Any islamic subject is a very good way to drive people attention away from other subjects. Each time the government wants to avoid to talk about a given subject they found something new to make scandals. For example, they don’t have enough teachers anymore, thousands of them are needed but the most important subject that the whole country should discuss is a few hundred people wearing abayas.
…it’s from a odd technicality where on ol’ blighty, a male can’t be “raped” because of how the laws are written. Call it a peculiarity of their system or sexism, but it results in oddly sounding charges like what you see reported at least.
They’ve had F-16s for years, producing most of them domestically (under license). Maybe some upgrades?
Turkey’s been developing their own “5th gen” fighter, and they do have a pretty decent domestic military industrial base, but they got barred from purchasing the F-35 in 2019 when they bought an S-400 system from Russia - I wonder if he wants those. It’d need some US congressional cooperation to make happen, though.
You obviously have no idea what you’re talking about. Current polling has major regions in russia polling 113% of the popular vote to putin. Do your research.
you wouldnt believe how staunchly those kind of polls are quoted to prove the popular support of the regime in online(and offline) discussions here and beyond the border
If Putin dies you’re not getting someone nicer, you’re getting someone significantly worse. Of the United Russia party he’s pretty much a moderate force within the party compared to the alternatives. And there isn’t any other party that would magically assume power if he died.
We all do, there’s definitely a faction within it that’s pretty good but the top is dogshit. They wouldn’t win if Putin was killed though, political assassinations tend to boost support for the parties that receive them, only really worthwhile when it would hurt a party organisationally such as small parties where one person can be very critical. But that’s not happening with any massive party.
The USSR wasn’t a paradise (communism isn’t magic) but it was better than anything in Russia before or since. It’s not like turning to capitalism in the 90s made the country a utopia.
Nah, he’s just another Russia’s tzar, this time under a different name, but still tzar. And when he dies, shit is gonna go down in Russia. And I personally can’t wait to watch it. No one is replacing Putin for quite some time after he’s done. Maybe on paper, but in reality Russia will be all kinds of fucked. Have I mentioned already that I’m looking forward to it?
I mean, he did try a coup that failed miserably because he had no support. Even if he would have want to try to kill Putin, there’s no reason to believe he was capable of it
Damn. It’s gotta be stressful as a public figure toeing the line between basic decency and a desire to not get investigated by the S(ecret) S(ervice). Can’t say I blame him for wanting to distance himself from that type of commentary
I feel this is a big win for her, she obviously suffered a horrible trauma and this website was what facilitated that.
I don’t know how this is a win for the internet. This was a website that clearly said “we connect random strangers”, and they did, and a fucked up thing happened as an improbable event based on human nature. It doesn’t seem to be caused by some fundamental aspect of the way the website works. I don’t really know how this could have been avoided. How would the website know who is a pedophile? How would the website know who is a child? I can’t think of a way without fundamentally changing user identity on the internet. I’m not sure what this means for anonymous internet interactions.
It means what it has meant since the first fifty seconds someone used chat roulette or uno on Xbox
Random unmoderated sites like this are horrifying and a danger to both people and society.
There are arguments to be made about moderation in general. But this is not a high capacity rifle with questionable purpose. This is a pistol where the barrel is pointed backwards
I can see your argument that you shouldn’t meet strangers in a private place. I mean in real life you would go to a public space if you wanted to meet new people rather than invite strangers into your living room. That wouldn’t be safe and people who facilitate that would be pretty irresponsible. That’s basically what omegle was doing.
I might be coming around. I think this will have to be very carefully managed to avoid slipping too far. There are already conservatives pushing for mandatory government ID check for viewing adult material online. I could easily see that same narrative pushed here. I think there is a real danger to the kind of censorship that is created when anonymity is removed by mandate from the internet.
If we take a moment to anthropomorphize Voyager here - It kinda is. Think of the pure vastness of space. Remember that all of the planets in our Solar System can fit between the Earth and our own Moon with a little space to spare.
Look up to the sky, point in any direction and (with the magical ability to fly up and through space) go in that direction without changing course, and there is an almost 100% guarantee you will never run into anything. Sure you may see things go by as you travel, but its just..never ending travel, fast as shit, through endless space until you just..stop and die.
