5 ms·
The simple absence of on the ground reports from a variety of independent sources tells me that these numbers should not be simply ignored. If there’s nothing
by curiousObject 8mo ago
The simple absence of on the ground reports from a variety of independent sources tells me that these numbers should not be simply ignored.
If there’s nothing happening, then the obvious way for the authorities to prove that is to let observers in, and let independent information out. They do not do this, so I will take these reports of deaths more seriously.
- JohnnyLarue 8mo agoThey shouldn't be ignored, but they also should be taken with a massive grain of salt. This reporting has all the hallmarks of the US State Department manufacturing consent for yet another war.
- pydry 8mo agoAfter WMDs i honestly thought america learned to be a bit more skeptical of poorly sourced "pretext for war" stories which emerge in the context of a military build up. E.g. like reading the sentence: >TIME has been unable to independently verify these figures. And going "hmmm".
- behnamoh 8mo agoYou can already see them in the videos raiding hospitals to "finish off" the wounded... Or you can watch videos of hundreds of bodies in plastic bags if you need further proof that this massacre is actually happening on that place on the earth.
- GordonS 8mo agoThat doesn't prove who went around murdering police officers and random people, and destroying hospitals, banks, police stations and ambulances - it only proves it happened at all.
- behnamoh 8mo agoIt does prove who did it; when you see police officers, Hamas mercenaries, and IRGC forces shooting at people using machine guns, and then demand "bullet price" from the families of the dead before they return the corpses of their loved ones...
- GordonS 8mo agoPlease do share these supposed videos. Except, they don't exist, do they? > Hamas mercenaries Literally LOL'd at that! What an utter load of nonsense.
- Aurornis 8mo ago> E.g. like reading the sentence: > >TIME has been unable to independently verify these figures. > And going "hmmm". Journalists couldn’t possibly independently verify large scale death counts, especially at this point. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong or propaganda. If you start “going hmmm” when journalists honestly report their own limitations then that’s just going to leave you more vulnerable to the psy-op peddlers who never give such disclaimers.
- pydry 8mo agoMediaZona is one example of an organization that uses a large diversity of sources to assemble what looks like a very accurate Russian soldier casualty count. Their process is excellent. TIME magazine didnt do anything like that. They most likely got a call from the state department in between their Iran invasion planning meetings to say "hey, we've got a totally legit guy on the inside of rhe iranian ministry of health with an EXPLOSIVE story you wanna talk to him?" That guy will be getting paid to risk his life talking to the enemy and he will know that he shouldnt disappoint. The US paid all sorts of informants to provide information on WMDs and shockingly, they told the state department what it wanted to hear and TIME printed all of that nonsense too.
- amoshi 8mo agoAs another comment said, they shouldn't be ignored, but they also should be taken with a massive grain of salt. https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/iran-casualty-counts-us-funded-groups https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/iran-casualty-counts-us-funde...