[Video] British journalist Steve Sweeney bombed by Israel while reporting in Lebanon
2mon 10h ago by lemmy.world/u/IndustryStandard in crazyfuckingvideos from i.imgur.com
He is injured but not dead
Some analysis
Allegations he was targeted because he posted this yesterday
https://xcancel.com/SweeneySteve/status/2034700333000331742
He have video after hospital from 5 hours ago. What a day to be alive.
Not saying this info is wrong but the fins on the bombs in those pictures look very different. I'm no bomb expert of course
That's pretty much undeniably a mk82 warhead. Which are fitted with different tail sections and other guidance systems for whatever they want to be used for. If the report is correct in that it was a 200lb load with 300lbs of metal, that would be the mk82 mod 7. Which likely has a Israeli tail section made for low altitude deployment with high precision.
Dang I didn't know they could swap parts like like
Going by the tail section (and lack of wings), it looks like this was a mk82 fitted with a Paveway II system, which would make sense given that this was likely intended to be used to demolish the bridge he's standing on...
Paveway tail/nose for comparison
How do people know so much about bombs?
In my case, autism. UXO/equipment identification is a hobby. If you think that's weird you should see how weird I got when they let me poke around in the Southern Pacific 4294 cab...
I don't gotta be an expert to know he's talking about trains XD That's awesome man I'm still trying to learn how to install arch on my own
Lemmy has a crowd of experts and academics in certain fields, but also weird hobbyists that expertise themselves for fun on a certain topic. Sometimes they are the same person.
And it wasn't always the case, but people love it when others geek out over their obscure hobby/obsession. A sign of life is much appreciated in the internet world these days.
Missile autists
Either way it's clearly different surroundings, and the missile in the video goes into a crater where a previous missile hit, while this still shows a missile hitting flat terrain
Edit: silly me, it's just zoomed in. And the rocket hits a little farther back from the crater, not in the existing crater.
Jfc, Israel just cant help but targeting innocent people, civilians, and the press are their prime targets
I don't trust anyone who, after hearing the story of Abraham, still is like "yeah, more of that please!"
Well gentiles (non-jewish) are like animals, according to some rabbi's
just cant help
This assumes that the bomb accidentally fell there. This was a targeted strike.
Not the way I worded it. I said they cant help but target innocent, civilians and journalists
Ah I see, I am just unfamiliar with the expression it seems.
No worries! Not sure why you got so many downvotes for a clear misunderstanding
I tend to downvote misunderstandings so that people realize that something is wrong with the statement
As the OP said: “just can’t help but” is a negation of what you quoted.
It’s like saying they “can’t not target [innocents]”
The only thing Israel loves more than killing journalists, is killing children.
Don't forget women and the elderly.
And infants
Idk it's maybe a tie for health care workers too.
Their leader is a child killer, and the US leader is a child rapist. Talk about a match made in the deepest recesses of Hell.
You're being really unfair. Trump very well could've also killed children.
Didn't he already kill the 160 girls bombing a school?
Ok, but I think we can all admit child detectives are neither cute nor amusing.
And they would have gotten away with it too! If it weren't for those meddling kids and their mangy dog!
IRL version:
Nancy Drew and Hardy Boy were never seen or heard from again.
what a chad. may he continue to evade bombs for a long time
Didn't really evade this bomb though, did he? Someone said it struck in the crack there and exploded in there, which was very lucky for them. Otherwise, smithereens.
For fun, I just looked at headlines for this. Almost all of them mention Lebanon, only two mention Israel or IDF. Classic.
Well, why did Lebanon decide to place a country where bombs fall?
It's ok guys, the missile just happened to safely "land" in the area, by chance, "next to" the guy, who is only a "presenter", not a journalist . There's definitely no war crime to see here.
Our "Journalists", their "Presenters"
History is written by the victors. This realization has made me question every version of history I have ever been taught
As moral compasses adjust over time, it has become clear that almost everyone that made it into history books was an asshole. And the ones that weren't might have only been that way because they died too soon or history had gaps.
Israel definitely didn't try to kill this journalist or the 300 journalists they successfully killed in the last 2.5 years.
Ahh the BBC, Pinnacle of using soft language (*passive voice is what I meant here) to describe war crimes
Only when Israel is the perpetrator. This is the NYT, but the BBC does the same thing.
Yuuuup. Almost like there's a lot of powerful people worldwide that rely on propaganda to not just obfuscate their horrifyingly immoral acts, but create a culture where these acts are permissible when discovered.
Think about how the news used passive voice to never use the word rape or torture to describe what the epstein elite were doing to children, despite it being clearly laid out in front of our eyes.
Same thing happening in Gaza, Lebanon, Sudan, West Papua, and now Iran, in a non exhaustive but exhausting list of countries where the west is funding and arming genocides in the name of "Spreading democracy" (Stealing Natural Resources ) while the news stations softly softly their way around talking points.
Almost the exact same spot as one before and nothing there but him...
the old one two attack, its done to target aid workers and whatnot.
And the bridge that was still standing.
