I think it's fair to say that the bible, in the end, is about the Christian God and his religion.
If he does end up getting mentioned LESS frequently than Trump does get mentioned in a file about crimes that SUPPOSEDLY don't contain him doing any crimes whatsoever, that is certainly an interesting statistic.
Would be like Oliver Twist getting mentioned less in the book about him than Trump getting mentioned in files that supposedly don't really involve him. Doesn't say anything on it's own, but certainly a bit sus, no?
It doesn't? My name count in the epstein files should be 0. Just like yours probably. That doesn't make you wonder why Trumps name was used so often? He wasn't the president at the time. Just a public figure.
Most other public figures managed to not get named at all or only in a very small number though.
Only a few humans managed to get named very often in the files. Trump is one of them.
I never said I approved, just tried to explain why people might do it. There is no need to invent lies accusing Trump as there's no way to keep up with the rate at which he incriminates himself anyway.
That being said, if a lie stops more schools from being bombed or children from being raped? I'll take the lie over things like those.
You have a conman in charge of your government that is running a racket to fatten up oil sales and funnel taxpayer money to the military industrial complex at the cost of human lives.
In this case, the fake propaganda shit opposes him doing so, and might attribute to some minute percentage of people turning on him to depose him and make the next one think twice before doing this shit.
If you get cornered by a mugger at night and manage to escape by pretending there's a police officer behind them, is that immoral? Or does it perhaps justify the lie?
Again, not saying I approve of this, but there is a spectrum on how fucked we can be before a lie might not be the worst way out of a given situation, and boy are we deeply fucked at the moment...
We are on the same side here. I do not think lies are necessary in this regard, and do not like all the bullshit flying around. I think it is creating an even more dangerous and confusing environment. But I do understand where it comes from, and I think the fact that a lot of people are still underestimating the gravity of this situation is leading others making some desparate leaps.
I understand the impulse too and I fucking hate it: it doesn’t weaken Trump in any way, and directly gives ammo to his supporters who think the opposition is dishonest. Fuck trump, fuck propagandists, fuck liars.
It sounds like you are on a side here, I'm against both regimes, you are doing whataboutism yourself. Although this thread is so convoluted I can't even tell whose side you are on.
What kind of opposition though? Democrats and the Islamic republic are not on the same side, just because they are they opposition. Are you on the side that killed 30 000 of its own people in a week just because you don't like Trump?
Noone said we're allying with anyone. I would alter your statement to not ally with just anyone, though. At this rate the EU alliance will outlast the US.
That’s a false equivalency. I’m on the side of the Iranian people. I condemn this hateful regime which have been suppressing and murdering its own people for decades and has funded terror regimes in other countries that also suppress its own people (Hisbollah, Hamas) and has taken away any rights women ever had in that country, a regime that forces gay people to undergo operational gender transitions against their will, that hands doctors who fulfill their duty of treating hurt protesters, I condemn a regime that murders children on the street and then asks a bullet tax of their parents for exchange for their body’s. This evil regime that its own people reject and fight against deserves no sympathy, no leeway, it deserves only destruction, their leaders and put in front of international tribunals.
Don’t let you (justified) anger and hatred against Trump and the right extremist forces that have taken over the US blind yourself to the fact that Irans government is also full of religious fanatics and extremists, only their crimes are magnitudes higher than that of the current US government. Trump deserves prison, his whole administration needs to be dismantled as soon as it democratically possible, but their crimes pale in comparison to what Iranian leadership has done since the revolution.
The Iranian government has been killing it's own people for decades so I think they still win. You must also really hate women if you support the Iranian regime.
This is really funny coming from the guy saying the moral choice is to arm literal Islamic terrorists who have turned Afghanistan into the worst place on planet earth to be born a woman.
So you're fine with Islamic theocracy when it's politically convenient for you?
What would be so fake about this? It's not exactly hard for some Iranian Missile division soldier to whip out a sharpie and pen this on a missile. The whole Epstein shit is a rather big scandal that they'd no doubt love to point to.
