Having not read the story or care to: sometimes a peaceful crowd will go mad. hence there is a phrase “the madness of crowds”
What do you believe is the rational response to a crowd getting restless?
Have you considered not being a bad human being?
no one is good but God - Jesus, Gospel of Luke
Unfortunately I’m not a Christian, so I must reiterate:
Have you considered not being a bad human being?
die screaming you Nazi piece of shit
it is simply true. sometimes a peaceful crowd will go mad. hence there is a phrase “the madness of crowds”
check out the dancing mania of the 14th-17th centuries
Starting off your post with “Having not read the story” then wildly speculating and referencing some mania from centuries ago makes you look bad.
I. NO INVESTIGATION, NO RIGHT TO SPEAK
If you don’t know what you’re talking about, don’t wildly speculate in a way that gives plausible deniability to Israeli genocide.
There is another phrase I’m fond of, it goes “shut the fuck up you genocide-justifying freak.”
go back to reddit’s worldnews where you belong with your fellow nazis
Yes, in western society we often have hundreds of people pushing and shoving to desperately get food. The preferred solution to this is to mow them down with chainguns and RPGs. Happened in Toronto last Tuesday again.
yeah it happened in moscow today
I’d engage you further in this battle of wits, but it’s apparent you came unarmed.
Having not read the story: sometimes humans shoot at other humans who they have been trained view as subhuman
brother cope harder
Having not read the story
I. NO INVESTIGATION, NO RIGHT TO SPEAK
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?
It won’ t do!
It won’t do!
You must investigate!
You must not talk nonsense!
I have to read stuff>? What is this, the mid 20th century? I’ll just wait till the mini-series comes out. I said was …sometimes a peaceful crowd will go mad. hence there is a phrase “the madness of crowds” === which is a true statement
Fuck off genocide apologist
Having not read this comment nor caring to do so: Sometimes people post the first thought that comes to their mind even if it only barely relates to the topic.
No one gains anything from your comment if it’s not informed by the discussion the rest of us are having. Consider just keeping it to yourself next time.
It starting to appear it was Hamas that opened fire on Palestinians waiting for aid.
https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-792075#google_vignette
Please don’t use a zionist newspaper as proof. They are unreliable
Check their post history, lmao. They’re referencing a Zionist newspaper because they’re a zionist.
Yeah just like how it was Hamas driving the trucks running people over
Starting to wonder if it’s genocidal laziness or a new standard of mental gymnastics every time the IDF opens their mouth
Israel got in hot water internationally the last time for doing exactly the same thing. So blaming Hamas is an easy trick to pull to try and detract from the ongoing mass starvation they are directly responsible for.
It’s really gross.
They did the exact same thing when they first blew up a hospital. Then they proceeded to blow up all the hospitals after the major news outlets stopped covering it.
Ditto with murdering literally over 100 journalists to try and suppress independent coverage of their ongoing genocide.
You can’t trust fascists propaganda to accurately report fascist genocide.
I’d take anything published by Jerusalem Post as inherently incapable of being unbiased about Israel/Palestine. Let’s wait for a third party confirmation before making this claim.
At least they’re using a newspaper and not a random and super obviously idf propaganda Twitter account like some I’ve seen
Using an Israeli newspaper is basically writing IDF propaganda, considering they have to submit every article to the IDF for review…
Refworld gives Israel a press freedom score of 33/100.
media outlets are subject to military censorship and gag orders, and journalists often face travel restrictions.
https://www.refworld.org/reference/annualreport/freehou/2017/en/118918
Censorship in Israel is officially carried out by the Israeli Military Censor, a unit in the Israeli government officially tasked with carrying out preventive censorship regarding the publication of information that might affect the security of Israel. The body is headed by the Israeli Chief Censor
On average, 2240 press articles in Israel are censored by the Israeli Military Censor each year, approximately 240 of which in full, and around 2000 partially.
Articles concerning potentially controversial topics must be submitted to the Israeli Military Censor in advance; failing to do so may cause the reporter to lose his right to work as a journalist in Israe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Israel
See also: https://theintercept.com/2023/12/23/israel-military-idf-media-censor/
lose his right to work as a journalist in Israe[al]
in US everyone is a journalist by claim and the authorities must respect that.
So was it Israeli helicopters, tanks and drones? Or armed Palestinian gunmen and trucks? Evidence recorded in the aftermath should make one or the other clear.
To kill 21 people and injure over a hundred, it’s much easier to do that with the former than the latter.
Is this sister than the last one?
“They were all Hamas”
To tell the truth I backed over the last two in my car. Luckily they turned out to be Hamas.
Hamas is the new slaughtering process that certifies it to be safe for Israel.
I’ve been reading many different news sources lately and I don’t trust them. I’m not saying that this isn’t true, but wait for secondary sources, Al Jazeera sucks IMO,
Media Bias gives them a left of center, which I’ve found not to be true, but also this quote:
In general, straight news reporting has a minimal bias; however, as a state-funded news agency, Al Jazeera is typically not critical of Qatar.
