95
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2026
95 points (100.0% liked)
World News
55400 readers
1782 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Oh hey, good news: I did! And it's bullshit. It funnily links to a NYT article covering it (I guess they're credible if and only if they're supporting your side). It also leaves out that credible organizations like HRW (which I'll say, preemptively, I know you're going to dismiss, but you're going to dismiss anyone against your war crime denial in bad faith, so I don't give a shit and neither should anyone else) pointed out at the time rebels didn't have the means to do this.
Moreover, it conspicuously fails to mention a later debunking of the notion that the Lloyd and Postol's conclusion is some kind of slam dunk:
Your funeral if you want to keep denying well-established war crimes only still denied by e.g. the Russian government, fringe, tankie propagandist outlets, and said outlets' moron readership. Whereas outlets like MintPress and The Grayzone may precede their reputations here with readers who aren't well-informed about propaganda outlets, they surely do know that someone coming in here with apologia for al-Assad is batshit insane.
I wasn't sure you'd let yourself get baited this hard into revealing who you really are, but here we are, I guess.
We could debate this for hours or longer (as people in that Guardian article’s comments section were) and never convince each other. The fact that it is so disputed and the details are not fully known, and the fact that Obama literally said the use of chemical weapons by Syria would cross a red line a year before the attack, and knowing the history of the US empire and its relentless greed and hunger for power and control, I am inclined to believe it was a false flag, just as you are inclined to believe the CIA propaganda/Western mainstream media line that every leader of a sovereign state that stands strong against US hegemony is a baby murdering dictator (even though all of the presidents of USrael are themselves baby murdering dictators). But I’m just a fringe tankie moron so don’t listen to me.
Oh, you're trying to end this in a draw because you know your position is unspeakably awful and indefensible to sane people, so backing down from "the rebels did it and it's effectively impossible the regime did it because muh 2 km", you're now pivoting to it just being oh so murky and will we ever truly know?
No. Bashar al-Assad perpetrated it. Serious organizations don't equivocate about this. Goddamn spineless that you're pulling this "uwu it's just too hard for anyone to say" bullshit. I could at least half-respect (as stupid and awful as it is) that you had an outspoken belief, but now it's clear you'll just say whatever muddies the waters the best because you value propagandizing over the truth. And here I thought the opposite might be true when you came out with unequivocal "al-Assad did nothing wrong" rhetoric (albeit with an objectively fucked version of "truth"). But no, you're just really bad at it.
Jesus Christ where do you get the time
The time to read the Grayzone source? I mean I could just dismiss it out-of-hand for what it is (again, like if someone linked to Breitbart), but it's still sometimes casually interesting to read what fringe conspiracy websites write. As for the "research" (quick and shallow; I won't dignify this by not using scare quotes) and writing, I type at 110 WPM, I've been writing as a hobby for 10 years (okay, this one doesn't show very well), and I've been researching as a hobby for 10 years. Quickly perusing an article, seeing what its sources are, and seeing what else has been written about the article's focus elsewhere is very straightforward. What I did isn't nearly on the level of research I'd normally do. That's not a brag; that's saying I'm not wasting real time on this nonsense.