He is injured but not dead

  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    21 hours ago

    There are many that don’t exist exclusively to push the narrative their owners want to get out there, don’t be so obtuse.

    • subversive_dev@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      That claim is ridiculous. Name a single media source that does not slavishly serve the political context it arises from

        • subversive_dev@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          19 hours ago

          And you think all three of those are meaningfully independent from the anglo-american military/espionage cartel?

          • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            18 hours ago

            You’re the one making the claim. Please provide credible sources that prove that they’re compromised.

            • subversive_dev@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              17 hours ago

              It could be argued that you are the one making the claim. Why is the default assumption that the sources are trustworthy until proven otherwise?

              Even if I accepted the burden of proof, what evidence of this would you accept?

              Do you think you can read about it in your favored Western sources?

                • subversive_dev@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  17 hours ago

                  Ok, if you insist on doing it the debatebro way

                  Here’s the first 3 BBC examples from https://lemmy.ml/c/ManufacturingConsent (all posted within the last week)

                  Inb4 “those don’t prove anything”

                  Yes, I asked you what evidence you would accept so will you answer that now?

                  Do you see now why that’s actually the interesting question?

                  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.wtf
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    16 hours ago

                    the debatebro way

                    Asking you to back up your claim is “debatebro” now? Jesus fucking christ.

                    1. “Israel says ‘limited’ ground operations under way in Lebanon”

                    I don’t see the problem, it’s reporting what they said without any editorializing.

                    1. “finding the BBC had failed to respond adequately and within the 20 working days stipulated by law.”

                    They didn’t respond in a timely fashion to a records request. I’m not sure what that is supposed to prove.

                    1. “At least 153 dead after reported strike on school, Iran says.” vs “Nine dead in missile attack on Israel as Iran strikes region”

                    I remember at the time that there was some confusion as to who attacked the school. Trump denied it, there was some talk that it was an Iranian missile that failed to launch, so I understand the caution in attributing the attack. For the second one, there was no problem with attribution.

                    Inb4 “those don’t prove anything”

                    Well, they don’t but you preempted me so I guess you win the internet today. Congratulations!