this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
517 points (88.3% liked)
Political Memes
12493 readers
1603 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What "anti-west" positions do you think are bad?
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is bad, for example. The Genocide against the Uyghurs (https://xinjiang.amnesty.org/).
What should a state do when the most prolific invader in the world (i.e. NATO) starts amassing troops and weapons on its borders (or otherwise in position to attack, like with Iran), especially after a coup against a neighbouring state?
The one that hasn't been substantiated, one which the NATO-dominated UN concluded to there being no evidence for, one which your masters have long since stopped pretending to believe to have happened?
And no, Adrian Zenz' word is not proof.
Oh, hey, it's the same people that sold you on Nayirah's testimony. Do you believe that one, as well, since Amnesty said it was true?
Maybe not invade a neighboring country yourself, and then keep investing material and manpower after the invasion has stalled for no discernible gain.
What the UN conclude was that while there are reeducation camps and systemic discrimination, there is not sufficient evidence to say its a genocide. Which is like "We can prove that A killed B, but we can't prove that it's murder".
Funnily enough, it's only ever the deniers who bring up this guy.
That's a quite deliberate misconstruction of the facts. Amnesty International initially promoted the story, then they issued a retraction once they found that it lacked supporting evidence. There's no evidence of malpractice on their part.
You said what they supposedly shouldn't do (which would mean that Iran shouldn't have struck NATO puppets in its vicinity that house NATO bases and equipment, by the way). You did not say what they should do.
Also the implication that Russia is supposedly not winning when it has been advancing is rather silly.
Haha. What you are saying is actually "I can't prove that A killed B, but A definitely murdered B!".
Do you even know what a genocide is?
So far, the only source the proponents bring.
"You are wrong to say that Amnesty promoted the atrocity propaganda. Amnesty did promote the atrocity propaganda..."
Also,
Doing nothing would have worked out much better for them.
Thing being, Russia hasn't been advancing.
Maybe re-read my post. That being said, genocide is a deliberate effort to destroy a national, racial, cultural or ethnic group entirely or in part. The crimes against humanity committed by the Chinese government against the Uyghurs constitute such an effort. The UN might disagree, because they are slaves to capital, and capital would like to keep trading with China.
It's not.
Malpractice would be if Amnesty International had kept promoting the testimony after evidence had failed to come to light. You'd have to show that they acted maliciously and/or recklessly, which they didn't.
Also, your argument for why Amnesty shouldn't be trusted is because they fell for a fabricated testimony 35 years ago. If that's all you have, then it's actually a glowing endorsement of them.