I doubt he was specifically targeted, since the margin of the miss was too large. But the ones doing the bombing knew he was there and went ahead to bomb the bridge anyway.
Actually Israel is known to use a double tap bombing method that waits until reporters and aid shows up to the original site and then they strike it again to take out additional people to make it harder to respond to the next attack.
Also this was a cluster munition bomb ment to shoot shrapnel out, the goal is to just hit solid ground to make it explode sideways, they just happened to double tap exactly the same spot and there was a cavity under the road.
From the stills it looks like a standard mk82 with a guidance kit. It lacks the longetudenal slits that cluster munition bodies have. Also cluster munitions deploy their bomblets about 50-150m before they hit the ground, otherwise they don't get distribution.
It looks more like they dropped a followup bomb on a bridge that was not destroyed by the first bomb. Its a common practice for low urgency targets.
Especially considering it hit the same crater. Those bombs are accurate to about 1m, so that is not unusualy to hit almost the same spot.
I still think they just did not care he was there. If they were targeting him, it would have hit him.
True I don't think they were targeting him specifically but they were targeting the professions of who shows up after the first hit. They seemingly want a couple professions caught in the crossfire. And its ones that is a crime to target.
Also that is still incredibly lazy with expensive munitions to not calculate the strike to actually hit again a weak point but to just send it on the same trajectory and hope it blows up enough to get the job done.
Being a journalist in range of Israel isn't the safest of occupations.
No kidding.
The Gaza war has become the deadliest conflict for journalists in history, with reports indicating that Israeli actions killed over 180 to more than 270 journalists, mostly Palestinians, between October 2023 and August 2025.
Israel is openly targeting journalists. The IDF have shot anyone with MEDIA on their body. they have been since the Oct 7 attacks. Israel does not want their genocide or war crimes exposed, so they actively (and encourage) soldiers to target media.
And now the USA has sided with this regime to kill more civilians in Iran.
For comparison's sake, I wonder what Iran's numbers are like.
This video is ANTI SEMETIC!
-The ADL, AIPAC, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, EVERY Republican!
Funny thing is most israelis arent even semites lol
And most arabs are
-Jonathan Greenblatt
Any world leader and politician not calling out israel government is evil and lying to people.
Life under capitalism, where 95% of your leaders are trying to think of better ways to exploit you.
So, will Keir Starmer comment on this or is his mouth too busy wrapped around Netanyahu's dick?!
Any moment now.
I heard this on the radio, it sounds so bad.
Does it maybe seem like the pilot intentionally missed, though--disobeying orders? Isn't this like missing an ant?
it supposedly was shrapnel munition, so you want to hit closeby but not necessarily on the target. But the bomb went through the hole and exploded in the canal under the street which is what saved his life. I see no reason to give an IOF stormtrooper the benefit of the doubt. They wanted to kill him, but accidentaly bungled it simple as.
It's in the exact same spot as a previous strike. It's called a "double tap" attack, and it's a war crime.
The guy only survived because the bomb went off inside the crater from a previous strike, he would've been turned into powder if that had exploded in the surface.
Right, but how do you screw that up? Isn't targeting computer controlled, or no?
To a degree it is, but target selection is (or should be - there are reports of the IDF using AI to designate targets, which is a whole nother omnishambles) done by human hand. If there is a group of people inside the lethality radius of your bomb, then you are designating them as targets.
Not sure I understood exactly what you're asking?
I'm asking how you miss like 2 or 3 people with a damn missile and modern targeting.
I think it was a paveway according to other comments here. Big and heavy, not accurate to the meter, not modern. Targeting is less important than the weapons technology. Incredibly advanced targeting algorithms still won't steer a big dumb jobbie from the 1970s any faster under changing wind conditions, for example.
If you mean missing an ant with a gun, then maybe. But it doesn't look deliberate, and the explosion could have killed them anyway
They can target specific buildings in a group. They put that bomb exactly where they wanted to. He was targeted.
The one I responded to assumed he was missed on purpose, I don't argue he was not targeted, I argue it's practically impossible to miss him by so little on purpose and not make him die in the explosion at the same time
Valid. I also heard that they didn't really target him, they targeted his truck, but still, you target anything near people, and they are at great risk of shrapnel injuries if you don't get entirely blown up, and reportedly this journalist was injured by shrapnel. I don't know how he could have avoided it by anything but sheer luck.
Oy im out of date. When did israel started attacking lebanon and why?
They have been attacking Lebanon every day since the "ceasefire" with Hezbollah.
If you want something even crazier, Israel just bombed Syria who is not even involved in any of this and even helps Israel.
The Middle East is now just Israel and temporarily embarrassed Israel.
The Middle East is now just Israel and temporarily embarrassed Israel.
And a lot of very confused and out of place American military.
That was (ostensibly) in response to Syrian leadership going after the Druz, whom Israel needs to keep Syrian Muslims in check.
They've been playing this sectarian card for decades now. They only care about dividing Syria and weakening it regardless of who's in charge.
With all eyes on Iran, Israel decided it was enough cover to try and conquer Lebanon again.
