en slik enorm konsekvens.
Norsk
@mikkelickski En rekke useriøse nett"aviser" lever av dumme kunder som klikker på sensasjonsoverskrifter.
Hva er sensasjonelt med at ektepar har ups&downs??
Norsk
«Forholdet mellom kronprinsesse Mette-Marit og kronprins Haakon skal nå være på et bunnivå. Kilder beskriver det som nå skjer som en krise – ikke bare for institusjonen, men også for relasjonen mellom Mette-Marit og Haakon.»
seher.no/kongelig/avslo…
Norsk
@PeteHegseth @POTUS Who is Pete Hegseth? Comedian and host of Friday Night Live??I always laugh at funny men like this who can make so much fun of a president who hates Epstein files ;-)
English
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Today, Russia struck a passenger train in the Kharkiv region with attack drones. In any country, a drone strike on a civilian train would be regarded in the same way – purely as an act of terrorism. There would be no doubt about the classification, neither in Europe, nor in America, nor in the Arab world, nor in China, nor anywhere else. There is, and can be, no military justification for killing civilians in a train carriage. In particular, over 200 people were on the train, and 18 were in the carriage hit by one of the Russian drones. Overall, this attack involving three drones has so far resulted in four confirmed deaths. My condolences to all the families and loved ones. Rescue teams are still searching for four more people, and two others have been injured.
Russia must be held accountable for what it is doing. And this means responsibility not only for strikes against our people, against our life, but for the very ability to carry out such attacks. The Russians have significantly increased their capacity to kill, their capacity to terrorize. They are investing in the progress of terror. And our task – and this should unite all decent people around the world – is to ensure progress in the protection of life. This is possible through pressure on Russia. This is possible by punishing Russia for its actions. This is possible through support for Ukraine. I thank everyone who does not remain silent when they see what Russian terrorists are doing.
English
@ICEgov ..but why allow innocent American citizens to be killed by those who are supposed to protect them..?
x.com/Borre_St/statu…
Børre St. Børresen@Borre_St
In 1966, Sergio Leone directed the famous movie “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.” 60 years later, Donald Trump is directing his version (AI):
English
When you see videos of anti-ICE agitators swarming our officers and agents in Minneapolis, MN, just know… this is who they’re trying to protect.
Below are some of the WORST of the worst we’ve arrested and taken out of MN neighborhoods to protect American families:
English
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Hey, big man, @elonmusk, why don't you stop the Russians from using Starlinks to target Ukrainian cities.
Making money on war crimes may damage your brand.
Institute for the Study of War@TheStudyofWar
Russian forces are increasingly using Starlink satellite systems to extend the range of BM-35 strike drones to conduct mid-range strikes against the Ukrainian rear. The reported 500-kilometer range of Starlink-equipped BM-35 drones places most of Ukraine, all of Moldova, and parts of Poland, Romania, and Lithuania in range of these drones if launched from Russia or occupied Ukraine. ISW has observed reports of Starlink-equipped Shahed long-range strike drones beginning in September 2024 and of Rubikon equipping Molniya strike drones with Starlink systems beginning in December 2025. ISW continues to assess that Russian mid-range strikes, especially those conducted by Rubikon units, seek to exploit Ukraine’s scarcity of air defense systems. The threat of Russian mid-range strikes underscores Ukraine’s urgent need for point-defense air defense systems to down drones, as electronic warfare (EW) systems are likely insufficient to defend Ukraine’s critical infrastructure from such a geographically pervasive threat.
English
This post is doing three dangerous things at once, and none of them are accidental.
First, the “$20 billion plus” welfare fraud claim is wildly inflated. The largest proven case in Minnesota, Feeding Our Future, is roughly $250 million. Massive. Criminal. Prosecuted. But not remotely $20 billion. Inflating numbers isn’t oversight. It’s propaganda designed to justify escalation.
Second, Trump directly links that exaggerated fraud claim to “violent organized protests,” despite overwhelming evidence that Minnesota protests are driven by ICE overreach and the killing of U.S. citizens like Alex Pretti and Renee Good. That’s not analysis. That’s scapegoating to deflect from federal misconduct.
Third, singling out Ilhan Omar with an unproven $44 million net worth claim, while saying DOJ and Congress are “looking at” her, is intimidation politics. No charges. No findings. Just insinuation layered on xenophobic framing. That corrodes due process by design.