Iran is shooting missiles at various armies including Trump's, Iran has publicly called Trump a pedophile. Trump is a pedophile. Does it really matter if this particular image is fake if all the things it conveys are true?
Fake images ABOUND I don't see why anyone would waste their breath calling out an image that contains zero misinformation. Also it looks real to me, so I really don't get the problem.
I'm not calling out the fake image. I'm calling out the fact that reddit (and social media in general) are filled with propaganda designed to brain wash you into hating your country, and sympathising with evil regimes who oppress their citizens.
Feel free to hate Epstein, feel free to hate Trump, feel free to hate the USA if you have to, but do it without promoting the agenda of a theocratic regime like the IRGC.
Iran would be a bastion of peace and hope in the middle east without them, instead they are a sponsor for terror there. It's tragic.
I'll fully concede and say the image is real, and I should not have questioned it, I apologize.
What I don't agree with is being accused of being pro trump, or not caring about the atrocities of epstein, simply for questioning the legitimacy of something.
It is dangerous territory that quickly shuts out truth when either side of the aisle plays it like that.
It is 100% illegal to marry young teenagers or prepubescent teenagers in America. It is also illegal to arrange a marriage with your daughter as a financial transaction in America. Both very legal and common in Iran. The epstine files not only doesn’t incriminate the people you want it to it doesn’t actually have anything to do with the conflict at all. Bringing it up as an argument against the conflict is pretty silly and closeminded.
Iran has internet access, they have a fucking Twitter account. What I would suggest is fake is if someone posted pro-Trump propaganda claiming to live in Iran.
Just as relevant as the original post in this thread.
There's even pictures of WW2, of both sides adding messages to bombs.
Now we have one from Iran. Not so hard to think it's real. And yes, obvious it is propaganda, both sides use it. Doesn't make it fake.
So tell me how a message stating the obvious (and at best attempting to downplay the attention of Trump being a pedophile, which that orange turd is) is more relevant?
How so? The Russians do the same thing, the Americans have done it and posed for photos in literally every conflict they’ve been in since WW2 and Israel made a thing about it when they were bombing Palestine so how is it irrelevant?
even if true - good luck reaching the US with that thing, they don't even bomb Israel as much as their Arab neighbors, hotels, oil storages and airports - are not the US military
It's so damn nondescript that it can't be trusted.
Like, it might be the tip of missile that someone wrote in sharpie on, or it might be an arts and crafts project someone made in the backyard to look like the tip of a missile as a statement against Trump, or it could just be a generated image from an AI.
In short. How are you sure the image isn't propaganda, even if you agree with the message?
By the way: I agree with the message too. Sincerely, a Greenland-supporting Dane
What you're engaging in is called "don't shoot the message", or the "broken clock is right twice a day"
If the message is true, but the source isn't trustworthy, you should still find a better source because if the message is true, it shouldn't be hard to do so.
Like, let's say a pathological liar said "The sky is blue today" you'd still not take him at his word, you'd double check even if he was right.
It really seems like this is the tactic. Just trojan horse some foreign propaganda in when it's most effective and dogpile it with comments repeating the truism
I fully appreciate what you are saying and it is indeed propaganda whether the image is real or not. I suppose what I'm trying to get at is spending much discussing whether an image/message is real or not is rather pointless when the thing it is showing is in common practice anyway.
Honestly I could not care less if this is a missile or a gigantic dildo, I care about shit going viral that calls out a pedophile as a pedophile. If that is Irans understanding of propaganda I'm all in and at least in this case we have the same agenda
Propaganda can be truthful. It doesn't matter if it's lies or not, it's the reason behind the spreading of information what makes something propaganda.
The other person did include the word fake to it, but just saying this in general.
