That site is garbage. The atomic unit of propaganda is not lies, it's emphasis. NYT (and most western news media have supported every single military action the US has done when it mattered.

This isn't reflected in their ratings, since they don't need to use lies to get people believing wild misconceptions. It is reflected in the way the American people are mobilized to support each military action.

Old enough to remember there were lots opposing it as well. Just.like the current Gaza war.

Except none of them meaningfully oppose the gaza war. The closest thing to criticism you'll hear from a mainstream source is how Netanyahu personally isn't carrying out the war out humanely enough. Note that this is not actually opposition to the war, since it just calls for a return to the state of slow ethnic cleansing that spawned the war. They oppose the way and rate the settler colonialist ethnostate carries out ethnic cleansing, not the settler colonialist ethnostate whose national project requires ethnic cleansing.

Just as in the Iraq war, nobody was saying "This is bad, and we should leave now, there's a million people protesting it outside" until like 2006, when the plans to leave were already drawn up (a schedule Obama maintained).

There was a million "The war is good, but it's being done poorly" and later on "The war is bad, but we're here and have to carry it out more competently", but the idea of not pursuing the war was so toxic, republicans would accuse democrats of wanting to "cut and run" (in the same way they accuse democrats of being insufficiently supportive of Israel, despite literally going around congress to keep the weapons flowing).

Are you old enough to remember how every single mainstream journalist promoted the Iraq war? (no, "maybe the war could be executed more competently" is still supporting the war) How about Libya?

Isn't it funny how the mainstream media just happens to align with the state department every on every single issue?

We'll be able to push the wolf to the left after the election!

Well if they can't convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire's ownership. If not, there's always the next in line.

Historically this has had mixed results

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeFzeNAHEhU

Edit: This still cuts off the end of the video, but it does show more

There's also a bigger picture with Tank Man, that shows the mostly empty square the tanks were leaving, with a handful of soldiers and bikes.

And a bunch of other photos showing the battle that took place in the surrounding streets, with cops that had been lynched and burned and protesters gunned down.

The evidence disproves the western narrative of tanks machine-gunning protesters inside the square, then liquefying bodies, that were then burnt and washed down the drain (and getting stopped by Tank Man on the way out).

That's not to say the Chinese claims should be taken at face value, but nothing I've seen contradicts their claim of 300 dead and several thousand wounded.

smh, 30 years ago, all the Japanese car manufacturers advertised lower HP than their engines could output, now they're lying in the other direction?

Honda got caught doing it too: https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/toyota-honda-mazda-and-suzuki-fall-foul-of-officials-over-falsifying-data/news-story/61b5393556e69d7b056af1628a7da2c6

Liberalism has a “my rights end where yours begin”

No, it's always been the defense of exploitation when it comes into conflict with any other supposed right.

Here's one of my favorite books, it goes through the history and evolution of Liberalism: http://acdc2007.free.fr/losurdo2011.pdf

It's special because most liberal thought is taught as something that was born, fully formed, from the minds of men in the 1700s, and exists entirely divorced from context and material conditions.

Liberals want governments and collective public elements to protect the rights and freedoms of individuals (from other individuals, organizations, and governments).

If the overarching "freedoms of individuals" is the freedom to exploit the labor of individuals then yes, that's the core of liberalism.

If by "collective public elements" you meant collectivizing the means of production, then no, that's socialism/anarchism/other.

Yeah the context is that many indigenous people depended on the buffalo for food.

It was basically the same as when Israel pours concrete down wells and burns olive groves that took centuries to get that productive. They knew for every buffalo they killed, an indian would starve.

That image is similar to the rooms full of luggage in Auschwitz in what it represents.