Voyager's just gonna keep going, and going...and going. It's material will eventually break down I assume, due to exposure, and perhaps fall to pieces, but...it'll keep going.
It would have to be on a direct collision course, which would still lead to those stats that would be represented in scientific notation due to how unlikely it is to occur.
They will float until we intercept them in a thousand years, or their atoms begin to decompose
Not neccasarily. You have to remember that space is expanding. That means that eventually the probes would undergo the big rip where they are torn apart. Prior to that however, they would be so far from anything that it would be impossible for them to interact with anything.
Space exposure. I'm not what anyone would typically classify as "smart" by any stretch but I have to imagine being out traveling in interstellar space for (eventually) centuries will end up in some kind of eventual damage, be it either from idk fuck ass Space Radiation™, or micro asteroid impacts, or anything else.
Space is big. You just won’t believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist’s, but that’s just peanuts to space.
They will likely be the last evidence that the human race ever existed.
In 2-3 billion years the sun will leave the main sequence steady state it has been in. This will end in it turning into a red giant, and engulfing earth and destroying all record we existed.
Meanwhile, the journey of Voyager 1 and 2 will have only just begun. They will continue moving through the expanding universe for at least 3,000,000 Billion years.
Interspace is empty on a level that is hard to imagine.
There are 2.652×10^25 molecules in one m^3 of air.
That is 26520000000000000000000000.
In intellar space?
The is 1.
IE: the probe would hit more atoms in one second on earth moving at 1 m/s than it would travelling the entire age of the universe so far through interstellar space.
Even the space between the planets is thick with matter by comparison.
I don’t think this comparison is really valid. If you are going through the molecules of air at the speed voyager is currently going it would vaporize. If you’re comparing it to more terrestrial speeds, It also ignores the amount of energy imparted by that 1 atom due to the high velocity. The high velocity also means it encounters those singular atoms and a higher rate.
If we are lucky the earth might survive after the sun becomes a red giant. As the sun expands because its gravity is weakening which means the hold on earth will be weaker and the earth will move away from the sun. Hopefully the speed we move away is equal to or faster than the suns expansion.
The cool thing about Voyager is that it has a record of information about Earth, etched in gold, with instructions on how to read the data it contains back.
Even once it powers down, it’s still on a mission. If millions of years from now intelligent alien life ever encounters it, they will know who we were and that we existed.
Can’t you guys just stop using Adrian Zens? Is no one else able to make up unhinged nonsense about China? Literally all it takes is for him to adopt a pseudonym and the credibility of the propaganda increases entirely for free.
Adrian Zens is integral to the Uyghur Human Rights Project.
This is honestly pretty dismaying. This isn’t meant as a put down because it is outside of your control but we’ve got to work on investigative literacy as a country if so many people are having a hard time doing simple stuff like this.
How is he so integral? I’ve looked all over their site and at a few of their reports and there’s nothing about it him or his findings? Look, I’m willing to hear people out but I’ve looked and I can’t find anything that backs up what people are claiming here so I don’t think it’s me that needs to work on investigative literacy.
I encourage anyone on the fence about this to do their own research. His Wikipedia article has some interesting points:
"As a result of his work on Xinjiang, Zenz has become a target for coordinated disinformation attacks from pro-Beijing and Chinese state-run media, as well as other state-affiliated entities. Zenz and his work on Xinjiang have been criticized by the Chinese government, which, according to The Globe and Mail, “has called his findings ‘lies’—even when it confirmed them.”
“During an interview with The Daily Telegraph published in May 2021, Zenz defended himself against allegations of fabrication, noting that 95% of documents he has analyzed are publicly available government records.”
Plus his findings have been corroborated by lots of reputable reporters. I’ve seen a lot of claims that people need to stop believing the lies and look at the sources. I’ve done that and not found what they are claiming so what exactly am I missing here?
Yep, I googled it and I encourage everyone else to do it too. There was nothing. I did see a few Chinese sources calling him out as fraud but nothing unbiased. I did see lots of other credible organizations backing up his findings too.
The Wikipedia article was simply a good starting point that I encouraged people to check out. There’s tons of citations in there that back up their points.