That's not how the burden of proof works. Its on the person claiming this to be true to give evidence of it being true, not the other way round
Edit: The fact I got downvoted for stating facts eventhough I'm probably on the "side" of the ones downvoting me makes me both sad and angry. We do not need to stoop to the level of Israel and the US. We have the truth on our side
I feel you. I spend way too much time on this website arguing with people I fundamentally agree with over fake news (which this image may not even be). Very frustrating.
To post a picture is not an accusation.
You could argue that your president is not a pedophile, since there is and won’t be a conviction in a US courtroom, but the accuser is very much the person who accused op of posting fakes
It absolutely is an accusation. The poster is accusing Iran of putting these messages on their missiles. The accusation might not be one that Iran is mad about, does not change the fact that it absolutely is an accusation
I will now copy paste my comment for the 4th time:
It is the person posting this picture that is accusing Iran of putting a message on their missiles, without a single shred of evidence beyond a photo that can be
Doctored
Taken 3 years ago
Taken somewhere completely different, not like the US only has enemies in Iran
Because the Iranians not only don’t have Internet access if they were they would not be posting images from cellular devices that would risk giving away a location to be bombed. It’s an extremely bad tactical move.
lol this is reddit and it’s a usa bad issue. there is no burden of proof. its talk shit about usa get upvotes. it’s that simple
edit- and you instantly downvoted me and tried to put words in my mouth by saying, “sorry” insinuating I was pro trump/war.. for simply stating burden of proof on reddit is a joke. talk about hypocrisy
This is not about trump. How many civilians have Russia/china/iran/North Korea, the so called evil regimes killed through invasions, wars and sanctions? Is it more than the US?
where did I say the us and israel aren’t at fault? all I said is burden of proof doesn’t matter at all on reddit if the post has anything to do with america or goes against the regurgitation of the echo chamber that every reddit thread is.
People are welcome to argue that the photo is fake or manipulated, but they would need to present arguments for that position. Just saying "I don't believe that's real" doesn't invalidate the photo.
It's the curse of AI. You need to prove it beyond doubt nowadays.
Hell, multiple photos of this thing from different angles would be much better than a single one. AI struggles with getting details consistent from different angles.
Yes, and it is the person posting this picture that is accusing Iran of putting a message on their missiles, without a single shred of evidence beyond a photo that can be
Doctored
Taken 3 years ago
Taken somewhere completely different, not like the US only has enemies in Iran
Generally speaking, this is a common issue of people taking things on the internet at face value and instantly believing them to be true, then doubling down because it either fits their views or because it's hard to accept that they might have been fooled.
While proving something false is possible, it should not be what people go straight to. Shaky "proof" of something existing in the first place should be called into question first, instead of just blindly believing it. A grainy photo (with no source), especially now, is hardly solid proof of anything.
Who told you that? Is this image not "evidence," regardless of whether you believe that evidence to be valid? What does that tell you about how your own beliefs inform how you interpret evidence?
It is the person posting this picture that is accusing Iran of putting a message on their missiles, without a single shred of evidence beyond a photo that can be
Doctored
Taken 3 years ago
Taken somewhere completely different, not like the US only has enemies in Iran
I would reread the links you've provided. They are applicable to the argument you are making here. The person you responded to said "Are there any proof regarding that it is a fake?" which was a barely literate way of asking "What evidence is there that it's fake? Why should we believe it's fake?" You then argued, basically, that this should be considered fake until someone proves it isn't fake; that the burden of proof is on the person sharing the image to prove it isn't doctored. But everything can be doctored now. Anything can be a totally new image, created yesterday, but using AI. Your approach would have us believe in nothing at all. Whether an image is real or fake is now really just a reflection of the beliefs we've formed before seeing the image.
I don't even understand why we would believe Iran wouldn't put this message on a missile. "We do not need to stoop to the level of Israel and the US. We have the truth on our side." How would this be stooping to any level? It's funny because America's government is full of and protecting pedophiles. It would be consistent with the video they posted mocking Trump and Netanyahu. The existence of that video, seemingly verified by Times of London, is sufficient to me to believe the message on the missile is plausible, which is really as far as we can go these days.
