BTW, yes. I do actually read Western reports condemning China, and most other Western geopolitical reporting. Whereas in my real experiencing debating right here on Lemmy, plenty of libs wouldn't even consider reading "tankie" resources defending China. If the latter applies to you, you might want to consider if you actually care about the truth or not or if you just love to hate certain countries.

[–] AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (13 children)

Love the bouquet of weasel words and qualifiers. "May have", "indications", "allegations", "may constitute"

I think there should be a general rule of thumb that when a Western news article uses this many qualifiers, it's probably bullshit and they're trying to cover their ass when it inevitably gets called out for being bullshit.

[–] cult@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago

a Western news article

This isn't that though. It's a UN report that's the result of an investigation by Michelle Bachelet (former president of Chile and head of the Socialist Party of Chile). The only reason you're seeing articles saying "may have" instead of making up some N+1 million figure (N being the last time they pulled a random number out their ass) is because that's the language the report uses

The report is linked in the second paragraph:

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/countries/2022-08-31/22-08-31-final-assesment.pdf

load more comments (12 replies)

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago

Great analysis of the western media coverage of the report as well as what the report actually says.