AJ is biased heavily on this one, more than they are on most topics. They’re practically the state media of Qatar, and Qatar shelters Hamas leaders.
But it’s hard to find any source in a conflict like this that isn’t biased somewhere to someone. This war is chaos and chaos always has a lot of wiggle room when it comes to truth. Read BBC News and Al Jazeera and take the average. It’s somewhere around there.
Israel are cunts. Hamas are cunts. Lots of innocent people getting killed. Whether 10 or 50 people got killed in any particular massacre is immaterial at this point.
Putting both in the same category is strange as one is an armed resistance and the other is an occupation force.
I should write a bot for MBFC mentions to save myself time https://lemmy.ml/comment/8913172
Doesn’t change the fact that Al Jazeera is biased in my opinion, I just couldn’t find anyone else that felt the same. I looked at their wiki and it says they’re under Time Warner for their TV stations, but I couldn’t tell who owns them now.
Removed by mod
From what I’ve heard in the past, predominantly the Qatari government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_Media_Network
That’s kind of what I gathered from it, but it was hard to confirm. The closest was the Media Bias Check that no one here seems to like. Honestly, if people like them, believe everything they say and ignore/downvote as what seems to be happening, lol. I don’t really have skin in the game, but I could see why it looked that way.
If you believe everything the BBC says about the British government, CBC about the Canadian government… You’re a massive chud. Yet we can take some of what they publish and still believe it is the objective truth.
So they are biased? Lmao, you guys are changing your tune pretty quickly.
Everyone is biased, that’s the freaking point. “Un biased” media does not exist, it’s retoric created to make you think whatever you watch is better than the rest.
Since you obviously didn’t read the comment I linked to, I’ll copypasta the relevant bits:
The whole concept of the “left” or ”right“ “bias” being inversely correlated with factualness is garbage. These kinds of graphs, which try to convince us that centrism equals factualness, are garbage:
The core bias of corporate media is the bias of the capitalist class.
The inner workings of corporate media were explained about forty years ago in Inventing Reality and Manufacturing Consent.
A five minute introduction: Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine
Give me an example of something they lied about in this conflict.
That hospital bombing which turned out to be a misfired Palestinian rocket?
But in all fairness, even the Israelis had to go and check it wasn’t them that did it.
All press is biased. See the press as lawyers. Western press=lawyers of Israel. Arabic press =lawyers of Palestinians.
You as a judge has to read the contradicting sides and decide for yourself what is the reality.
You are correct, every source of media has a bias. To expand upon your comment. Whenever we are consuming media and in particular news that sould always be in our minds. Who’s is sponsoring this, what is trying to be accomplished by this piece?
Al Jazeera has a stronger bias than most but considering that it’s essentially state media they are a lot more objective than I expect they would be. It’s not a trash news source but it definitely takes more scrutiny than say DW news.
Removed by mod
Completely subjectively! It’s inpart because of how they acquire most of their funding but my own personal bias is the most impactful.
it definitely takes more scrutiny than say DW news
DW has been absolutely awful on the Palestinian genocide, now and before Oct 7th.
DW is German, sponsor of the genocide
Yup. They do have an AMAZING documentary on Iraq though called “Iraq: Destruction of a Nation”. If you can find it it’s absolutely worth the FOUR HOURS watch. One of the most objective geopolitics documentary I’ve seen in a long time.
Removed by mod
Media bias says they’re good, lol. Read the headlines every day and you’ll see what I mean. I just started skipping them, they definitely have bias.
Removed by mod
Just look at my history, you can easily see what I’m all about. I look for non-conjecture, fact-based headlines and content. Their headlines are biased. I used them as a serious source at first, but then it became where I don’t even look at them, same with Huffpost. Huffpost looks like the National Enquirer for the last few months I’ve been gathering content. I usually won’t go past the headline if I feel it doesn’t match the content or it’s shitty in some way. AP is barely in the running as well. I did post the “Florida Man with 91 indictments goes to trial” or something like that because I thought it was funny, but I’m usually pretty good.
Removed by mod
I read new republic and nation
I’ve learned to take every view
You know, i’ve memorized lerner and golden
I feel like i’m almost a jew
But when it comes to times like korea
There’s no one more red, white and blue
So love me, love me, love me, i’m a liberal
Almost word for word OP… Gotta love Phil Ochs… He knew what was up!
Love me love me love me
Mediabias is heavily biased
Fuck Israel.
all palestinian violence against israel is self-defense.
And just as a note for anyone reading, when an Arab says something bad about Jews, like curse the Jews, they are referring to real Jews, as in the ones who actually follow their book*, i.e. the Zionists, not your average self-proclaimed Jew, which is the reason the word ‘Jew’ is sometimes used as a swear word, even if mostly ironically. (kind of like redditors and the French)
*: I am unqualified to talk about what’s in it, the only things I heard are horrible - mainly war rules - and I made this comment only to prevent misunderstandings by revealing different points of view.
