489
China says Israel has gone too far
(www.politico.com)
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 15 Oct 2023
489 points (93.7% liked)
World News
39034 readers
1139 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. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating 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 10/19
-
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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Do you remember when I told you that you cannot trust the word of a genocidal government?
Did you notice how you just parroted like a well trained bird the words of a genocidal government? You even admit you know you are repeating what you are trained to say.
Did you notice how you blamed the protestors for "starting it?" Thats what the US says about black and indigenous people. Australia and canada about their respective indiginous populi. Russia about ukraine. You just blamed the victims of a war crime for, and I quote you previously, "it had to happen."
Youre excusing mass killings. You literally say, "no but unfortunately yes."
Youre justifying and excusing mass killings, just because a chinese man pulled the trigger.
You are the person who defends humans rights violations. Youre doing it right now.
Right, I don't trust the government. I do trust images, such as the one of a destroyed armored column. That could not have been done by peaceful protestors. How do you explain the destroyed column otherwise.
*Edit: I do trust that I saw the tank man survive. I also do trust I've seen dozens of images of US police running over BLM protestors. I trust what I see with my eyes, not what the governments say. Why do you trust words over images?
Show me proof that the chinese did not destroy them themselves to justify the killings. A thing multiple nations have been caught doing to hide human rights violations for centuries, from japan to the US.
Oh my god, you do think stalin was alone in those photos
What the? So your argument now is that after seeing the military avoid conflict driving around the tank man and seeing destroyed columns of armored vehicle, you think China staged all of that? Even though those images were taken by western journalists who were there at the time? So China got the west to play along with this as well? What are you talking about?
*Edit: You do know that no pictures were taken by China and that everything we have was taken by foreign journalists right? You know at least that much about the history I hope.
All you have showed me is some broken vehicles. Thats not proof that terrorists did anything, nor is it proof that china had no other choice but to commit multiple successive war crimes.
Your handler gave you one photo and a fantasy story and you barked happily on your knees. This isnt proof, its a pro genocide conspiracy theory that china decided makes great propaganda.
No I showed you an image that a western journalist took. This is not available in China and was taken by a UK journalist. Here's an article using it from the UK.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-square-protest-massacre-china-us-mike-pompeo-1989-a8944841.html
So what you're telling me, is that an image created by and taken for UK newspapers is actually Chinese propaganda? Do you hear yourself?
....... Do you not understand how propaganda works?
Did you miss the entire 2016 election?
Also, I see nowhere in that article where it calls the protestors terrorists who forced china to slaughter all of them by bombing cars. So I think your handler sent you the wrong link
Nope, they're using that image to say China bad. And yet no one can explain how those armored vehicles got destroyed. They just conveniently leave that information out. Which is my point. I'm sourcing from WESTERN ANTI-CHINA sources. So it'd be really awkward for you to try to deny them. Which was the whole point. I really enjoy reading you jumping all over yourself to try to explain why western media that are anti-china is posting proof of what I'm talking about.
So, you think its more likely that terrorists snuck weaponry into a very regulated china, bombed chinese vehicles, and then got slaughtered while also magically removing any evidence china could use to prove there was a terrorist plot forcing them to hide all facts about the event?
And its less likely that the well armed chinese military also blew up vehicles while slaughtering protestors?
Who was the conspiracy theorist again?
What are you talking about? This isn't China today, this is China in 1989 when they weren't able to have the kind of control they do today. In fact, Tiananmen is WHY China puts all the controls they have in place today. And we can feel that's excessive, but at least know some basic history. Jesus, if you don't even know basic history you really are a lost cause.
*Edit: In fact prior to Tiananmen, the west thought China was so open they were happily selling China weapons.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-NSIAD-98-171/pdf/GAOREPORTS-T-NSIAD-98-171.pdf
It wasn't until after Tiananmen did they feel China was closed. And China said it had to be because of Tiananmen. So yeah, back then, not too hard to get weapons in.
Did you just say that they couldnt have collected proof of a terror attack because it was 1989?
What? I said back before 1989 the west was even shipping weapons into China, so weapons were pretty available. But they decided to stop because China cracked down and then became opaque. I don't even know what you're trying to say.
Try reading what I say, and magically you will learn.
No because it's completely incoherent like your argument. But to answer your original point, it was much easier to access weapons in China prior to 1989. You just can't deal with reality.
My original question was where the evidence of terrorist attacks went, not that china is a magical anti weapon zone.
