For a decade, Russia has submitted a text denouncing the ‘glorification of Nazism’

In the context of the war in Ukraine – and with Russia justifying its invasion, which began on 24 February, by the desire to “denazify” the country – many states that had previously abstained decided to vote against the resolution

In its explanation of the vote, the European Union recalled that it had been advocating “for years that the fight against extremism and the condemnation of the despicable ideology of Nazism must not be misused and co-opted for politically motivated purposes that seek to excuse new violations and abuses of human rights.”

According to the press release published on the UN website, Ukraine called this text hypocritical believing that, contrary to its title, it was a pretext used by Russia to justify its brutal war against its country and the despicable crimes committed against humanity.

The countries opposing the resolution emphasize at every turn that they do not in any way condone the Third Reich. “We reaffirm our strongest condemnation of all forms of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” Ukraine insisted in 2019, while recalling that 8 million Ukrainians died in the Nazi offensive.

Before the vote, Australia managed to get an amendment to the draft resolution adopted (63 votes in favor, 23 against and 65 abstentions) inserting a new paragraph in which the General Assembly “notes with alarm that the Russian Federation has sought to justify its territorial aggression against Ukraine on the purported basis of eliminating neo-Nazism, and underlines that the pretextual use of neo-Nazism to justify territorial aggression seriously undermines genuine attempts to combat neo-Nazism.”

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/11/09/why-france-and-51-other-countries-voted-against-the-un-resolution-condemning-nazism_6003471_8.html

Hmm…

deleted by creator

gestures broadly at the UK…

Because English is an arse of a language and I am a dumb dumb 🙃

A dumb dumb capable of providing credible sources though, which is funny considering the downvotes and the context of this thread. Maybe y’all aren’t as different from Gabbard as you think…

Proven? Is it? Care to provide some sources or argument beyond just an assertion? An administration does not an empire make.

It’s intriguing that posts with references get downvoted but posts without get upvoted. Great critical thinking Lemmy users 👍

Did you read any of my sources?

The BBC doesn’t outright say red is blue, because they’re not idiots and their target audience aren’t idiots, but to state they’re not comparable flies in the face of reason. They have shown on multiple occasions to push agendas, to the point that the criticism page on Wikipedia is huge. They are not the bastion of good journalism that they’re held up to be by the general public.

The Guardian has it’s flaws too of course but that is a far far better source than the BBC. It doesn’t claim to be unbias, it doesn’t lie to you that you’ll hear fair and even coverage from “both sides”, it doesn’t give preferential treatment to the ruling party in government because of fears its funding will be removed.

Edit: What’s scarier? An obvious bias source screaming nonsense 24/7 or a supposed unbias source subtly distorting facts when it suits them? Which will have more influence on public perception? Which is a better propaganda machine?

Nick Robinson and Laura Kuenssberg were by no means unbias (particularly Kuenssberg) and they were both previous BBC Political Editors:

https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24627111.laura-kuenssberg-worst-moments-boris-johnson-deleted-tweets/

The BBC were also found to be bias during the Scottish independence referendum:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report/

And they’ve had journalists call out pro-Israel bias:

In November 2024, 230 members of the media industry including 101 anonymous BBC staff wrote a letter to Tim Davie accusing the BBC of providing favourable coverage towards Israel and failing its own editorial standards by lacking “consistently fair and accurate evidence-based journalism in its coverage of Gaza”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC

The BBC are a giant government funded media company, they know how to present a good image of themselves and have years of good publicity and marketing to solidify that image. But be under no illusion that they are unbias. They push political agendas as much as any American private news organisation, just with more subtlety and an air of professionalism and officialdom to more legitimise their stance.

That’s not to say they don’t do good journalism or can’t be used as a credible source at times. But just to remember that they too are bias and have masters who push agendas.

Edit: to add more context:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/apr/22/bbc-tells-pm-evan-davis-to-stop-hosting-heat-pump-podcast

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/stephen-doughty-labour-mp-s-jeremy-corbyn-onair-resignation-prearranged-by-the-bbc-a6801846.html