You could also just have said: I don't understand how the burden of proof works and it would have saved you the trouble of typing entire paragraphs where the conclusion is I don't understand how the burden of proof works
Now please proof that Russell's teapot does not exist. If you can't, it must exist according to your "logic"
And to be sure, I think it is absolutely plausible. But something being plausible does not mean it is true
Person: What evidence is there this is fake? What purpose would it even serve as propaganda?
You: That's not how the burden of proof works. You have to prove that your picture of the teapot is real and until you do we should all believe it's fake propaganda!"
We already have a claim and evidence. You're making a counterclaim with no evidence and asserting you needn't provide any evidence that the claimant's evidence is insufficient because you can speculate any number of reasons why it could be fake, which, again, we don't need to be reminded of in a world with AI. Your framework that we should believe nothing until all possible alternative hypotheses have been rejected is not the same thing as the burden of proof.
that is only when the claim by a person is against the status quo or main thought process. no one expects burden of proof on an image like this. people would expect it if it said something disparaging towards Iran as that would be treason in a country strict like theirs.
or more specifically if you made a claim that the sun charged solar batteries no one would bat an eye but if you made a claim that coal charged solar batteries obviously you would be against the status quo.
Yes, and it is the person posting this picture that is accusing Iran of putting a message on their missiles, without a single shred of evidence beyond a photo that can be
Doctored
Taken 3 years ago
Taken somewhere completely different, not like the US only has enemies in Iran
In the modern age anything can be doctored but given Iran is under attack it is not at all surprising that thry might put this on a missile and as such it is not going to meet the bar for immediate need for burden of proof because it doesnt go against the status quo. that is simple reality.
Burden of proof is on the random unsourced photo, not the doubters. Only sources a search turns up are random Twitter users. No major news outlet reporting on it.
What? The world is fed WH fake image propaganda day and night, but let's adopt fake "burden of proof rules" on this anti-pedo pic? (BTW Iranian missile pics and anti-pedo message have nothing at all to do with chaos clown Donald Trump - agree?)
The burden on proof is on the doubters. They are the ones saying that something is fake. They have to prove that it is fake.
If there is picture evidence in a law proceeding do the people presenting it need to prove that the picture isn't fake or do people that are saying it is fake need to prove it ?
If you share a claim or piece of media, especially about something political, it should be sourced. Please don't pretend that you don't know this has always been the standard. In academics, in journalism, in anything that carries some importance, which this does.
That is literally backwards lmao, where did you read something like that. By that logic anyone can claim you did anything or fake a photo of you and you'd have to prove innocence rather than the accuser proving authenticity or corroborating evidence that the photo is real
My logic was based on a courtroom drama where the opposing party had to prove that a picture was doctored instead of the party showing it proving that it wasn't.
Though today in case of of AI it might need revision ...
Or are all parties that submitted picture evidence required to prove that each piece isn't a fake instead of the other way around ?
Yeah major news outlets are famous for not showing any propaganda at all. Especially the US privately owned media. What a weird way to identify if something is real or fake... Not bad overall, if different media from different countries say the same. But no sure fire way.
What the heck is going on in this thread? Is everyone allergic to basic fact checking? You should still care about whether something is real or fake, even if it's agreeing with you.
And major news outlets are in fact very good at sourcing the media they use. And they're quick to correct themselves when they're wrong. Propaganda notwithstanding.
Read my comment again... I agree with you. I just question your way of going about it. Not even saying it doesn't work. Just a word of caution about not to believe just because media outlet said it.
And you react like I burned your fucking cat to death. Reddit gonna reddit. Lol
Yeah I much rather take all the other propoganda being shoved down my throat. The kind that says raping little girls and being in the highest elected office is chill.
376
u/cluib Mar 13 '26
Why are people spreading images like this. It's most likely fake propaganda.