• Bloomcole@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    When they are ‘normally’ murdered by bombing them or whatever they usually use ‘found dead’ or some euphemism.
    In this case they use the world ‘killed’. Something must be really wrong then.
    Somewhere below the genocider apologetics, “without headlights or emergency signals” “alleging Hamas militants had been in the Red Crescent ambulance” it’s clear they had been EXECUTED, not killed.
    Never honest reporting from the UK regime press, always doing dammage control.

    • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Do you have anything to back this up? I’ve never felt The Guardian was using euphemisms

      • Bloomcole@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        They are supposed to act as the progressive paper in the UK but when it comes down to it they tow the line.
        Somewhat less obvious but still.
        Already clear from long ago.
        A good example is Jullian Assange and how they fully went along with smearing him and printing lies.

        Do you have anything to back this up?

        There is no obligation to do what anyone can look up themselves.
        Anyway, this took me 3 seconds to find:

        half a dozen current and former staff at the BBC, Sky, ITN, the Guardian and the Times have disclosed the extent of anti-Palestinian prejudice in their newsrooms.

        https://www.declassifieduk.org/battle-for-the-truth-pro-israel-bias-inside-uk-newsrooms-revealed/

        • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Do you have any examples of the Guardian dancing around the word ‘killed’? The fact you have to resort to their reporting on unrelated issues seems to suggest that’s not really the case