Hezbollah insurgents have started trying to retake parts of their country, with Israel focused on Iran.
The Israeli response has been to kill a bunch of civilians in retaliation.
That highly feels like it was targeted at him.
It was either targeted at him, or a double tap strike at the same place to kill medical personell if the first strike hit someone.
classic
I hate Israel as well, but you both appear to be wrong. It looks like they were just finishing taking out a bridge by hitting the last part that was still standing.
Not saying this is good, and I'm not defending Israel, but that's what this strike was.
Blowing up bridges with shrapnel warheads. Sure.
Edit: since everyone thinks I'm a liar, I'm basing this info on OP's comment in this post that added more info:
How in the world can you tell it is a "shrapnel warhead". I'm no weapons expert (you obviously aren't either), but I'm pretty positive most shrapnel warheads detonate well above the ground to pepper the target with shrapnel and have a much wider area of kill. This bomb clearly penetrated the road and exploded just like a high explosive warhead would, which is used to destroy buildings and bridges and whatnot.
Read the article
I do not see an article linked in this post, but again, if you look at the frame by frame, it's not a shrapnel warhead, and whoever say it is does not know what they are talking about. It is a high explosive warhead that is designed to penetrate the object they are targeting and then explode from within to cause as much damage to the structure as possible. A shrapnel warhead would have little to no effect on a concrete and rebar structure.
My mistake, I was referring to the comment OP made with additional info. Take it or leave it I guess.
You were absolutely wrong. In the two frames, you can see the bomb just as it penetrates the roadway, and then the next frame shows the explosion is obviously happening from underneath
/inside of the bridge from the way the blast looks. You are bullshitting and don't know what you're talking about. And again, I'm no expert, but I clearly know more than you. This was a high explosive warhead not anything designed to create shrapnel as a primary goal. Obligatory fuck genocidal religious nut job Israel but making shit up doesnt help anyone and ruins the credibility of people spreading the lie.
I was basing it on the additional info posted by OP in the comments:
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/19696548
I guess you can take it or leave it
How can you tell? Genuinely interested as I thought the shrapnel was just blasted rubble.
I mean it definitely looks like a low bridge there's railing on either side and the big hole in the center of it looks like a hole in a bridge.
This is very common in the Ukraine-Russian war where both sides launch multiple munitions across a bridge to take it fully down in the center.
You can also see all the rebar sticking up in the first hole, which definitely indicates it is a bridge and not a road. Roads don't have rebar through them. Bridges do.
Oh thank you, I meant for the type of warhead.
Look at my other comment to prole, it's absolutely not a "shrapnel warhead". A warhead with shrapnel as its main design would detonate well above the ground and pepper the ground with shrapnel and would have little effect on a bridge.
Saw it, makes sense to me, thanks.
I was basing my comment on this comment by OP adding more info:
https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/19696548
It wouldn't be all shrapnel. There's obviously explosives too.
It's in the article
Ah, shame on me.
Edit: Wait, it's a video, what article?
My bad I was referring to the comment OP made with more info:
Thank goodness they didn’t double tap him.
Why am I not surprised that it is Israel that makes such mistakes?
Once is a mistake, twice maybe, 738363727th time surely aint a mistake. These fuckers just like killing people for no reason.
It's not for no reason. They do it to hide their ethnic cleansing and illegal expansionism.
A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state.
Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion
Nice way to justify murdering journalists.
Oh, did he get murdered?
You must be very disappointed he was not
What the fuck are you talking about, answer the question
You've justified the murder of journalists, whether this one was murdered or not. It was attempted murder, which carries all of the intent of a successful murder. And we're seeing the video precisely because of survivorship bias. The 300 or so other journalists the IDF have murdered in the last 2 years were not so lucky.
Give your head a wobble mate, you're literally out here justifying the murder of press in war zones.
Give your head a wobble mate, you're literally out here justifying the murder of press in war zones.
They won't get it, the good-vs-bad is so rooted so deeply in their thought process that they don't even realize it. At this point it's just cheering for every death of a "bad guy". It was bad when it started with celebrating the deaths of "terrorists", then collateral damages started to be fine as well, as long as the target died too, and somehow we ended up here, where full on war crimes and genocides against civilians are okay, as long as they are the so-called bad guys or in the way of a mission against them.
It's honestly sickening. They are all human beings, and we all bleed all the same. Just because someone's been born in a Hezbollah-controlled shithole, or is working for an irrelevant Russian TV outlet, they don't deserve to die, and it doesn't make their death acceptable.
How incredibly disheartening that was to read
So no.
And no, I'm not justifying anything.
I could ask you to point to where you think I justify killing but what a waste of time it would be, asking questions to people so fucking deep in the political delirium.
Your first comment.
You don't care he was bombed because he's "the mouthpiece of a terrorist state".
Comes out with a spicy take, then tries to walk it back when it shows an ass of themselves.
I hate lemmy, I swear I really do.
Read the first comment you damn illiterate. I swear you fucks are so blinded by hatred that you interpret shit however you like...