Sending Tom Homan to “report directly” to the President while preloading the public with inflated fraud claims and personal smears isn’t about restoring order. It’s about controlling the story before accountability lands.
Law enforcement doesn’t start with lies. Democracy doesn’t survive them.
English
@EricLDaugh A brother of Putin??
Neither he has respect for a human life.
English
🚨 BOOM! Don’t try it in FLORIDA!
Sheriff Wayne Ivey: “If you throw a brick, a firebomb, or point a gun at one of our deputies, we will be notifying your family where to collect your remains at because we will KILL YOU — GRAVEYARD DEAD!" 🔥
English
@JDVance Oh my God what a sad story !! Was the ICE-men really locked in a restaurant??!!
That’s very bad behaviour from people in that city!!
Worse than kill people by shooting..
English
When I was in Minneapolis, I heard a number of crazy stories. But near the top of the list:
A couple of off duty ICE and CBP officers were going to dinner in Minneapolis. They were doxed and their location revealed, and the restaurant was then mobbed. The officers were locked in the restaurant, and local police refused to respond to their pleas for help (as they've been directed by local authorities). Eventually, their fellow federal agents came to their aid.
This is just a taste of what's happening in Minneapolis because state and local officials refuse to cooperate with immigration enforcement. They have created the chaos so they can have moments like yesterday, where someone tragically dies and politicians get to grandstand about the evils of enforcing the border.
The solution is staring everyone in the face. I hope authorities in Minneapolis stop this madness.
English
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Don’t let this White House lie to you. Believe what you see.
Alex Pretti was trying to help a woman off the ground. Then immigration agents tackled, shot, and killed him.
It’s time for them to get the hell out of MN.
English
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
Bruce Springsteen on ICE: "If you believe you don’t deserve to be murdered for exercising your American right to protest, then send a message to this president — ICE should get the fuck out of Minneapolis”
RETWEET if you stand with @Springsteen against Trump and ICE!
English
Jeg gir deg rett i at den kontrollerer narrativet.
I et helt døgn har Trump fått oppmerksomheten bort fra de 99% av Epsteinfilene som ennå ikke er offentliggjort til tross for Kongressen har pålagt dette.
I tillegg fikk han bort noe av oppmerksomheten på at ICE nok en gang kaldblodig har drept en amerikansk innbygger.
Norsk
Fordi den er morsom, har klart å kapre oppmerksomhet, kontrollere narrativet og bruke internettkultur for å fremme et politisk budskap, selv (eller kanskje spesielt) gjennom kontroverser og latterliggjøring.
De har klart kunststykket å blande geopolitikk med absurd humor, noe som resonner hos folk som er lei av tradisjonell, stivbent politisk kommunikasjon. Det har skapt et uformelt, men minneverdig, budskap.
Bildet har fått mye kritikk for den geografiske unøyaktigheten (pingviner lever ikke på Grønland). Jeg tror det var en bevisst taktikk for å provosere frem debatt og ytterligere engasjement.
Memet tvinger oss til å snakke om Grønland og Arktis – temaer som administrasjonen anser som strategisk viktige – fremfor andre saker.
Ved å bruke et populært, eksisterende internett-meme ("Nihilist Penguin"), sikret Det hvite hus at dette ble plukket opp og delt på tvers av utallige plattformer, uavhengig av om delingen var positiv eller negativ. Dette har generert massiv, gratis medieomtale rundt Trumps politiske agenda (i dette tilfellet, fornyet fokus på Grønland).
Norsk
This must be one of the most brilliant media campaigns I have ever witnessed.
English
@DocumentNo Det finnes folk i USA som mener at folk skal fritt få bære håndvåpen.
Pretti hadde sitt i jakkelomma.
I hånden hadde han derimot en mobil.
Derfor ble han kaldblodig myrdet av rednecks med noen ukers opplæring..!
Norsk
Børre St. Børresen retweetledi
🚨🇺🇸 BREAKING: Protesters in Los Angeles just projected an anti-ICE video onto a building.
And it wasn’t just any building.
It was Twin Towers, an ICE-linked detention facility where LASD actively collaborates with ICE for deportation screening.
This is what resistance looks like when people stop pretending everything is normal.
English