[1][https://www.cloudflare.com/apps/email-forwarding]

To focus on his personal history is simply irrelevant and is in disrespect of the judicial branch and the principle on the separation of powers. No one is contending the truthfulness of his criminal history, but he didn't die as a result of that, he died as a result of the disregard of human life by an officer of the executive branch.

Even if you don't like BLM, which is okay, it stretches too far to claim it a terrorist group.

Please don't just reduce it to 'facts you don't like', facts won't get you banned, but those claims the OP made are more than that.

People who win Silver generally went after the Gold.

Suppose you have a secret, that is RSA-encrypted, we might be looking at three hundred trillion years according to Wikipedia with the kind of computer we have now. Obviously that secrecy would have lost its value then, and the resource it requires to crack the secret would worth more than the secret itself. Even with quantum computing, we are still looking at 20+ years, which is still enough for most of the secrets, you got plenty time to change it, or after it lost its value. So we say that's secure enough.

see FTC: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices

A side note: my mother majored in education, so she actually talks about Childhood Amnesia, which other's have mentioned, to other parents or teachers mostly. She told it that kid don't remember anything before five. So when I tell her things about the experience of my younger self when I was well in to primary school, she was perplexed.

Also: while I'm actively thinking about it, those memories came flooding in, and though I'm not going to put them here, I think it gives a valid point that yes one can remember at the age of three.

First of all they have no interest in doing such.

Secondly, Attacking cable infrastructure using submarines is in effect a declaration of war (or act of terrorism). I understand this world gives you this illusion that money = power, but just remember who prints the currency, who owns the army. Only because this sort of things are not in your daily life so often like the rich people are doesn't mean they don't exist.

The last but not the least, they likely won't be rich at all when the governments of countries affected freezes their assets, which should be the least of their concerns if that actually happens.

Suppose someone was granted access to evidence room, but had a look at the evidence that is not of his case, or a case file that he have access to for reasons not work-related. And those generally falls in the area of internal regulation, in which case the agency takes the legal blame for the agent, and should it take actions against the agent, it might be supported.

Plain simply, even if those records are physical the referred agent could have done the same thing. Logically, it's not a matter of abusive conduct through computer, it's a matter of abusing public power.