I doubt anyone is convinced that I'm hateful or illiterate.
You don't care he was bombed because he's "the mouthpiece of a terrorist state".
Seems like a pretty fair paraphrasing of
A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state. Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion.
Or is there some hidden meaning you think should be obvious?
"A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state.
Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion" - murvel
You said that, that's your own words. How is one supposed to interpret that exactly other than being okay with just the attempted murder of a member of the media who is covering genocide?
That I don't care would be the sane interpretation, but then again I am talking with fucking lunatics
Says the insane man.
Is that the exact quote? No!? Oh because that's your dumb shit interpretation.
I doubt anyone is convinced that I'm a dumb shit.
You don't care he was bombed because he's "the mouthpiece of a terrorist state".
Seems like a pretty fair paraphrasing of
A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state. Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion.
Or is there some hidden meaning you think should be obvious?
So you think that when a propagandists from one terrorist state gets killed by another terrorist state, that it's not ok? Because dude has a press badge?
I understood their post just fine.
Yes, I think that is not ok. Do you think it's ok? To kill an unarmed video team using a guided bomb?
Where do you get that moral code from? You're surely not claiming to be religious or rational?
By the way, most states are engaged in terrorism in one way or another. The US most certainly is a terrorist state. So you're saying anyone should be able to bomb journalists from any country? Which countries are exempt?
Yes, I think that is not ok. Do you think it's ok? To kill an unarmed video team using a guided bomb?
Where do you get that moral code from? You're surely not claiming to be religious or rational?
They stated that they were bombing that bridge. Mouthpiece went over to the area they knew Israel was targeting...this isn't about moral code. If that was a bullshit Fox news "journalist" doing this to Iran would you cry foul?
By the way, most states are engaged in terrorism in one way or another. The US most certainly is a terrorist state. So you're saying anyone should be able to bomb journalists from any country? Which countries are exempt?
Any journalist worth their salt, isn't going to areas that have been stated will be bombed. They don't because they're not idiots.
If that was a bullshit Fox news "journalist" doing this to Iran would you cry foul?
Yes, I absolutely would. I don't wish Fox news journalists dead, as disgraceful as they are. Though I doubt any of them would have the courage to report from a war zone.
Any journalist worth their salt, isn't going to areas that have been stated will be bombed. They don't because they're not idiots.
That's not how it works in the Geneva conventions, though. The reason it doesn't work like that is because then any aggressor state can simply designate an area for bombing if they want to keep the press away from it, then they can commit any and all kinds of crimes against humanity there with zero civil oversight. Also, let's say Mugabe had killed journalists in an area because he had warned he was going to attack there, we all would've cried foul. So that's not the rule.
The rule is really simple and clear: don't target noncombatants.
Edit: another thing, can you show me any evidence that this journalist knows the bridge was about to be bombed? I find that incredibly difficult to believe, so I can't just take that on faith sorry.
Yes, I absolutely would. I don't wish Fox news journalists dead, as disgraceful as they are. Though I doubt any of them would have the courage to report from a war zone.
That's impressive, considering that war doesn't work that way.
That's not how it works in the Geneva conventions, though. The reason it doesn't work like that is because then any aggressor state can simply designate an area for bombing if they want to keep the press away from it, then they can commit any and all kinds of crimes against humanity there with zero civil oversight.
Not how that works at all. A journalist is a civilian, targeted attacks on civilians is against the convention, not attacks on infrastructure (unless it's a hospital or school), bridges are %100 allowed to be attacked. Even the USA let's civilians know they're going to be doing massive bombings usually as a courtesy to the country they're attacking.(Dunno if they still do since the orange turnip took power though).
Also, let's say Mugabe had killed journalists in an area because he had warned he was going to attack there, we all would've cried foul. So that's not the rule.
The rule is really simple and clear: don't target noncombatants.
They didn't target non-combatants they targeted a bridge. This is the same shit a lot of insane dictators do, stuff a bunch of military shit in heavily populated civilian areas, then cry foul when civilians get killed. What you're doing is saying, if you strap civilians to your planes then they're no longer weapons or infrastructure of war. You don't get to bend the rules and cry foul.
Edit: another thing, can you show me any evidence that this journalist knows the bridge was about to be bombed? I find that incredibly difficult to believe, so I can't just take that on faith sorry.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079
Israel does this a lot, they also do roof knocking. This in no way defends the terrorist state of Israel. It's just pointing out facts.
Also in this thread people have already called out that the munitions used are not shrapnel bombs like this journalist suggested, it's a standard high yield explosive designed to destroy infrastructure, not kill people. If it was a shrapnel bomb it would have gone off above the ground, just like the HIMARs rounds that Ukraine uses to inflicte mass casualties to russian forces when they're all clumped together.
Nonsense. If your munition's lethality radius includes a civilian, you are targeting that civilian.
Your link is from 2023, so it cannot be evidence that this journalist knew the area was about to be bombed.
Look, I think at this point you're just a shill for Zionists, and that means it's not worth talking to you any more. So I'm not going to go point by point because it's a waste of my time.
