this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
140 points (97.3% liked)
World News
32291 readers
630 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Forget about what I claimed.
I'm asking you, personally, if you think North Koreans are starving.
It's a simple yes or no, but you're ashamed of the answer so you don't say it.
You never said it.
Glad you did. Not for me, but for everyone else.
Have a nice day.
Can you please quote where you said North Koreans aren't starving?
All you asked me were for sources.
I don't watch Fox news, so you're wrong about something you think you're "100%" on.
I wonder what else you're sure of but wrong about.
You still didn't quote where you said North Koreans aren't starving.
No, I don't watch Fox news. I don't watch any major news stations. I'm sorry this is too difficult for you to grasp.
P.S. Knowing that North Koreans are starving isn't a republican talking point. Most people in America understand that, regardless of political affiliation.
I'm not playing your sources game because you're just going to say anything that isn't "The Pyongyang Times" is invalid.
You still didn’t quote where you said North Koreans aren’t starving. Were you just lying about that? How come you keep ignoring this?
So, you accused me of not being able to read yet fail to quote the part you said I missed?
Also, what are you going to do about my 'right' to speak? You're not the decider of who gets to say what, lol.
That's only when dealing with rational people, which you clearly are not.
You still haven't quoted the part you said I missed, lol. Why are you so ashamed to say North Koreans aren't starving? You should be saying it loud and proud, but you know it's not true.
Right, you said that already.
How do you feel about people who ignore sources if it doesn't support their agenda? Does the 'burden of proof' work on them?
Or else what?