we are going to have a lovely discussion about this video >:3
I stopped watching at 28:38 when she frames Jimmy Dore as a crank for believing that the Syrian gas attacks were false flags.
I mean, Jimmy Dore is a crank on vaccines, horse paste, and probably several other things, but he’s right about the OPCW leaks.
Edit: Decided to continue watching anyway (even though I disagree) because her video is thought provoking.
Edit2: I got to her full explanation of the events [43:05] and it’s much worse than I expected. Her argument is “AKSHYUALLY the gas attacks weren’t PROVEN to be false flags, they were just proven to not have taken place in the way we were first told, and Jimmy Dore is a crank for believing that indicates it’s a false flag because he’s just emotionally motivated by his anti-imperialist views”.
Okay, but I’d argue that the false flag explanation is the next most coherent one since the official story has been debunked, and that you’re emotionally motivated by your disdain for anti-imperialists and “dictators who commit horrific crimes”.
Then she thinks she’s making a big-brained point when she says that the media could be telling the truth about the gas attacks while still be guilty of cynically exploiting them for their purposes.
Jimmy Dore is a crank on vaccines, horse paste, and probably several other things
that boomer pig is also a rogan-tier transphobe, which makes him eligible for the “advanced” section of the re-education camp (“gulag +”).
Clearly for Jimmy Dore, once a news outlet has been caught lying they can never be trustworthy again, which certainly has a lot of populist appeal as an idea [31:31]
…but… isn’t that accurate tho?? :cat-confused:
If there’s zero attempt at accountability, then yes.
There was more navel-gazey introspection over how they were suckered into covering Trump in 2015 than over how they ‘accidentally’ enabled a full on war.