You've abandoned reason before you came to discuss anything, and I can only explain things to you, I cannot understand them on your behalf.
Bye
Lol provided evidence, said Israel is shit all over this thread, and still I'm called a Zionist shill lol
War sucks, but you're being willfully naive or ignorant.
Are murder attempts okay if they fail?
Is your ego so fragile that you cannot simply answer the question?
That's because they don't know the RT is a russian mouthpiece....that and there are a fuck ton of tankies here who think russia can do no wrong.
Thank you, some sanity in this thread, finally!
He's a British man, but he was working for the Russian state-controlled media organization Russia Today. So, I don't think you can really call him a "journalist" anymore.
He is still literally a journalist whether you like it or not. FOX News says their content is entertainment, but I wouldn't bring that point up if one of their reporters was violently targeted in their line of work.
No, he's not a journalist. He's a propagandist working for the Russian government.
A propagandist can be a journalist, a teacher, a doctor etc. You don't bomb unarmed people you disgusting peace of trash
I think I've missed the part where he said it's okay to bomb unarmed people, can you point it out?
journalists are protected under international humanitarian law in war zones by saying he is not a journalist he is alluding that that person deserve to die for being a propagandist
You don't bomb unarmed people you disgusting peace of trash
Because I noted that he's a propagandist, you think I supported his being bombed? That's all you, my friend. I said nothing about that.
Who are you tring to fool scum
Wow, you're really stupid, huh?
You may not realize this, but being a journalist provides him with protections. As a journalist he should not be a target, same as a medic. No matter whose side he is on, he is not a target. By attempting to strip him of this title, you would also be stripping him of his legal protection from military targeting.
Most people agree that journalists (even "enemy" journalists) should not be targeted by weapons, for what should be fairly obvious moral reasons.
I hope you understand now why you are experiencing such a huge level of disagreement here.
As a propagandist, he's putting all the legitimate journalists in danger.
No, he isn't. That would be the IDF. They don't have the right to bomb journalists, regardless of legitimacy.
"Netanyahu had a warm relationship and "personal friendship" with Russian president Vladimir Putin. In his 2022 book, Netanyahu wrote positively about Putin and describes him as "smart, sophisticated and focused on one goal – returning Russia to its historical greatness"
Propagandist is your opinion. He's a journalist because of the press pass that he's holding, that's why I used the literally signifier.
It is ok to kill him then
No
He should have been in an IDF tank with full Israeli censor over the content instead of on the front lines getting bombed by Israel. That is what real "journalism" looks like.
Yeah he’s a propagandist. But him getting bombed is still a WTF moment.
If he had been working for the British state-controlled media organization the British Broadcasting Corporation, would you still call him a journalist?
Yes, because the BBC hasn't been caught repeatedly coordinating with state intelligence services to spread disinformation, setting up astroturf campaigns to spread misinformation, funnelling money to "influencers" to destabilize governments, secretly operating media outlets under other names in other countries, etc.
Ok, so double standards it is, then. You like the BBC, so you ignore all the shady shit they do, but you don't like RT so you highlight their problems, and hold both to different standards.
You need to read about critical thinking. It will make your world a much less confusing place.
"The shady shit they do"?
Do tell.
Irrelevant. The point is that you believe you get to decide, based on some convenient criteria of your own choosing,which news outlets can call their workers journalists, and which ones will be classed as propagandists and therefore lose the right to safety from military strikes.
Effectively you think you should get the power of life and death over people who are putting their lives at risk to report from war zones.
You are a coward, decreeing all this from behind an anonymous profile on the Internet.
C'mon, do tell.
☝️
Wild to see 280 people upvoting content from RT, which is literally a Russian propaganda outlet. But thanks for the list of 280 people whose votes I can safely ignore, I guess.
What russia propaganda is spread in this specific video? This is also a community about insane videos so they upvote insane videos
It's propaganda because it shows how Israel bombs indiscriminately while they're at war with Russia's ally Iran. This is effective propaganda because it's true.
The word russia was never mentionned in video. Yes RT do propaganda but it is not in this video
The video literally has a watermark on it that says russia in big letters in a twitter handle. You clearly did not watch the video or are lying.
Propaganda doesn't mean you don't ever report news accurately, lol. In fact, effective propaganda relies on it.
I never said he is not a propagandist. I said a propagandist can be a journalist or any other job relating to public affairs
I think the point he's making (and at least which I was making with the article, and it's actually a really good read) is that quality propaganda is inherently hard to discern by it's very nature, and in this time of war with Russia, we should probably do even the small things we can to avoid known Russian propaganda outlets.
Or do you disagree?
He is claiming that doing propaganda strip you of the titlte of journalist which would mean that person is not a protected person in war zone. It is like someone getting hit by a car and someone else talking about how the person who was hit was a bully who hurr many people. It is a justification of violence
No, I don't agree with that. The reporter doesn't have anything to do with it.
It's about not watching known propaganda outlets, because despite their information being accurate most of the time (and convincingly small lies other times), they usually have an agenda as to where they want to take you, feelings-wise.
