top 75 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 102 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago

    Add to that ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan who has already been sanctioned by the US back in February for the crime of issuing an arrest warrant for a war criminal.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Sanctioning albanese is an abomination.

    it's not true to say al jolani was the founder of al qaeda. He was a part of jabhat al nusra which was affiliated with al qaeda. They split over disagreements and actually wiped al qaeda from Syria.

    Whether he's actually a terrorist is hard to say because the US designates any group it doesnt like as that.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Also, sometimes "terrorists" give up their armed struggle. That's something that should be encouraged. If you go with the idea of "once a terrorist, always a terrorist" then there's no incentive for so-called "terrorists" to ever change their ways.

    And, from a more practical matter, he's in charge of Syria now. If the international community wants Syrians to be free, happy and healthy they have to try to work with him. If they cut off all aid to Syria and refuse to work with him, then the only people who will work with him are all the various bad actors of the region. They shouldn't necessarily fully trust him, but they should give him an opportunity to show he has the best interests of the Syrian people at heart.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    These mental gymnastics that selectively apply to very few specific instances to prop up US interest is always wild.

    The Nazis gave up their arms too, why did the Nuremberg trials happened then? Why even have international laws against war crimes when you can just say what the west wants to hear and get off scot free. This is exactly the plan with Netanyahu too.

    You people are despicable ghouls that only concern troll with the moral high ground when it fits your narrative.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    They split over disagreements

    "Listen, are we proxies of the CIA or not, guys?"

    Whether he’s actually a terrorist is hard to say

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_al-Sharaa#War_crimes_of_al-Nusra_(2012%E2%80%932016)

    Under al-Shara'a's leadership, al-Nusra Front and Jabhat Fateh al-Sham perpetrated a series of war crimes, suicide bombings, forced conversions, ethnic cleansing and sectarian massacres against Syria's Christian, Alawite, Shia and Druze minorities. These included the January 2012 al-Midan bombing, which killed 26 people and wounded 63.

    🤔

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm sure he was backed by the CIA, people forget Hamas was backed by Israel. Doesn't mean Hamas is an Israel asset. The CIA like many others will play the dirty game of backing groups that they dont like if there is some strategy to it. Just like they did with the Taliban originally to fight the Soviets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    people forget Hamas was backed by Israel. Doesn’t mean Hamas is an Israel asset

    It's the age old "backing moderate rebels" strategy. Divide and conquer. Netanyahu armed Hamas to undermine The Palestinian Authority, then turned them into a Boogeyman the moment they had an electoral win.

    Hamas was an "asset" in the sense that it gave Israelis an excuse to continue ethically cleansing Gaza.

    Just like they did with the Taliban originally to fight the Soviets.

    So easy for westerners to ignore how the fundamental local appeal of the Taliban was to break the hold of the opium cartels (which the CIA/MI6 loved).

    As soon as the US toppled Mullah Omar's government, their allies in the drug trade rushed back in to rebuild the old opium trade. When they were finally pushed out 20 years later, the opium traffickers were pushed out with them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    asside, checked ADL, they treat her as if she's Hitler incarnate for talking truth, then checked Elon Musk's page on the ADL, practically nothing, no mention of his Hitler salutes, or that his AI is promoting Hitler and attacking jews.

    ADL is a fucking joke

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Guy on the left is an (ostensible) ally of Israel

    Woman on the right is not.

    Seems pretty straightforward to me.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    He cut off Iran's supply to Hasbulla in Lebanon, cut off Iran's reach to Israel, gave Israel extra strategic lands, let Israel destroy all previous regime's Russian/Iranian military equipments and now he has announced normalizing relations with Israel.

    Then US immediately rewarded him with investments and aid contracts from the other dictatorship gulf countries, who are good dictatorships btw they say USA Good. They invest in the US, ONLY allowed to buy US defense contracts, tie their currencies to the US dollar ONLY and basically keep all their country resources under the exploitation of the US for the mere beautiful American/Western-values sponsored cost of emprovishing and beheading their citziens every fucking month for talking on twitterz and depriving them of human rights :D

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] 12 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 76 points 1 year ago (27 children)

    Couldn't they frame this without the angry bearded Arab vs smiling white woman?

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That's just resting beard face.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    He doesn't really look angry to me. And he does have a beard and is Arab so those seem like things that will be in every picture of him.

    I'm sure hos photo is from the wanted list and hers is from her bio somewhere, but the juxtaposition just serves to magnify the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    This is not an image that just comes up if you search him. Oop chose to have this image instead of him in a suit with a kept beard.

    Edit: also amplify which fucking point, that people with messy facial hair in headscarves are terrorists?

    Edit 2: look at my bias with the messy part, sub in 'longer'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I think they were attempting to imply he was more dangerous than her and more deserving of being on the list. Its probably true, but tactically chosen pictures make the differences between them more extreme, less than a mug shot of her and a wedding photo of him would, as an example.

    I am surprised they didn't find the classic terrorist photo (holding a weapon) they usually seek out for these headlines.

    Compared to what I usually see, this is pretty mild.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] -1 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    No because the left image is what people have been sold as the stereotype of a terrorist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But the message is that we should be stereotyping the guy on the left because he's more dangerous, and not the lady on the right.

    And that's wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    If you were aware this was stereotyping why did you post it here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Because it shows that the stereotype were actually American plants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (12 children)

    I feel like we are having a conversation so I won't just ignore, but I don't understand at all what you mean by this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    ISIS and Al Qaeda are allies of America and Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    And that requires using stereotypes to communicate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] [S] 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    This is a perfect example of how the empire disguises spies, commits terrorist acts with them, launches a racist propaganda campaign against a people using their spy as example, and then it turns out to be their own guy.

