All true, but that doesn’t disprove my point. The risk was non-zero, so it was still worth investigating.
- 1 Post
- 300 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 17th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Yes but the difference is that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that prolonged exposure to RF waves might possibly cause some harmful effects. The WHO didn’t categorize radio frequency radiation as a potential carcinogen based on no evidence at all:
https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf
The possibility of there being a link was not absurd, per se.
To be fair, the evidence about a link between cell phone radiation and cancer has been inconclusive for quite some time. After all, a series of inconclusive or null results doesn’t mean there is categorically no link – it could equally mean that more research is needed.
That said, I do agree that if there were a casual link in this case then it would have made itself apparent by now, given the huge increase in cell phone usage over the past few decades.
21·11 months agoA translation of the top caption says
The last Iron Swords survey was conducted between the dates 07-11.8.24 led by the data collection and analysis desk at the Institute for National Security Studies. The fieldwork was carried out by the “iPanel” Institute, during which 772 men and women were interviewed on the Internet and by telephone in the Hebrew language and 200 in the Arabic language, which constitute a representative sample of the adult Israeli population in Israel aged 18 and over. The maximum sampling error for the entire sample is 3.5% ± at a 95% confidence level.
He won’t need to nix anything - Hamas will not agree to a deal that does not actually hold Israel to a lasting ceasefire:
“After being briefed by the mediators about what happened in the last round of talks in Doha, we once again came to the conclusion that Netanyahu is still putting obstacles in the way of reaching an agreement, and is setting new conditions and demands with the aim of undermining the mediators’ efforts and prolonging the war,” Hamas said.
More specifically, Hamas objects to the fact that the proposal doesn’t include a permanent ceasefire or comprehensive Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.
All this talk of a ceasefire deal is a PR stunt that allows the US to pretend like it’s trying to make progress while still funneling weapons to Israel.
Shame you’re being downvoted, but you’re right. While Maduro’s regime is certainly autocratic and corrupt, the US has been interfering in Venezuela for decades in order to gain access to its oil reserves (the largest in the world).
This article in The Intercept is a good overview of the history, which includes two failed coup attempts.
Any claims that this latest ploy is being carried out for the sake of “democracy” should be viewed with the utmost skepticism.
Not just in the 80s - US government actors and proxies have tried to overthrow the government in Venezuela twice since then - in 2002 and in 2020.
Then there’s also the crippling effects that US economic sanctions have had on several countries in South and Central America, which has led to the deaths of thousands and many refugees fleeing those countries. The surge in the number of people trying to cross the US-Mexico border is in no small part driven by the US’ own policies on Latin America.
Several genocide scholars seem to be convinced on the matter, though:
Designating something as a genocide is not a matter of opinion – it’s a legal definition.
Same.
I’ve seen the photos of the aftermath of this airstrike – the bodies of men, women, and children so obliterated that there is no hope of identifying them. The poor souls having to clear the area today have to sort the lumps of human remains into trash bags and hope all the parts belong to the same person.
There’s no justification that anyone can give that would ever justify it, and yet it will just be brushed under the rug by the US State Department, just like the last time.
371·11 months agoAs someone who has lived in Thailand, I get why Thais were pissed. The hotel, the taxi, the public transport all look like they’re from 30 years ago. Yes, you do still find run-down buildings and tuk-tuks in Bangkok today, but it’s generally a lot more developed and modern than westerners expect on first arrival. Instead of showing the reality, the creators of this ad went out of their way to portray an outdated caricature.
To an outsider it might seem like nitpicking, but Thais are fed up with being presented this way to an international audience.
Being profoundly ignorant on a topic has never stopped him from tweeting about it.
Because he is the owner of the very platform that helped to stir up the recent neofascist riots in the UK that led to POC being attacked and terrorized and properties looted and burned. His tweets are seen by millions of people, and greatly contribute towards online extremism and polarization.
I’ll add UN Watch to the list.
MBFC rates it as “highly credible” despite it publishing laughably bad hit-pieces on UN officials who openly criticize Israel.
I did a debunk on one of their articles that was removed from this very community due to disinformation, but I’ve posted a screenshot of my critique here for anyone who is interested.
I have another one - MBFC rates a site called UNWatch as “highly credible” when in fact they run trash-tier hit pieces on UN officials who criticize Israel. Their articles have been removed from WorldNews@Lemmy.world for disinformation.
I debunked one of their articles last month. If you want to see the kind of crap they publish, see a screenshot of my critique here.
10·11 months agoThe idea that propaganda cannot be propaganda if it is delivered in a dry, objective tone is nonsensical.
The Israel/Palestine conflict is a great example of this - especially in the US. Anyone who has closely watched the mainstream news media cover the situation in Gaza, or the college protests that sprung up as a result, has witnessed consent for Israel’s war being manufactured in front of their very eyes, along with the vilification of anyone who stands opposed to it. The fact that it is delivered by seemingly professional journalists in a somber, even tone has no bearing whatsoever on how accurately it describes reality.
I disagree – I think there is definitely room for this more impassioned/personal style of reporting as long as the facts being reported are accurate, especially with this conflict in particular. After all, the headline is not misleading – people literally attacked military bases in defense of the right of IDF soldiers to rape and torture Palestinian detainees with impunity. That happened.
If you prefer the more dispassionate, passive-voice-using, equivocating language about what is going on in Israel/Palestine right now, you have almost the entire rest of the Western news media to choose from.
No sick burn was intended.
Regardless of whether you think an emotive or a dispassionate tone is more appropriate for this particular story, the facts contained in both articles remain the same, do they not?
Perhaps you would prefer CBS News?
Aesthetics, plus the seductive appeal that pre-modern, pre-liberal-democratic societies (when the governments were authoritarian, the women were submissive, and the men “were men”) have for reactionaries, incels, and cryptofacists.