Did you find where Adrian was used in each of these articles? Can you tell me the extent that he is relied on by the organization, based on how he is used?
I encourage everyone to look into the links provided and see for yourself what I’m talking about. In the very first link, out of 32 citations provided, Zenz was used 4 times. I’d hardly say his research was a critical part of their research or regardless there’s plenty of other sources provided if you don’t like him as a source. Don’t listen to all the others saying and look for yourself. There’s very little to back up their reasons for dismissing everything as some kind of anti China conspiracy.
That is incredible because I intentionally made them invalid URLs. I get redirect errors when I click on them, and I assume folks who actually bother to click on them should get similar errors.
You should ask yourself why you’re so committed to intellectual dishonesty.
Uhh, what? The links work perfectly fine and are not “invalid”. You do get a redirect notice but that doesn’t make them invalid links?
I’m not the one being intellectually dishonest here, man. I haven’t even accused other people of being dishonest. I’m just saying that I looked into what people have claimed and I can’t see what they are saying. People should check for themselves and I think they’ll see quickly who’s really spreading BS here…
You’re right here actually. Some devices give a redirect warning without letting you go to the site. That’s my bad.
Still, 4 of the 32 links directly reference zenz. If you read all of the links sources however, you will note that they overwhelmingly have zenz somewhere in the citations. This is why I’m not willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Because I keep telling you to vet the citations, and when you go to check, you do not properly vet the citations.
This institution is also funded by the NED (through a shell org) which is a US government tool for regime change.
Also, if 1/8th of the citations are directly from a Christian fascist why would you assume the rest are credible? Even following the logic of your shoddy research I really don’t get that.
OK fair enough. I’ll admit that I first didn’t see any connection to Zenz at all, but then I noticed you have to click on each citation individually to see all of the sources (I assumed all the citations would be listed at the bottom so I could just search for his name and when it didn’t pop up I assumed he wasn’t there at all).
I fully admit that I don’t have the time to look through and vet every citation (who does?) and I never claimed I checked everything. People were just claiming that Zenz was the source of all of this info and that was clearly not true based on just a quick check. Lots of this information is corroborated by lots of reputable organizations so I don’t think it is appropriate to just dismiss it all.
I think at least the thing we seem to agree on is that people should do some research into this stuff themselves rather than blindly believe what everyone is shouting. I fully support that. I took a look and what I saw didn’t convince me of the claims people are making here. I encourage everyone else to do the same.
Lots of this information is corroborated by lots of reputable organizations so I don’t think it is appropriate to just dismiss it all.
Except Aria just walked you through how there were no reputable citations for this specific article.
You are assuming that there are plenty of reputable organizations that support this with quality evidence, but Im assuming this is the most in depth you’ve ever gone on looking at sources for claims here and all of them were not trustable.
There is evidence of a crackdown in response to terrorism(the US government funded Islamic extremist groups in the area) and some excesses from that crackdown, but every time a claim rises to the level of genocide, you’re going to go back into Adrian Zenz or the state run media says lala land.
To the best of my research, the counterterrorism program is primarily focused on improving economic prospects and reassuring folks that their culture will be respected. And they have used very heavy handed methods, such as involuntarily throwing people who are only marginally connected to extremists in vocational training centers -where abuses do happen- in order to do the former. And they very much deserve to be criticized from an informed place about that. But you know what, the US would just kill them or black site them, as we’ve seen play out over and over again in the middle east the last 20 years, which just created even more insurgents.
I am this thorough whenever something new comes out because I care about being informed about this as China is the largest socialist project in the world and as a socialist I think its flaws need to be very carefully studied so as not to be emulated.
I’d like to draw attention to how every tankie who commented in this thread actually looked at the sources whereas the liberals mostly read the headline.
Did you really look at the sources? Because the first source in the article links another BBC article (which links to another article) that ultimately sources research from the Uyghur Human Rights Project. That project does not appear to have any connection to Adrian Zenz. So my original question still stands what does Adrian Zenz have to do with this?
You say every tankie who commented actually looked at the sources but, as far as I can tell, they are just parroting propaganda talking points that they are accusing everyone else of falling for.
