• drolex@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    09·
    2 days ago

    It’s true but I prefer my criticisms without ad hominems

    Where’s the source for discrediting the statement?

    • dalekcaan@lemm.eeEnglish
      9·
      2 days ago

      How is this an ad hominem? If he’s being accused of pushing Israeli propaganda, the fact that he formerly worked for an Israeli lobby is 100% relevant.

      • lars@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        1·
        1 day ago

        Come onnnnnn. If that were the case, then there’d be no God, peace be upon It.

      • drolex@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        04·
        2 days ago

        Fair point. Could be a quote from a relevant expert saying “I think it’s bullshit” maybe?

        • Acamon@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          2 days ago

          I guess he is a relevant expert? And I think his tone suggests his judgement on the matter’s bullshitosity.

          Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. He completed his PhD in 2017 and has since authored two acclaimed books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

      • drolex@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        05·
        2 days ago

        I get it but you could apply it to the post itself.

        “Can you prove Wolf Blitzer isn’t Israel’s mouthpiece? Because somebody on the internet told me so!”

        I don’t see why asking for sources is mocked.

          • drolex@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            06·
            2 days ago

            It was hardly evidence. It was a quip.

            Let me put it another way, I don’t converse with paedophiles so I’m going to need proof that you’ve never diddled kids before we can continue.

            Here we go. Amazing and terribly clever.

      • drolex@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        02·
        2 days ago

        Mmh… Somebody could hypothetically have worked for AIPAC in the past and become a staunch opponent of Israel’s policy

        For me, not specifically knowing the guy in question, using the shortcut “has worked for AIPAC” -> “is a mouthpiece of Israel” isn’t a really solid argument

        So, thanks for the link, this is what I missed

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          2 days ago

          Somebody could hypothetically have worked for AIPAC in the past and become a staunch opponent of Israel’s policy

          I’d be surprised if you could find a single example…

          AIPAC uses bribes as the carrot, then if you go against them, the being up past carrots (bribes) and use the disclosure of them as “the stick”.

          Like, do you not understand how state back propaganda works? AIPAC works hand in hand with Israeli intelligence and their administration.

          Literally the only reason AIPAC exists is because it’s predessor had to register as a foreign agent, so AIPAC replaced it and immediately bribed the people who decide who has to register as a foreign agent…

          For me,

          This isn’t a one off specific issue you missed …

          You seem completely unaware what AIPAC actually is and what they do…

          But still feel the need to weigh in. Why?

          Why not spend 15 minutes reading up on AIPAC?