Fuck me dude, can you follow a sentence at all? Are you following a script, and Ive gone too far off your path?
Where have you been? This is China's stance on literally everything. You don't need evidence because we are not beholden to you. That's what they've said about everything from Tiananmen, to the Uyghur situation, to Jack Ma, to what Xi ate for lunch.
Hey Jack Ma is dead right? He disappeared, and the west was going crazy as shit that they killed him. Oh but now he's in Japan, they were wrong. And China's response on all of that? Fuck you, it's none of your god damn business.
*Edit: Also 911 was an inside job right? Where's the proof it wasn't? And that's why China says fuck you. Because idiots like yourself will spout nonsense no matter what anyway.
Oops, someone tell the handler youve slipped lip a bit.
So, what youre saying is there were definitely terrorists but they refuse to prove it, but they had to massacre everyone there to deal with the terrorists that tooooootally were there, so it wasnt war crimes because of the evidence you definitely have but refuse to show?
Or in other words.... Proof of a terror attack would exonerate china of the event and completely embarass all of its global rivals. Instead of rubbing everyones nose in it, they are actively hiding and suppressing any discussion of the terrorists.
Because they arent real. They dont exist. And if china lets that out, they have to admit they murdered their own people over nothing.
E: the US did loads of "inside job" investigations. They published a good deal of it. You should google it, its an interesting read
There are lots of photos of burnt out armor from the protestors attacks by western journalists.
Their argument is if you see those images of destroyed armor taken by foreign nationals and still think that some how China did it, well fuck you. You're too god damn stupid to talk to.
Where on those images does it show they were damaged by non chinese weaponry?
What are you talking about, of course they were damaged with Chinese weaponry. They're in China. I already told you at the time weapons weren't as restricted, the people got access to Chinese weaponry. Why the fuck would Chinese protestors use other weaponry?
*Edit: Did you know BLM protestors used AR-15s? Where was the non-American weaponry? No PROOF THEREFORE BLM DIDN'T HAPPEN. You absolute dunce.
For fucks sake dude, obviously I mean proper noun china, in contrast to the imaginary terrorists.
Could you pick typing, or huffing glue? You get to do 1. Either turn off your computer, or go put the fucking glue away.
Chinese people used Chinese weapons yes. Just like Americans user AR-15s. What is your point?
AR15s are not trademarked US weaponry. An AR15 is not proof of american military presence. Its just a gun.
Do I need to dumb down questions for you? Should I avoid big boy words?
... Are you dumb? AR-15 is the civilian moniker for M-16. You know that right? There's no way to distinguish the damage they do from one another.
You genuinely have no idea what you were asked, and its so fucking funny.
Its like someone told me they trained their dog really well, so I tell the dog (you) to fetch a ball. And the dog (you) keeps trying to put its paw in my hand. No you dumb dog! Fetch!
Im not using complex ideas, Im speaking in simple sentences, Im repeating myself for you when you fuck up, and you still dont grok a thing.
"Hurrr, but AR? But AR? That merica weapon? Weapon, in merica? AR? It M16? Hurr? What was question?"
There's no way to distinguish the damage. It would be like comparing ar-15 with m-16. It's impossible. And thus, you've proven why China simply says fuck you.
..... Do you think that terrorists on american soil would attack with ARs?
Do you think that the american military only uses the M16, as its singular weapon, and would respond with such to a terror attack?
Do you think the only evidence of non military strikes are if you can see an AR in frame?
Genuinely, you have no clue what youre talking about.
Wait, do you not know there's domestic terrorism? Do you think the Jan 6th rioters used foreign weapons? BLM? Yet the police still had to deal with them, sometimes violently.
I don't get where you are getting this foreign terrorist idea from
The jan 6th rioters mostly didnt use weapons at all, but the ones carrying used open market sold firearms. Not military issued and grade weaponry.
Ill be honest, I dont think you know what BLM even was. You keep bringing it up like its even remotely on topic. Do you watch a lot of fox news?
Let me spell it out for you. Ill keep it simple. Read slowly, and sound out the words.
China makes their own weaponry. Their weapons, like all weapons, leave specific patterns of damage and debris. Every nation has heavily studied these weaponry patterns, and can easily determine what weapons could and couldnt cause a given type of damage.
China doesnt sell its weapons to the people, and really never has. The public chinese gun market was mostly foreign made, and chinese weapons were mostly used for self arming or selling to other nations. There are a lot of political reasons for that, but they dont matter for this. The end result was foreign guns in the peoples hands, and state made guns in state sponsored hands.