Look, I get being skeptical of what the West says about China but I don’t think anyone can deny that anything anti China gets quickly astroturfed on Lemmy. I’m seeing lots more knee jerk reactions from tankies that obviously did not read the article and are accusing everyone else of just falling for Western propaganda without doing some real introspection that they are basically just doing the same thing.
Adrian Zens is integral to the Uyghur Human Rights Project. I suppose I don’t do new research, I just follow links until I find something I’ve judged as untrustworthy before. He’s not directly credited as a contributor, but Uyghur Human Rights Project uses him as their source for all their publishing, and invites him to their events.
Well, I don’t know what else to tell you. I couldn’t find anything about him on their site or him being used for any of research that I looked into. Now, I didn’t go over everything so it is possible he’s worked with them in the past but I don’t think that would be a reason to discredit all the work the UHRP.
What am I seeing is anything critical of China getting downvoted and a bunch of people congrating themselves for not falling for the propaganda when I literally looked and could not find anything they were claiming as part of the article.
I encourage anyone seeing all these comments discrediting this story and look into the details yourself. I could not find any evidence for all the claims they are making to discredit this. There has been some good thoughtful discussion and I appreciate that but lots of knee jerk reactions that people not doing proper research when even just a cursory check doesn’t back up what they are claiming.
Anyone reading the above comment, simple Google “Uyghur Human Rights Project Adrian Zenz” and investigate how involved he is with the links on their own website that show up. It will be obvious how full of shit this poster is.
Ctrl F, RFA 7 matches, RFERL 6 matches, radio free 7 matches, uhrp.org to see how many times they source themselves. There are 23 matches but only 19 instances of them using circular sourcing. ASPI 1 match. Jamestown 2 matches. There are some better sources in there, like Human Rights Watch, but the HRW article in question uses Adrian Zenz as their source. The only source I’m seeing quickly that isn’t directly with zero steps of separation tied to a NATO member spy agency or propaganda agency is NY Times.
For the New York Times article though be careful following their Tinyurl link because it goes through a Viglink reroute that is unlikely to be safe. I can’t imagine why else they’d find it appropriate to use a tinyurl link in their paper if not to attack readers. You can use an extractor service. But anyway if you read that article you’ll see that their source is only Uyghur Human Rights Project so it’s a circular citation again. No I don’t check stuff like this every time. But by now we should know that Uyghur Human Rights Project is an untrustworthy front for Adrian Zenz and stop when we encounter it.
That’s not their most recent published work. That was published in Feb 2023 and they released a more recent report on Jul 2023 (and I believe it has less troublesome references but I’ll admit I don’t have the time to go through them all):
Regardless, your point still stands, there’s likely more circular referencing than I originally believed. I’m still not convinced it is as much of a conspiracy as others have claimed, but it is food for thought. I appreciate the less combative tone and a willingness to discuss in good faith.
I’m still not convinced it is as much of a conspiracy as others have claimed, but it is food for thought.
Two things about this:
It doesn’t require “conspiracy” on the scale of dozens of different international organizations conspiring and then working in lock step. What you have is a set of media entities (following the governments who they have a vested interest in getting along with) following their individual interests of publishing bullshit, and when another company publishes bullshit of the same genre you are publishing, there’s a good chance you will find it worthwhile to recycle their reporting (as many do with AP and BBC articles, for example). There is no need for these groups to “conspire” to produce this result, there is only need for common interests that are observably true to us. Circular citations making spurious claims again, say, China is the natural result of media outlets being aligned with an entity like NATO because of a number of factors like funding and access journalism. That’s the market for you.
The view that conspiracy is an epistemic hazard (though it does certainly happen) is correct and important. I encourage you to keep that in mind next time you read an article about North Korea calling basically every observed part of the country a potemkin village, or all the flimsy claims of subterfuge by China when they do things that are normal for other states but blown up into world-domination catastrophizing when the BBC puts it through its very filtered lens.
How could you possibly believe this? Which part of his work do you find well reasoned? Is it the work he does with VoC where he says Covid-19 is a communist weapon? Is it Worthy to Escape where he says that if you abuse women, homosexuals or children, you’re always morally in the right because those actions repel the Antichrist?
bbc.co.uk
Top