For example, during WWII, Germans would've never tuned into Atlantikssender if it had been lies. No, it was (mostly) accurate reporting (with wins and losses, Germany always lost a bit more than they actually did, and the Allies always won a bit more than they did). What made it propaganda, aside from the small exaggeration, was Vicky mit drei Küssen, or "Vicky with three kisses", who was an actress of German origin, who had escaped to England, and was there to make the German soldiers just feel like the war is bullshit (which it is, as a larger phenomena as well, so that's not in any way untrue either) and to imagine being home with their better half. Or if they didn't have one, made them imagine having one.
I'm not saying this reporter is any of those things, or in any way involved with Russian propaganda at all. I'm saying RT is, and we can't possibly know which of their material is bending the truth and how. Obviously it isn't this, as shooting journalists is pretty common for Israel, but the larger point is still that we can't know, so just avoiding anything RT is the best way to go.
"Justification for violence" pssshhh, I'd say "good try", but it really was not even a good try
But the other user complained about the journalist not the russia media
No, they didn't.. ?
He mentions RT being a Russian propaganda outlet and people upvoting it. Nothing about the journalist or the event is mentioned.
I was in the wrong sub discussion. Sorry about that
Happens to the best of us, no wörries.
LOL hang the fuck on. You're saying the explosion we all saw didn't happen?
GTFO here.
Did not say that. I said what I said. I said this is from RT which is a known outlet for Russian propaganda. Why are you so intent on sealioning for a known propaganda wing for the Russian government? Actually, never mind, don’t answer, I don’t care. I’m not interested in debating with authoritarians, fascists, and tankies. You all can respectfully go lick grass.
Oh yeah, this video is clearly Russian propaganda.
Are you that much a conspiracy theorist that you lost all pragmatism in life? It doesn't matter where this video comes from, it is what it is.
Sheesh you must be fun at parties
What are you even on about? Weird
HEY GUYS I FOUND THE ZIONIST
Don’t try to drag me into being trampled by harassers by making McCarthyist claims about what I believe with zero evidence. You are the worst type of person. Blocked.
Did you write this from your Fuhrerbunker?
But thanks for the list of 280 people whose votes I can safely ignore, I guess.
Cool, and we have a list of hasbara accounts like yours.
Wow thanks for the threat man that’s fun to wake up to. I guess I must have really upset the tankie mothership to have gotten so many threats today. I do not support fascists or authoritarians of ANY kind, wild to see that you only dislike them when it’s not daddy russia.
Like seriously, you in particular confuse me. What are you doing on the anarchist instance if you’re going to go out of your way to threaten people for calling out state-controlled media? Such a hypocrite.
What threat though?
WAIT is there a way to block someone's votes from influencing the count your client displays?
Yup, it takes some programming but I find it quite handy for avoiding botnets and tankies.
Oh geez, do tell.
Make a pull request! If I block someone, then I also want to ignore their votes.
Wild to see this comment having such downvotes.
I mean, not actually.
But it's nice to see.
RussiAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHGHHHGGHGHGHGHGHHGGHHG!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for confirming you're a dumbass, blocking account. Makes it easy.
RT journalist so it's hard to believe. Or could have been staged. The way they describe the bomb and the "good luck" it didn't kill anyone
I only get my news from trusted CIA cutouts owned by billionaire oligarchs
It's possible to dislike propaganda irrespective of who is dishing it out.
What news source, pray tell, is not propaganda?
The best today are a short list of YouTube channels. Truly independent investigative journalists are a rare treasure these days.
This, I agree with
There are many that don't exist exclusively to push the narrative their owners want to get out there, don't be so obtuse.
That claim is ridiculous. Name a single media source that does not slavishly serve the political context it arises from
AP, Reuters, BBC World Service.
There's three.
And you think all three of those are meaningfully independent from the anglo-american military/espionage cartel?
You're the one making the claim. Please provide credible sources that prove that they're compromised.
It could be argued that you are the one making the claim. Why is the default assumption that the sources are trustworthy until proven otherwise?
Even if I accepted the burden of proof, what evidence of this would you accept?
Do you think you can read about it in your favored Western sources?
Just admit you can't backup your claim.
Ok, if you insist on doing it the debatebro way
Here's the first 3 BBC examples from https://lemmy.ml/c/ManufacturingConsent(all posted within the last week)
Inb4 "those don't prove anything"
Yes, I asked you what evidence you would accept so will you answer that now?
Do you see now why that's actually the interesting question?
the debatebro way
Asking you to back up your claim is "debatebro" now? Jesus fucking christ.
- "Israel says 'limited' ground operations under way in Lebanon"
I don't see the problem, it's reporting what they said without any editorializing.
- "finding the BBC had failed to respond adequately and within the 20 working days stipulated by law."
They didn't respond in a timely fashion to a records request. I'm not sure what that is supposed to prove.
- "At least 153 dead after reported strike on school, Iran says." vs "Nine dead in missile attack on Israel as Iran strikes region"
I remember at the time that there was some confusion as to who attacked the school. Trump denied it, there was some talk that it was an Iranian missile that failed to launch, so I understand the caution in attributing the attack. For the second one, there was no problem with attribution.
