By Marni Rose McFall
A video of a Ukrainian soldier shows her appearing to successfully shoot down a Russian cruise missile in her first combat launch.
Natalia Hrabarchuk, who was a nursery schoolteacher before the Russia-Ukraine war, was filmed destroying the Kh-101 long-range missile on Sunday morning during the latest of Russia's large-scale attacks, according to the Ukrainian air force.
Moscow launched a "massive, combined attack," of approximately 120 and 90 drones across Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a statement released early on Sunday.
In the statement, Zelensky said that Moscow had used several types of missiles, including its hypersonic Zircon and Kinzhal missiles and the Irania-designed Shahed strike drones. Kyiv reportedly intercepted more than 140 of the incoming targets, Zelensky said.
The footage of Hrabarchuk, shared on X, formerly Twitter by the Ukrainian Air Force account said that: "On the morning of November 17, soldier Nataliia Hrabarchuk successfully shot down a russian cruise missile using an Igla MANPADS. It was her first combat launch and first successful hit!"
Newsweek could not independently verify the veracity of the video.
The !news team has recently changed course and opted out of the bot. AFAIK it will still operate in !world and !politics, but I want to share the news and thank everyone who has given feedback, downvoted, and protested the bot. This isn't over, but I feel we've reached an inflection point.
I've experienced Rooki acting inappropriately and immaturely as well. This recent incident is part of a pattern of behavior.
CNN is owned by conservative billionaire John Malone, one of the largest landlords in the world. An example of its right-wing bias is when they put an obvious Trump Supporter on their recent panel of 'undecided voters'.
According to Parker Molloy from The New Republic, this isn't "an isolated case of questionable representation in CNN’s voter panels. In fact, it appears to be part of a troubling pattern stretching back years." She suggests it could be "a potential willingness to mislead viewers for the sake of compelling television." - media ownership and their profit motive, and complicity of the media elite are the first and third filters of the propaganda model.
Harris and Walz picking CNN is futher evidence that the the Democrats are not a left-wing party.
CNN is owned by conservative billionaire John Malone, one of the largest landlords in the world. As a corporation whose main product is selling eyes to advertisers, it would be correctly categorized as a right-biased organization.
An example of this right-wing bias is when they put an obvious Trump Supporter on their recent panel of 'undecided voters.' According to Parker Molloy from The New Republic, this isn't "an isolated case of questionable representation in CNN’s voter panels. In fact, it appears to be part of a troubling pattern stretching back years." She suggests it could be "a potential willingness to mislead viewers for the sake of compelling television." - media ownership and their profit motive, and complicity of the media elite are the first and third filters of the propaganda model.
The job of flak organizations (fourth filter) like MBFC is to center corporate news that is favorable to power, and push voices critical of it to the periphery.
Dave Van Zandt's site, Media Bias Fact Check puts The Guardian and Breitbart in the same (Factual Reporting: MIXED) category of credibility. Apparently this is because they both have articles where the facts are contested. This ignores the difference in size of the two news sources' publication rate, the number of articles contested, and the seriousness and type of errors. Van Zandt is not a social scientist, and should not be running a credibility gatekeeper when he doesn't understand statistics, science, or bias.
MBFC uses a fundamentally flawed methodology for categorizing bias. Lemmy.World loses credibility every day this bot continues to operate.
Dave M. Van Zandt has no academic media literacy qualifications. He's not a social scientist. He should not be running a site that is being used to censor news feeds.
He admits that his system for judging 'bias' is pseudoscience, but at the same time claims that MBFC's purpose is to debunk pseudoscience. He appears to have no idea what science is. His methods for rating credibility are not public, repeatable, or by his own admission falsifiable.
He is actively harming media diversity and LW should be ashamed for taking this charlatan seriously.
Good question. Someone could write a thesis or two about it.
The named people are merely the central facilitators of the scheme. The general lack of consequences for the uber-wealthy named in the papers has been an ongoing theme, the lackeys getting away without a conviction is just the cherry on top.
Cracking, unlicensed MAME, jailbreaking - these should be free-speech fundamentals that are instead prosecuted as crimes.
Don't confuse support for Palestinians as support for Hamas.
Probably January 5th Capitol Riot defendants, unfortunately.