Oh, what’s that watermark at the bottom right? Oh, the site whose bread and butter is unsubstantiated, pseudoscientific conspiracy theories? Wow, I’m so surprised. I guess astrophysics journals aren’t credible now either because some shitty flat Earth website says they’re all secretly controlled by NASA.

Hi, MBFC bot, you forgot to account for the fact that this is a wire story from the Agence France-Presse, one of the best, most credible news agencies in the world. As usual, you’re less than worthless.

MBFC calls both The Guardian and Breitbart “MIXED” in their factual accuracy. For Breitbart? It’s because they’re an alt-right disinformation factory which as a policy denies fundamental and provably true scientific facts like climate change, spreads baseless, trivially disproven conspiratorial nonsense, and intentionally misleads readers left and right. For The Guardian? Well they’ve failed five fact checks in the last five years, and these fact checks are as robust as, umm…

“Private renting is making millions of people ill.”

“Private renting is making millions of people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”

MBFC is a joke, and this bot is a pathetic sham.

MBFC calls both The Guardian and Breitbart “MIXED” in their factual accuracy. For Breitbart? It’s because they’re an alt-right disinformation factory which as a policy denies fundamental and provably true scientific facts like climate change, spreads baseless, trivially disproven conspiratorial nonsense, and intentionally misleads readers left and right. For The Guardian? Well they’ve failed five fact checks in the last five years, and these fact checks are as robust as, umm…

“Private renting is making millions of people ill.”

“Private renting is making millions of people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”

MBFC is a joke, and this bot is a pathetic sham.

“Air Canada believes there is still time to reach an agreement with our pilot group, provided ALPA moderates its wage demands which far exceed average Canadian wage increases,” CEO Michael Rousseau said on Monday.

Petulant little bitch who’s getting their airline shut down says what?

I reported like three of their comments, and they were:

• A comment that told another commenter “fuck you”.
• A comment that calls Islam “a shit religion for shit people”. Rule 4 of this community reads: “Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.”
• “Antisemitic leftists run this shithole.” (if you don’t believe this specifically violates rules, that’s cool, but I also can’t imagine calling this an “abuse” of the reporting system.)

Was there a fourth one? Was that the abuse of the system? I’m just confused here. (Didn’t downvote you, btw; just genuinely perplexed.)

Edit: in fact, ironically, this user’s account seems to have been banned ostensibly for the things they’ve said here, and while LW’s ToS aren’t the exact same as PS’, they’re extremely similar. I can’t think of anything weird or out there that PS does in their ToS that means would’ve gotten banned on PS but not on LW.

Also, “I am not advocating genocide, but” is so telling about how they actually feel. They’re reveling in this but have to hide their true colors. Good thing they’re really awful at doing that.

“Genocidal zionist furries” definitely aren’t the first thing I expected when I came to Lemmy, but here we are I guess.

The quote above is literally a verbatim ruling by the ICJ telling Israel to “immediately halt its military offensive” because it could “bring about the destruction in whole or in part” of the Palestinian people living in Gaza. I’m sorry that basic English literacy is antisemitic to you.

First sentence actually: “Experts, governments, United Nations agencies, and non-governmental organisations have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people during its invasion and bombing in the Gaza Strip during the ongoing Israel–Hamas war.”

You know who else was found to have committed genocide through accusations by international organizations, NGOs, governments, and experts? Literally every government that’s committed genocide in the history of fucking anything ever because there’s not a god of genocide that descends from on high to inform humanity that a genocide has been committed. Like I know this genocide-denying argument is being made in bad faith, but can you at least have some dignity about it and make it seem like you’re at least trying to be intelligent?

The ICJ – which Donoghue is a part of – speaks for itself, and the ICJ tells Israel to stop their genocidal invasion. Israel as a rogue state run by a far-right government aided by its corrupt supreme court refuses to cooperate with this order and continues to commit genocide.

And your source is UN Watch, a lobbying group tied to the Israeli government. In the BBC interview, she clearly gets into pedantic legalese about how “the court determined that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide”, and the fact that UN Watch is taking that as some kind of pedantic “own” is pretty telling. What’s especially curious to me is that this video was posted in April, but you fail to acknowledge that the ICJ a month later ordered Israel to halt its offensive in this case.

The State of Israel shall, in conformity with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and in view of the worsening conditions of life faced by civilians in the Rafah Governorate:

Immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.

Your entire comment history is genocide denial; go deny it somewhere else.

Israel is, as we speak, carrying out a genocide in Gaza.

Netanyahu is perpetrating a far-right genocide. Pass it on.

Repost of: https://lemmy.ca/post/27963922

They only need to scooch that ‘D’ in the acronym over three letters, and I think they’ll have something.

Moreover, I’ll never understand the people who think that shadowy cabals like this intentionally leave extremely obvious clues. Somewhere like Russia, sure, you want to have plausible deniability while still making it obvious that "I did it’. But why would someone wanting to kill these two people for some unspecified reason want to kill them both on the same day? That’s the absolute last thing you want to do if you’re trying to cover something up.

I like how despite copy-pasting these large excerpts as a Gish gallop, you cut it off right before:

Further, while The Guardian has failed several fact checks, they also produce an incredible amount of content; therefore, most stories are accurate, but the reader must beware, and hence why we assign them a Mixed rating for factual reporting.

That’s not at all what mixed is?? If you fail like five fact checks in five years while you put out more than quintuple that amount of articles per day, that’s not “MIXED”, and it’s literal orders of magnitude different than the disinformation factory that Breitbart is.

Moreover, the fact checks don’t even seem to be accurate. “Private renting is making people ill.” “Private renting is making people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”

Absolutely asinine.

Nope, nope, back it up a step. If your organization claiming to quantify “Factual Reporting” calls Breitbart “MIXED” in that respect (let alone puts it on the same level as The Guardian), you have absolutely failed at your job and do not deserve to be taken seriously by anybody.

“B-but then how will I poison the well for anything that challenges a center-right status quo by introducing it as biased (relative to the US’ center) and questionable without using an armchair analyst whose methodology is in no way scientific?”

Edit: to clarify what MBFC considers “MIXED”:

Further, while The Guardian has failed several fact checks, they also produce an incredible amount of content; therefore, most stories are accurate, but the reader must beware, and hence why we assign them a Mixed rating for factual reporting.

They list like five fact checks, while The Guardian puts out basically quintuple that every day. And moreover, this is the sort of asinine nitpick that they classify as a “fact check”.

“Private renting is making people ill.” “Private renting is making people ill, but maybe this happens with other housing situations too, we don’t know, so we rate this as false.”