Inb4 “those don’t prove anything”
Well, they don't but you preempted me so I guess you win the internet today. Congratulations!
Asking you to back up your claim
That's a very interesting way to put "ignoring the interesting questions and coming back with the smug taunt"
Which is what you did again here.
Media control is a system that works across a whole society. I'm sure you believe that about China.
I ask again for the final time: What evidence of that pernicuous and pervasive system existing in the West would you accept?
I ask again for the final time: What evidence of that pernicuous and pervasive system existing in the West would you accept?
I haven't answered because it's a dumb question. How about some evidence that's convincing?
The examples you cited aren't even close to convincing.
To recap, you made the edgelord claim that all news sources are propaganda. Back that up or quit wasting my time.
It seems we've reached an impasse. I'm not interested in doing a sources duel when you refuse to engage with anything else. The idea that media can be neatly characterized into "propaganda" and "not propaganda" is childish and absurd at face. This will be my final reply
This will be my final reply
Thank fuck for that.
Yeah, because it matters which journalist is targeted. The good guys are obviously allowed to target journalists of the bad guys.
You are an absolute fucking retard, just as anyone agreeing with this stupid ass take. He and his team are fucking civilians. They are not legitimate targets.
They're a mouth piece for Russian propaganda, and as much as Israel can go fuck itself, they literally told people they were targeting the bridge and finishing up the road destruction. Even fired warnings shots...this guy is a known propagandists for russia.
Oh, my bad, right. Ignoring collateral civilians isn't a war crime, because obviously they've been warned to fuck off. This is an amazing concept for journalism, you just tell any journalist that is uncomfortable for you to get away or they die, and if they don't, you just kill them. Isn't that great?
Civilians are not a legitimate target, without exceptions.
as much as Israel can go fuck itself, they literally told people they were targeting the bridge and finishing up the road destruction"
"Fuck israel, but actually no". If the same clip would've been from the Ukraine with a Russian shell in the background, you would be protesting the fucking ICC already.
You're a bootlicking asshole, excusing war crimes with pathetic double standards. Fuck you, and everyone coming up with that unhinged argument of "It's not a crime if the good guys done it", "it's not a crime if the victim was a bad guy", or both at the same time. Fuck you, and your moral pseudo hight ground. People like you are part of the reason that the US and their Israeli buddies can invade, genocide and cripple whole countries with close to zero backlash and with zero consequences.
Oh, my bad, right. Ignoring collateral civilians isn't a war crime, because obviously they've been warned to fuck off. This is an amazing concept for journalism, you just tell any journalist that is uncomfortable for you to get away or they die, and if they don't, you just kill them. Isn't that great? Civilians are not a legitimate target, without exceptions.
Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.
"Fuck israel, but actually no". If the same clip would've been from the Ukraine with a Russian shell in the background, you would be protesting the fucking ICC already.
It's just Ukraine.
Russia doesn't announce that it's going to bomb a bridge, or location. They just hit civilian apartments.
You're a bootlicking asshole, excusing war crimes with pathetic double standards. Fuck you, and everyone coming up with that unhinged argument of "It's not a crime if the good guys done it", "it's not a crime if the victim was a bad guy", or both at the same time. Fuck you, and your moral pseudo hight ground. People like you are part of the reason that the US and their Israeli buddies can invade, genocide and cripple whole countries with close to zero backlash and with zero consequences.
The actual fuck are you on? Israel needs to be de-armed and basically neutered, but so does Russia and it propaganda machine. Get off your podium kid, nothing I have ever said has been in support for Israel or the US wars.
Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.
Again, fuck you and your arrogance. You know who's mouthpiecing for who, what strikes have been called where and by whom, and seemingly everything else. Obviously, there isn't a chance that Israel could've lied about that and deliberately striking this guy as claimed, since the Israeli government and IDF have proven to not misreport anything and they have never deliberately targeted civilians, journalists, medical personnel, or other persons of interests. Even the OHCHR stated concerns about the excessive bombings on infrastructure in Lebanon and the impact on civilians, potentially considering those as a war crime. Israeli officials threatened to do the same razing to Lebanon as they did in Gaza, and already started to do the same mass displacement orders (also a war crime btw), but they are just warning them to fuck off before they bomb the shit out of them, so that's all fine, right?
And what is journalism then? Broadcasting from a luxury hotel far away claiming all is well? Those people risk their life to show what's actually happening, and that's exactly why they are protected.
So yeah, I seem to be more okay than you, at least I'm not excusing war crimes and accepting civilian casualties.
Get off your podium kid, nothing I have ever said has been in support for Israel or the US wars.
And yet you're excusing obvious fucking war crimes. Keep lying to yourself and get back to that delicious boot.
Again, fuck you and your arrogance. You know who's mouthpiecing for who, what strikes have been called where and by whom, and seemingly everything else.
The fuck are you on about? It sounds like you're just shouting at the wind. Lol you must not be able to read, or research shit.
