this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
287 points (100.0% liked)
MeanwhileOnGrad
2009 readers
154 users here now
"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"
Welcome to MoG!
Meanwhile On Grad
Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!
What is a Tankie?
(caution of biased source)
Basic Rules:
Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.
Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.
Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.
Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.
Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.
Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post, rather than engaging in unrelated arguments.
Brigading — If you're here because this community was linked in another thread, please refrain from voting, commenting or manipulating the post in any way, this includes alt accounts. All votes are public, and if you are found to be brigading, you will be permanently banned.
You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean shit, there's some validity to that argument at times.
Yeah they might not technically be lying, but they are really trying their hardest to make themselves look like fucking zionist defenders sometimes.
What do you mean trying? The amount of ass-kissing they do for Israel is insane and horrific.
Balanced by ass-kissing for Hamas. They refuse to call them terrorists despite the UK government designating them thus.
The BBC middle east editor is Rafi Berg. An Israeli ex-IDF spy unit.
And they do zero ass kissing for Hamas that is simply Zionists crying that Hamas gets any airtime.
An important lesson that you can learn from the Gaza bullshit that's going on is that all media has an ideology and cannot ever be trusted to be completely unbiased, especially the ones that present themselves as unbiased.
The truth is always found somewhere in the middle. But sometimes it's really, really far away from some of these propaganda outlets. Often times it's really, really close to a particular news source. Sadly, we can't just say "the BBC is often really-really-close to the truth", therefore they are always really-really-close to the truth. Sometimes, on certain topics, they are just spouting propaganda, and they always will be, because that's their ideological position and what they are posting will always be consistent with that ideological position, not with truth. They can still, as part of the ideological position, post a lot of stuff that is if not exactly the truth, very very close to it. But they can never be trusted to always do that, they will always have an agenda and an ideology.
Consider the source doesn't mean "find something truly unbiased and ignore everything else" it means understand why the source is saying the things they're saying, the way they're saying them, and why they're omitting what they're omitting, and compare that against other sources doing the same things, or different things, based on the understanding that you've developed of their biases, and also to develop further understanding of those biases. Media literacy is critical, especially with how much we're getting bombarded with fake news and how much the rug has been pulled out from beneath legitimate quality journalism. We need to thoroughly consider and understand sources these days. It's not easy, it's also a lot of work. We shouldn't have to do it. But we live in the information age, and information is a battleground, so we must. Those are the skills we need to survive in this world now.
Really? I have seen the evidence of the opposite.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/15/bbc-alienated-everyone-gaza-bias
You are just giving examples of (what you think is) more pro-Israel bias. Regardless of whether it is so, I gave you an example of pro Hamas bias and The Guardian article does not address my example.
Zionists crying is not evidence.
Here is who runs the BBC middle east news. Literal Israeli ex-IDF.
So you cannot refute my point and have to resort to mocking. I showed you evidence of where BBC retracted their statement calling Hamas terrorists. Now it is up to you to show that they did call them terrorists elsewhere.
My point is that the bias isn't one way in BBC.
What is typical ProPal is starting a war then crying when losing. Oct 6 looks pretty good now doesn't it?
Have you been calling for Hamas to surrender or at least stop hiding in hospitals? If you care about civilian collateral deaths.
Whats the lie there?
Bias by omission. They retracted their calling Hamas a terrorist organization and other than that "slip" have never called them that.
They also mislead by always quoting from "Gaza Health Ministry" instead of from Hamas who run the Ministry. This gives the impression they writing from a reliable. The Al Ahli hospital fraud shows it is far from reliable.
I could go on but I doubt anyone here is interested in muddying the water when they have a black and white narrative to defend. And it is getting off topic anyhow.
The point is that no source is 100% reliable but I would argue that BBC is as reliable as it gets (unfortunately).
Forensic architecture research has shown that it was Israel who bombed El Ahli hospital.
BBC is literally famous for saying "Hamas run health ministry". Which is a Zionist adjective because they do not do it for Israel (which has lied plenty about their casualty count)
Strange you bring up the hospital bombing after Israel literally bombed a hospital by the way.
No forensics are needed because the hospital was not hit by anyone. That is just a further lie.
There was footage the next day taken by a Gazan of the hospital showing it unscathed except for a small crater in the carpark. There were shattered windows in a nearby chapel. Unfortunately there were people camped in the carpark so about 20 people died (not 500 as Hamas lied).
Notice that Hamas didn't even release any footage of any damaged building let alone AlAhli hospital. They didn't even have to try because media around the world lapped it up without question.
There was also footage of the rocket barrage by the PIJ streamed live by Al Jazeera which showed one of the rockets boomeranging and a citizen's footage showing similar closer by.
I was outraged by the recent double tap of the hospital looking rescuers. Even if there was a Hamas base there it is inexcusable.
Apparently Hamas documents have been found last week showing their basing themselves in hospitals.
I can back up the above but I doubt people in this thread are interested in such messy departure from any narrative which isn't black and white.
That is so much misinformation I am not going to bother responding. Everything you typed is a lie. Go look up the Forensic Architecture report.
There are no photos in the report of hospital building damage which is what was claimed by Hamas.
AFAIK There is also no news story from that day displaying damage to Al Ahli hospital either.
Hamas say 471 people were killed and 342 injured. There is no way to fit that many in that car park. Here is a video by a Gazan the morning after.
The Forensic Architecture report has been debunked.
Say no more.
What does the sub matter? Look at the contents of that post.
Never heard of Destiny before. I just found that thread with Google but you got me curious.
he has promoted the idea that college campuses should have students who have diverse opinions in order to reduce polarization.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destiny_%28streamer%29
Thanks. I may join the sub now.
He made a stupid comment during the George Floyd protests though. Am trying to find out if he recanted.
Destiny is also a notorious sex offender and pedophile.
He isn't a pedo. He says a 23yo with a 16yo isn't pedophilia. Which is technically true: it is ephebophilia. He seems to have been baiting outrage.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/11uvamp/i_dont_understand_the_value_in_destinys/
He hasn't been convicted of sexual abuse AFAIK but he certainly does seem dodgy on that front...
https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/1h6nvdj/why_is_nobody_concerned_about_the_streamer/
That sub should rename itself to distance itself from such behavior. Don't think I want to add to its karma by joining or participating. So thanks for the warning.
Still doesn't invalidate the debunking of that report though.
"No no, I'm not a pedo, to prove it, I looked pedophilia in a dictionary! It's actually ephebophilia! ...You don't care that I used a new word? Well, I was just doing it as a joke! It's your fault you'd think I would molest a minor!"
When someone rapes a minor as a joke, someone still raped a minor.
I gave you a specific example. 23yo with 18yo... consensually.
If you think that is pedophilia or rape then you are out of step with the law and with cultural norms.
Especially when it comes to trans issues. They've been running complete lies on that front for like 15 years now.