What this means is any evidence of non chinese weaponry would prove actions of terrorists. Any evidence. Left behind guns, bombs, grenades, any bullet casings, any identifying fragments of weaponry, specific destructive patterns, literally anything.
Even a single non chinese bullet dug out of a wall would prove china right, because chinese military would never have those bullets.
China has nothing to show. Despite how easy it would be to find any type of this evidence.
Right so ignoring your ignorance I will repeat, people use weapons they create. The Chinese used Chinese weapons. And I'd love you to explain how to differentiate the casings of a Russian SKS and a Chinese made one. Or a markarov. Oh wait, they're exactly the same. And that was the primary weapons for both the civilians and the military at that time. Well damn, I guess your just wrong
...... Are you claiming that people only use guns they handcraft? And not purchase? Because the chinese public gun market from 1870 to the massacre was almost exclusively foreign models.
You tell the difference based on manufacturer differences. They burn and bend the casings differently. You can id which factory an SKS came from via that. Same thing for bullets, you can tell exactly which gun fired a bullet based on the damage done to the bullet by the chamber. Thats how cops can id which gun was used at the scene of a crime.
Wait wait wait, you think they handcraft SKS? Also, you clearly don't understand forensics. The only way they can match is if they have the gun. You can't match based on the bullet or casing alone.
*Edit: Here's a document on how forensics works.
https://www.nist.gov/firearms-and-toolmarks#:~:text=What%20is%20forensic%20ballistics%3F,marks%20are%20like%20ballistic%20fingerprints.
Key point:
They need the suspect's gun to identify.
You said they handcraft them, dunce. Im mocking you for that.
You need the gun to match the specific gun to its specific bullet. You can still id model and company of origin, often down to the factory via batching defects.
A bullet or its casing would tell you what kind of gun it was, and who made it. Proof of russian made SKS, for example, would show that non military combatants were present.
I didn't say anyone handcrafted anything. I said you can't tell the difference between a Russian SKS and a Chinese one. You're the weird one talking about handcrafting.
Also, no you can't tell the difference forensically from a Russian vs Chinese SKS unless you had the gun. They were literally made with the same tools. But you don't know that do you?
Ok dunce, your comments are right there.
If they were made in the same factory, you mean? Its the same concept as forensicall bullet to barrel matching. You are matching the casing to known micro defects of the regions manufacture.
Different manufacturers use different materials for the barrel, or chamber, etc which alters how the bullet or casing is dented, burned, etc. Theres also some minor stylistic differences which result in the same thing. AK47s from russia in the 60s jam a lot, for example, way more than is normal. Something was wrong with a template, and the error wasnt caught for a while.
This forensics was used in the middle east under bush to id who had participated in different fire fights, because different groups were supplied from different sources. If you know only the taliban has access to russian made weaponry, for example, you can use that to id where they were involved.
Your handler should have told you all this, very embarassing.
Nothing you said is correct. I literally sent you a document that explains how it works. Your ignorance is astounding.
No you didnt, you sent a link to a 2 paragraph article-ette detailing how cops apply the science to match a gun to a crime scene.
Thats just how local cops use it, not the only way to study post firing remnants. Cops dont need to know which militaristic force robbed your cousin, just if his personal gun was at the crime.
This is like if you posted a mini blurb on how to collect rain water in your backyard as proof that the water cycle doesnt create fog.
Ask your handler. Im sure he can explain this to you using pictures with bright colors.
E: I actually went looking through that site, and while its not public access they go into some detail about how they are literally creating a database of gun type forensics. Literally exactly what I am talking about, down to gun year and difficulties vs obvious tells for specific models.
Yeah, things they didn't have in the 89s. Thanks for confirming you have no idea what you're talking about. A database of gun type forensics. Yeah all those super computers in China back then.
Holy shit, you genuinely are stupid. That single website is working on their own private database for american gun circulation. That is not the global database for all guns ever since the invention of guns. We have had ballistic forensics since the 1800s, and manufacturer tells have been commonly known since the 20s.
I pointed it out as an example from your source confirming that what I said was correct. Are you now calling your own source a liar?
Also..... Hey, buddy? You understand databases are older than computers right? A database is just a collection of datapoints. This could be, and likely is, a stapled packet of papers sorted by company and model.
Oh, wait, let me guess. China didnt have paper in the 80s?