Can you imagine the response if China or Russia kidnapped and abused an EU politician?
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
96 points (99.0% liked)
World News
36372 readers
389 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
What's some inhumane prisoner treatment when you are already doing a genocide.
I hope both activists are releases and returned to their home countries soon.
What’s some inhumane prisoner treatment when you
Had no legal jurisdiction or right to kidnap and imprison them in the first place.
Israel had no right to exist
Yeah, Isreal is known for how much they care about legal jurisdiction or rights in their genocide of the Palestinian people, that will definitely stop them from doing awful shit to these activists.
And let THAT be a Lesson to anyone trying to give STARVING AND DYING CHILDREN FOOD AND MEDICINE!
-The ADL! And Republicans! And Democrats! And Germany! And the UK! And
Interesting source. It’s basically a nationalized Turkish outlet:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anadolu_Agency
After the Justice and Development Party (AKP) took power, AA and the Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT) were both restructured to more closely reflect the administration line. According to a 2016 academic article, "these public news producers, especially during the most recent term of the AKP government, have been controlled by officials from a small network close to the party leadership."
Still, the writing is flat in a good way? I have found that reporting from politically captured sources (say, RT) can be conspicuously good, if it’s on an international subject that aligns with their incentives. For instance, Turkey's AKP is no fan of Netanyahu, hence AA is motivated to produce (seemingly) original reporting like this.
Could you give us an example of a source that isn't "politically captured"?
Not really, heh.
There are different degrees though, and different environments for each one, which is what I meant to convey. Like, AA is a better source for Gaza information than, say, Turkish political opposition parties.
Well, I was expecting you to say Reuters, allowing me to rip into them + AP + AFP. Was not expecting someone to say that the PKK is an unreliable source of information. Who sent you? That's supposed to be one of my takes!
You misinterpreted my, to be fair, vague statement. I meant AA is seemingly a bad source to read about opposition parties like the PKK, because of the obvious conflict of interest.
I mean, AP is a pretty decent source. It’s a nonprofit coop stretching back to 1846 in a country with, err, could-be-worse press freedom history, while AA has been explicitly state run since 1920, somewhat akin to VOA, BBC, Al Jazeera or RT I guess.
And yes, I know, AP is still an objectively bad source for specific topics, you don’t have to drill that in. So would whoever shills for the PKK, in some respects. But I’m not playing the game of “they did this and this, they can’t be trusted like them and them!” either. One has to look for conflict of interests everywhere, but it’s also okay to respect the good work long running institutions have done (like AA and this article).
Shame on france for not doing it job of protecting kidnapped citizens
And yet we’ll (USA) lift nary a finger.