this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
232 points (92.0% liked)

World News

32285 readers
1 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer seemed at a lost of words at the justification being used to bomb a refugee camp in Gaza.

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pensivepangolin@lemmy.world 39 points 2 years ago

It’s almost as if, and hear me out guys, ISRAEL ARE NOT THE GOOD GUYS HERE.

[–] ikiru@lemmy.ml 35 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Good Guys™ strike again!

[–] Zastyion345@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Strike I see what you did there :)

[–] MrKillmister@lemmy.ml 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think he just didn't know what else to say when he pretended they were losing sound.

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 13 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Wolf sucks. The IDF guy is admitting to mass murder right in front him and everyone. No self-respecting journalist would let it slide like that.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"There was a hamas commander so we dropped a giant bomb on a refugee camp full of women and children."

"It sounds like I'm hearing you dropped a bomb on a refugee camp full of woman and children to kill a hamas commander."

"No. Uhh, tunnels. Complicated situation."

[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 4 points 2 years ago

Wild to watch this CNN elder short circuit because he can't figure out how to make the narrative fit.

[–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 3 points 2 years ago

To me it seemed like he was struggling to give the IDF guy an out and make it fit the narrative.

[–] MayonnaiseArch@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

No self respecting anybody would be called "Wolf Blitzer" like what kind of dumbass childish crap is that

[–] Substance_P@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Not sure if it seems like the headline claims, but in my case, from what I saw, Wolf had a cutout over the satalite feed, maybe on purpose? I hate it when the video isn't added in the article.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I genuinely feel bad for any liberals who haven't figured out they're basically just polite nazis. That's gotta be a really rough realization. Spending your entire life thinking you're doing the right thing only to suddenly have it revealed that everything you were living for was a lie.

Now for those of them that are aware what liberalism stands for and are still going? Straight to hell.

[–] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You somehow twisted this in your mind as some kind of gotcha that lets you preen in your selfish politics.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago

Scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds

[–] HowMany@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Define "liberal". Then maybe the rest of what you said can fall in place.

[–] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Not OP but I think they meant supporters of neoliberal economic policy and somewhat progressive social policies. "Liberal" like American liberal politics. The point being that they think they have good politics because they think trans people are people and aren't the kind of right wing fanatic we get a lot of. They're "left" to the extent that the American political spectrum allows for without understanding what "left" actually means, without being conscious of the overarching machinations that make then think their politics are good even as they continue to feed a system that intentionally blinds them to any honest criticism.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

supporters of neoliberal economic policy and somewhat progressive social policies. "

There's nothing progressive about airstrikes on civilians. Never has been.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago

Henry Kissinger

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Liberal: White, far-right, genocidal, usually rich and supports literal nazis because their opponents are communists.

In a modern day context: Supports Ukraine because they're white and full of nazis, supports Israel because they're white and full of nazis.

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A Russia apologist, Surprise Surprise. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you...

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I fucking hate this so much. Anyone whose against nazis in Ukraine must automatically be a russia apologist. There is zero other explanation. Flat out the one case where they can flat out support nazism and then spin it like you're the one whose problematic for calling it out.

You do realize how dangerous that is, right? Remember how Prager U called everyone they didn't like communists and they were so universally disliked that it resulted in a huge surge in people identifying as communist? What makes you think this won't happen here?

And that's why they do it. It's two fascist nations are fighting, they want you to pick a side because regardless of which one you do, they win.

[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

These Russian sock puppets try really hard.

[–] Grapetruth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

It's "at a loss for words", not "at a lost of words".

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer seemed at a loss for words at the justification being used to bomb a refugee camp in Gaza.