- 0 Posts
- 129 Comments
21·20 days agoYeah but guys, you’ve got to remember, money doesn’t grow on trees.
So despite me owning multiple properties, owning so much land I must employ people to maintain it for me, and owning multiple cars that are worth more than you earn in an entire year, you have to remember it’s the immigrants that are making everyone poorer.
Look! They dress and look slightly different from you, therefore it must be them at fault. Ignore that they’re here because their country is currently going through war/genocide/famine/mass poverty, they’re different!
What do you mean you want me to pay 2% more tax per year? Fuck off you communist scum!
Tap for spoiler
/s
For a decade, Russia has submitted a text denouncing the ‘glorification of Nazism’
In the context of the war in Ukraine – and with Russia justifying its invasion, which began on 24 February, by the desire to “denazify” the country – many states that had previously abstained decided to vote against the resolution
In its explanation of the vote, the European Union recalled that it had been advocating “for years that the fight against extremism and the condemnation of the despicable ideology of Nazism must not be misused and co-opted for politically motivated purposes that seek to excuse new violations and abuses of human rights.”
According to the press release published on the UN website, Ukraine called this text hypocritical believing that, contrary to its title, it was a pretext used by Russia to justify its brutal war against its country and the despicable crimes committed against humanity.
The countries opposing the resolution emphasize at every turn that they do not in any way condone the Third Reich. “We reaffirm our strongest condemnation of all forms of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” Ukraine insisted in 2019, while recalling that 8 million Ukrainians died in the Nazi offensive.
Before the vote, Australia managed to get an amendment to the draft resolution adopted (63 votes in favor, 23 against and 65 abstentions) inserting a new paragraph in which the General Assembly “notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism, and underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism.”
Hmm…
deleted by creator
81·21 days agoThe amount of Americans that claim to be Scottish because their great great grandparent once farted in Edinburgh is pretty damned high to be fair.
The difference between the amount of Americans with genuine Scottish ancestry and the amount who arbitrarily claim Scottish ancestry is absurd. I dunno if they all saw Braveheart and decided “Freedom! Fuck yeah, I want some of that!” or what but it’s ridiculous.
11·24 days agoIn addition to dieting you can try replacing fork reps with barbell reps. This gives a source of dopamine and increases your resting metabolic rate, making the dieting a bit easier.
Plus being stronger just makes day to day life easier.
Good luck, you got this!
51·25 days agoThat’s how English aristocrats (and aristocrat wannabes) say rugby. Whether that’s what they mean I dunno though
22·26 days agogestures broadly at the UK…
Because English is an arse of a language and I am a dumb dumb 🙃
A dumb dumb capable of providing credible sources though, which is funny considering the downvotes and the context of this thread. Maybe y’all aren’t as different from Gabbard as you think…
Proven? Is it? Care to provide some sources or argument beyond just an assertion? An administration does not an empire make.
It’s intriguing that posts with references get downvoted but posts without get upvoted. Great critical thinking Lemmy users 👍
Did you read any of my sources?
The BBC doesn’t outright say red is blue, because they’re not idiots and their target audience aren’t idiots, but to state they’re not comparable flies in the face of reason. They have shown on multiple occasions to push agendas, to the point that the criticism page on Wikipedia is huge. They are not the bastion of good journalism that they’re held up to be by the general public.
The Guardian has it’s flaws too of course but that is a far far better source than the BBC. It doesn’t claim to be unbias, it doesn’t lie to you that you’ll hear fair and even coverage from “both sides”, it doesn’t give preferential treatment to the ruling party in government because of fears its funding will be removed.
Edit: What’s scarier? An obvious bias source screaming nonsense 24/7 or a supposed unbias source subtly distorting facts when it suits them? Which will have more influence on public perception? Which is a better propaganda machine?
Nick Robinson and Laura Kuenssberg were by no means unbias (particularly Kuenssberg) and they were both previous BBC Political Editors:
The BBC were also found to be bias during the Scottish independence referendum:
And they’ve had journalists call out pro-Israel bias:
In November 2024, 230 members of the media industry including 101 anonymous BBC staff wrote a letter to Tim Davie accusing the BBC of providing favourable coverage towards Israel and failing its own editorial standards by lacking “consistently fair and accurate evidence-based journalism in its coverage of Gaza”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
The BBC are a giant government funded media company, they know how to present a good image of themselves and have years of good publicity and marketing to solidify that image. But be under no illusion that they are unbias. They push political agendas as much as any American private news organisation, just with more subtlety and an air of professionalism and officialdom to more legitimise their stance.
That’s not to say they don’t do good journalism or can’t be used as a credible source at times. But just to remember that they too are bias and have masters who push agendas.
Edit: to add more context:
8·27 days agoShenanigans
It’s not going to stop the genocide, obviously, but would you rather they just shut up and put up with it? Would you rather they supported Israel?
This is a show of solidarity.
The more there are, the more emboldened others are to do it too. The more people condemning genocide, the more likely politicians are to do something about it. Particularly if those people have public followings of their own.
“I never wanted to stay in my small town”
“Uprooting for adventure is one thing”
Y’alls reading comprehension is pish.
For anyone who would like to learn more about what Nigel is talking about I recommend you watch this documentary: The Labour Files