Please don’t put any hate comments against the developers of lemmy or against the person who posted this.

I am also unhappy about what the main lemmy instance is doing.

What are your thoughts?

  • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 years ago

    Can you quote the sources of claimants of this atrocity? Can we discuss the matter with academic integrity, or are you a believer of the church of CIA?

    • nikifa@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 years ago

      xD. I get the Joke @TheAnonymouseJoker. Hope you wont get to much downovtes by those not understanding the actual joke. xD Because this might not be obvious to others reading here I give a short explanation:

      It’s a common practice by tankies and of those who come at their defense, to make some claim/question about “shit lib” or CIA, and it doesn’t matter if it fits the current argument or not. Usually some conspiracy follow after that.

      The joke here is to make a pun out of that behavior, by injecting that “CIA” claim at a moment it just doesn’t servers well.

      And here’s why: Someone tried to gaslight an political opponent by linking to an article that they claim to be about “Even US state department denies the Uyghur genocide”. So all I did is to quote some parts of the text, as a means to break the gaslighting spell. And now, the source that was original used to prove that that genocide did not happen, if used by a non-tankie it is CIA propaganda shit libs believe in. And because this art of debate is so absurd, it creates some laughter for some. On the other hand it is also very anoying, because you can’t have any serious logical consistent debate with anyone who argues like that.

      • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 years ago

        I think yogthos took good care of you already, so I need not engage in a debate where you shift goalposts and purposely try to avoid contradictions in the lies of very people whose propaganda you believe in.

        I am not going to assume a statement is true, that comes from a theologist (basically religious fundamentalists who took it to the extreme), or from a country that did hundreds of illegal interventions across half the world, and continues to genocide and murder people overseas. I hear they even used feminism to manufacture consent for Afghanistan war in 2011, and they are currently doing it too.