    This is not a stereotype. It's literally the guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    I see it now, although still I don't think gachaing the US with those in on it topic is worth putting this imagery on the internet

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I agree. The text doesnt go much into him being a spy or an asset. It just sounds like its making a shitty point with a racist premise, like "look how absurd it is that this long bearded arab guy isnt considered a terrorist but this white blond lady is a terrorist, the usa must have lost touch with reality". I know theres a point there about silencing reporting on gaza, but its a bit too discrete, and the post sounds like reactionary ramblings. I think this probably wasnt intentional by whoever made this post.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I know, I never said it was somebody else. As I've said elsewhere, they could've picked any other picture of him but they specifically picked this one because it conforms to what people already think what a terrorist looks like. That's what a stereotype is.

    You put the imagery under the name to illustrate that they're a terrorist to people that already have the stereotype ingrained and it also ends up illustrating to other people that that's what a terrorist looks like. Worse, it normalizes the idea that stereotypes are a reliable source of information about people. This isn't bad because it's going to hurt his feelings, it's bad because it affects completely unrelated people.

    Honestly it's insane to me that this has to be explained to a presumed anti-racist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Should we have forced him to shave before photographing him, like the US military did in Iraq in 2006?

    Or should we clean up his image, as the US is doing right now?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's great because it shatters a preconception that this was about looks or terrorism. The list is "enemies of America". Like how people are very confused when you show them this image of Reagan and the Taliban.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    ISIS are the good guys now.

    We have always been at war with the UN Special Rapporteur.

    War is Peace.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    that kind of post always seem to me like "let me cherry-pick my context to complain about something without providing the real full context"

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Fuck america & tRump in particular

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I mean ISIS and Al Qaeda didn’t attack Israel once. I wonder who funds them. :-)

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Time for 9/11 on trump tower

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Wow, let's top discrimination by being racist.

    Both can be good or bad independent of their outward appearance.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] [S] 19 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    He's projecting the same orientalism back at the empire to illustrate a point. It was never about wearing a beard. Or even about joining ISIS.

    It was about not being a politically advantageous ally to the US empire.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    There are better ways to make a point. The implication is that he is worse because is Muslim.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The implication is that all the nonsense people have been fed about people being labelled terrorists because they are Muslim or wear a beard was a massive sham. And that the actual ISIS terrorists, not the targets of Islamophobic smears, are getting off the terror list for obeying America and Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You're saying all oop wanted to do by picking an old photo where the man they label as a terrorist wears stereotypically terrorist clothes was to imply that looks don't determine who you are?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yes. I don't think you know who Trita Parsi is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I don't. I did assume oop was a white guy and it seems I was wrong, but regardless of who posted you don't break down stereotypes by reinforcing them. If he's not being racist for the sake of it, then either he's being casually racist because it helps his point or he didn't double check if his genious takedown on stereotypes actually reinforces them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I don't know: it's inherently ambiguous. How do you know which is the man & which is the woman? Maybe they're the same person.

    Are you possibly misgendering & being racist? 🤨

    (I thought the message had more to do with the words than the images.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    And why are the pictures relevant? Because Middle Eastern men are terrorists by default, and attractive women are pure of heart?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Jolani is literally an Al Qaeda commander who is now the dictator, sorry, President of Syria. His thugs are massacring Christians, Druze and Alawites in the same way as his ISIS brothers were doing.

    But he is now the darling of the West because he isn't pro Palestinian and kisses Trumps ring.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What your saying isn't true.

    1. He was an al qaeda affiliate, he later wiped al qaeda from Syria with his group.

    2. There hasn't been a massacre of Christians as you espouse. There was some aggressive incidents caused by a few but Jolani has been deploying his army to safe guard Christians and their church's.

    3. There was 1 incident of an alawaite massacre after which he sent troops to calm things down. And promised to take those to account, we will see if he fulfills this promise.

    Other fights with alwaites are with old regime hold outs.

    No, he has not been going around massacring people ISIS as you espouse.

    1. Remains to be seen if he will be pro palestine or not. Israel seems to have been on edge since he's taken power.

    The truth is, it is too early to tell what type Jolani will be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    He was literally Al Qaeda in Syria. He founded and led Al Nusra front which pledged loyalty to Ayman Zawahiri. He split from Daesh and continued to align with Al Qaeda.

    He is a Sunni fundamentalist and there have been repeated accounts if Alawites, Druze and Christians being massacred. This is being whitewashed as counter insurgency by Western propaganda.

    According to the media he is about to sell out the Golan to Israel so it's clear he's a vassal to the US Empire.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Excuse my ignorance but last I heard they were explicitly not massacarring anyone or taking a strong stance in any way as to not get deposed before they were internally stable? And is the dictator part a jab at coming to power with a coup or is there something else?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    The massacres and targeting of minorities by ISiS is being under-reported by Corproate media, probably because Syria is now a vassal state of the US under Jolani.

    Here is some information

    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/04/syria-coastal-massacres-of-alawite-civilians-must-be-investigated-as-war-crimes/

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c307n9p43z9o

    Yes the jab was that Jolani, who was literally the leader of Al Qaeda in Syria, took power and has set out no path to elections, which doesn't seem to concern the West, provided he does Israel's bidding.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›