272·
5 months agoWhich politicians, and what is your source for popular opinions in Hong Kong?
420blazeit69 [he/him]
- 0 Posts
- 107 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
Cake day: April 9th, 2021
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Love how you counter concrete, material facts like “guaranteed housing, employment, and childcare” with fact-free scare mongering like “political pressure” and “control over the media.”
There’s never any analysis about what this shit really means. “The fucking stasi” gets thrown out there like “the boogeyman” without even a thought towards how the U.S. security state violently repressed a nationwide movement against police violence in 2020, or how right now that same security state is violently repressing people protesting the genocide we’re supplying. You’re supposed to belive the stasi is the worst thing possible without ever digging into how it functioned, and certainly without asking how it compared to other states.
102·9 months agoCarefully triangulating between 99% Hitler and 100% Hitler
That is why I am super impressed with the job that Biden is doing. Walking that tightrope is HARD.
Is he walking that tightrope in Palestine?
4·9 months agoLinedUp
spoiler
The LinkedIn for coke dealers
28·9 months agoThis is both not enough and better than nothing.
How about firsthand testimony that can be corroborated. If you’ve ever been in court for anything, it’s standard to not simply take whatever story you hear at face value.
So point to a story you’re saying is true, then show how it can be corroborated (by video? by documentation?). Show how there is no realiatic alternate explanation. Explain how your corroborated story amounts to genocide, and isn’t just a story about someone being arrested, for instance.
There totally aren’t actual Uyghurs who have told their own stories or anything like that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony
Just because someone says something doesn’t mean it’s true. Do you think cops ever lie when they testify?
99% of the time, calling someone a genocide denier is just burden shifting. Genocide is a crime; you have to prove it happened, you can’t simply assert it did and then smear anyone who asks for evidence.
We have spy satellites that can read a license plates and genocides, by their very nature, leave a lot of evidence. If there were a genocide in Xinjiang we’d have what we see in Palestine: tons of documentation in a wide variety of news outlets about crimes against civilians and actions like UN officials resigning in protest.
China is such an excellent test for how gullible someone is. So many people will believe any bad thing they read on the internet about it, no matter how absurd, and no matter how easy it is to disprove.
https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/entertainment/theme-park/characters-meet-pooh/
So there’s a whole fucking Hundred Acre Wood exhibit, Pooh and all, but I guess if you text someone about it Xi appears from under your bed and black bags you?
You have your sink to eat over, too!
“Reality is stranger than what TV advertisers can imagine” is a lot less interesting than “reality is stranger than fiction”
the only thing stopping them from nuking the Gaza stripe
The politics understander has logged on
“I was lied to about an obvious, easily verifiable fact, but I’m sure the people who lied to me are otherwise being honest”
It’s absolutely common practice to get permits to film in public places and historic sites:
Lmao that’s an entirely different thing than “you need government permission to make a film with a certain type of subject material.”
It’s laughable to cry “whataboutism” when discussing international politics. Comparing how countries act in similar situations is one of the foundations of international law.