Obviously, there isn't a chance that Israel could've lied about that and deliberately striking this guy as claimed, since the Israeli government and IDF have proven to not misreport anything and they have never deliberately targeted civilians, journalists, medical personnel, or other persons of interests.
Dude is literally standing in an existing warning shot crater with the bridge in the background....use your eyes for once, and not your mouth. You seem to be real good at trying to make up silly arguments...
Even the OHCHR stated concerns about the excessive bombings on infrastructure in Lebanon and the impact on civilians, potentially considering those as a war crime. Israeli officials threatened to do the same razing to Lebanon as they did in Gaza, and already started to do the same mass displacement orders (also a war crime btw), but they are just warning them to fuck off before they bomb the shit out of them, so that's all fine, right?
At what point did I say it was ok? Please please show me where I stated what Israel is doing is ok?
And what is journalism then? Broadcasting from a luxury hotel far away claiming all is well? Those people risk their life to show what's actually happening, and that's exactly why they are protected.
Knowing that an area is going to be bombed before hand to get views is not journalism....and it's quite hilarious that you're simping for RT.... assuming you got a little tankie in you.
So yeah, I seem to be more okay than you, at least I'm not excusing war crimes and accepting civilian casualties.
Yea cause that's what I was doing lol, you must have slept through school to be that bad at reading comprehension.
And yet you're excusing obvious fucking war crimes. Keep lying to yourself and get back to that delicious boot.
Lol as I said kid, please show me where I have excused what Israel is doing lol
At what point did I say it was ok? Please please show me where I stated what Israel is doing is ok?
Your initial post was "they fired warning shots, he still went there it's his fault", I called you out on that. You doubled down with:
Are...are you ok? You do know how wars work, legitimate or not ones. You target infrastructure, that's what Israel was doing here. This idiot knows where they were going to be bombing, and set up near it. This isn't journalism.
You are literally dismissing any argument with "They targeted infrastructure, which is fine, and the journalist is at fault for being there"
and it's quite hilarious that you're simping for RT.... assuming you got a little tankie in you.
Let's go, you also need to call me a snowflake for your retard bingo card. Should've thought you're a fucking American. Saying a journalist is a human being and has his human rights is simping for RT and being a tankie. You have lost any respect and value of a human life, like most of the US unfortunately.
I'm fucking done wasting time with this bipolar shit. You're doubling and tripling down into points claiming that you're not making those points, and you're not interested in anything else than making your own point anyways, so whatever lol
Your initial post was "they fired warning shots, he still went there it's his fault", I called you out on that. You doubled down with:
No you didn't, because cried foul because I stated that he is a russian mouthpiece and that wars don't work like you think they do. I even said that what Israel is doing is bullshit, but I also don't cry foul when a propagandists goes to an area that's being bombed and then screams he was targeted.
You are literally dismissing any argument with "They targeted infrastructure, which is fine, and the journalist is at fault for being there"
There is no other argument to be had here. This propagandist was in a spot, that was called out for getting bombed, it gets bombed and he screams he was being targeted.... literal definition of propaganda. Dude knew the bridge was getting waxed. It's why no one is visible in the area.
Let's go, you also need to call me a snowflake for your retard bingo card. Should've thought you're a fucking American.
Wait wait, the guy who has literally been personally attacking me, is whining when I say something back? Lol fucking hilarious kid.
Saying a journalist is a human being and has his human rights is simping for RT and being a tankie. You have lost any respect and value of a human life, like most of the US unfortunately.
Considering this journalist is a British citizen...and that Russia and Israel both need to be cleaned up like Germany was with Hitler...sure I do value some lives over others. I'm not afraid to say it, tolerating the intolerant is why you get these types of people.
I'm fucking done wasting time with this bipolar shit. You're doubling and tripling down into points claiming that you're not making those points, and you're not interested in anything else than making your own point anyways, so whatever lol
Yea... I'm the bipolar one, you literally couldn't make it a single post without personal attacks. Lol
You don't use shrapnel warheads to blow up infrastructure.
How in the actual hell do you stage a mk82 slamming into the ground?
What did RT roll up to the Russian AirForce and ask them to fly all the way to Lebanon to drop the equivalent payload behind a staged reporter and hope he survives?
That's a bit of a dumb question, although I seriously doubt this was fabricated. Aside from the video effects software we've used for decades to create exactly this sort of footage, just look at the front page of reddit to see the effect that broad access to AI video editing tools has caused. Footage is easier than it has ever been to fake these days, and as a result we have to rely on the credibility of the source. RT has zero credibility in general, but in this case they don't have a history of outright fabricating footage (just lying about the source, content, location, etc.) so I doubt this is fake.
However, it does throw into question his claims that they were never warned or that he was directly targeted - that strike makes plenty of sense and is directly on target if they're trying to demolish that bridge, and very little sense if they were using a laser guided munition to kill him. That landed wayyy out of the CEP for a Paveway II, so either the pilot missed intentionally or... they're trying to extend the initial damage to disable the bridge.