3 ms·
its like a child, after being caught with chocolate on their entire face, and after a long scolding, admits that it is possible that there might have been at so
by cuteboy19 4y ago
its like a child, after being caught with chocolate on their entire face, and after a long scolding, admits that it is possible that there might have been at some point been a chocolate eating binge (but that he was correct in eating the chocolate).
you should go read what they originally said at the time of the genocide. its similar to saying we shouldnt believe the stories of jewish refugees at the time of the holocaust because the us and the nazis happened to be enemies.
> how the available facts were selected, modified, or sometimes invented to create a certain image offered to the general population
imagine if someone said this about the reporting of the holocaust. the cambodian genocide is comparable in terms of numbers to the holocaust btw. so shameless and yet people still defend these people
- comte7092 4y agoTheir point was that the US media downplays its own atrocities while playing up those of its enemies. Their statements seem reasonable in that context. What you’re claiming is outright denial is more like hedging, and an open admission that they don’t trust the source. It reflects poor judgment on his part, but what you’re arguing isn’t in good faith. Denying the holocaust today is reprehensible. Denying it in 1943 was understandable, given the limited facts at the time. Similarly, denying the Cambodian genocide in a book in 1979, literally right in the middle of it, isn’t the same as denying it today.