Peoples still believe that lie about the column somehow running out of fuel and food and whatever redditors felt like saying this week while heading for Kiev?

I was there years ago when r/Ukraine started spinning that lie and I still have yet to see so much as a shred of evidence that this column ran out of whatever they said it ran out of, or that this ominous column that they said for months was about to reach Kiev was even real in the first place.

Did someone fuck around and not like what they found out?

"Hey friends! I need your help. Can you tell me why the US would want to sell more weapons to the Saudis?

click

“That’s right! Very good! They probably want Saudi Arabia to attack Yemen in hope that this would prevent Yemen from supporting the Palestinian resistance!”

Israel is having a Ukraine moment.

Probably for the same reasons: they see that Israel is on a path toward irreversible and unavoidable defeat and want to cut their losses by scraping everything they can while on their way to bail out of the sinking Zionist boat.

This time for SURE sanctions will work

Almost all pieces ever written about the “Uyghur genocide” go back to this one “bad dude” Adrian Zenz if you follow the chain of sources back to their origins. And both of the articles you liked have him as source, not just one.

The reason it’s so bad is because Adrian Zenz isn’t merely biased, he’s a known liar. He’s a fraud who pretends to be an expert on China despite not speaking a single word of any of the languages just because he’s been to China a single time over 10 years ago. He is being referenced despite all that by CIA financed medias (such as the BBC via USAID) because his lies are exactly the kind of things western bourgeois want us to think about China.

Your comparing Dessalines pointing out that your sources cite Zenz to you pointing out that some of his links go to X is misguided at best, Musk isn’t the author of what is written on these X posts, Zenz is the author of the lies your sources tells.

No one is pretending it isn’t. But the fact that it is pointed doesn’t automatically make it false. You are rejecting sources on little more than vibes here.

There is no such thing as unbiased sources buddy. If someone tells you a source is unbiased, they are either lying to you or don’t understand how biases work.

Time to download the videos you care about and move to PeerTube.

An EU country doing something about the far right?! Who would have thought?

Zen browser is very good.

Don’t hold your breath, they are going to resume the genocide as soon as Trump is in office. The Democrats fucked up and gave a free opportunity to earn brownie points to the Republicans on a silver platter and Trump is taking it, that’s all.

Death to Israel.

I wish Netanyahu a very

There are no truly neutral parties and there is no such thing as unbiased. If a source or a media tells you they are unbiased and/or perfectly neutral, they are either lying to you or don’t properly understand what biases are and how they work.

However, some sources are more biased than others on different things.

Take the American election observers who endorsed the election results mentioned by the article for example.

Like I’ve mentioned, they aren’t truly unbiased or neutral as that’s not possible.

BUT

At the very least, they don’t have a money trail linking them the international terrorist organization that tried to overthrow Venezuela’s government multiple times (CIA and it’s ecosystem of right wing think-tanks), unlike the one you’ve cited.

I’d like to hear how the heck you can possibly think that this ☝️ isn’t a VERY OBVIOUS bias.

Apart from the pure , you gotta love the subtly racist smugness of white westerners halfway across the fucking planet being so confident that they would know better whether or not and by who the peoples of middle-income countries are exploited than the peoples of middle-income countries themselves.

I DON’T insist on Biden at all.

Maybe not you specifically but I’ve seen a lot of peoples do.

many MORE people in this world will suffer, struggle and die under Trump than under Biden. It’s just math and all your ideology is VERY empty in the face of it.

See, I think this is where we disagree.

You operate under the assumption that the things that the Republicans want to do couldn’t happen under Biden, presumably because you think he would block Republican policies, but knowing what I know about Biden and his policies, his willingness to “reach across the aisles” and give concessions to the right, his tendency to passively letting Republican bills pass without doing anything about it even when he clearly have the power to, his failure/unwillingness to roll back Republican policies from Trump’s last term let alone the ones that he expanded instead, etc… I’m telling you honestly, I don’t believe that for 1 second.

I have not seen ANY evidences that Biden would act against Republican politics.

Heck I haven’t seen evidences that he wouldn’t do a complete 180 and start supporting Republican policies that he used to denounce, it wouldn’t even be the first time he does it.

In your arguments in favor of voting blue, you (the peoples who tell everyone to vote blue) always use this assumption that Biden couldn’t possibly be as bad as Trump as an axiom, as if it was just obvious, you never bother trying to show that it’s true, you never question it, I certainly haven’t ever seen any of you questioning it or trying to demonstrate it. You just treat it as some sort of fundamental truth to the point you don’t even seem to notice that you are using it sometimes.

I haven’t seen any reason to believe that this assumption is true, on the contrary.

When I look at the 2 last US presidential terms, I don’t see a bad president and a worst president, I see a bad president who tell you that he’s gonna to terrible shit and does exactly that and an other equally bad president that pinky promise he wont do terrible shit but then do terrible shit anyways and blames the other bad president for it when he get caught doing terrible shit.

I just don’t understand the pro-Democrat party crowd’s strategy. Why do they insist on keeping Biden as the Democrat candidate when that clown keeps nuking it’s own odds of winning more and more everyday with his stupid shenanigans? If the peoples who keep berating everyone to vote for Biden see Trump as some sort of ultimate threat, why do they insist on using a candidate that even they admit is hated by most of his own voter base against Trump? That sound like a terrible strategy to me. Shouldn’t they be mad at the Democrat party for taking such risk by insisting on a candidate so widely despised? Why don’t they call for a candidate that is actually likely to beat Trump? Why do they keep berating the folks who have made it clear that they won’t be voting for Biden under any circumstances when the over 60% of the Americans who don’t participate in politics are right there?

We won