World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Explain to me which of these comments you so generously provided screenshots of is evidence of my support for any of these things?
Sure, all of these comments are a fantastic example of the "other-ing" of Palestinians, while reinforcing and white-washing Zionist ideology.
You reference the birthrate of Palestinians followed by the subtle inclusion of the pronoun "them" or "these people" to indicate exclusion, isolation, and a removal of identity.
In that same comment you imply that it is unjust or unethical for Palestinians to fight for their own culture or statehood while tacitly ignoring the fact that the post-WWII Zionist movement regularly used terrorism which they justified via ethno-supremacist ideology and a perceived divine right in order to claim land that was already occupied. This is so laughably hypocritical that no good faith actor would make such a fallacious argument.
You argue that it is reasonable for Israel to use whatever cruelties they deem necessary in order to maintain the sanctity and security of their ethno-supremacist state. This includes indefinite detention and support of a crypto-fascist strongman leader. The reasoning you provide is "well other countries do it to". Yes, the most famous of which was Nazi Germany. It is not a mistake or merely a coincidence that Israel employs many of the same tactics that were used by Nazi Germany as there is a strong historical link between modern day Likud and Lehi who repeatedly sought to form an alliance with the Third Reich.
This same link between Lehi's support for National Socialist ideology and Lehi's influence on modern day Likud also provides historical context surrounding the justification for and continued expansion of settlements for Israeli Lebensraum.
Curiously you do not see the hypocrisy with supporting any and all Israeli "security measures" when that was precisely the justification that the Third Reich gave for preserving the pure Aryan heritage of their own ethno-supremacist state after the crippling sanctions that were imposed upon the Weimar Republic after WWI.
You paint Hamas as common thieves for having the audacity to sell HEBREW ARTIFACTS as though they have no right to even touch such holy relics from a superior culture. I'm taking some liberty here because while you did not say that directly, I am comfortable asserting that you certainly implied it along the way.
You also fail to mention that Israel has repeatedly destroyed cultural heritage sites, and continuously attempts to rewrite history by dead-naming anything that does not fit with the perception of an exclusively Jewish historicity in the region.
Beyond all this though, I find you to be ethically bankrupt, bigoted, hypocritical, and proud of supporting the same kind of behavior that you would find abhorrent if it were being done to you. Anybody who supports the mass killing of civilians over religious, ethnic, or socioeconomic differences I consider to be sociopathic and evil. It doesn't matter what the historical context is, that behavior is unacceptable. I don't give a fuck what Abrahamic religion they subscribe to, or which god they think gave them the go ahead. It is wrong, it will always be wrong, and continuing with more wrongs only leads to even more evil. So for those reasons I find your positions to be morally repugnant, and worthy of scorn.
Remind me to never piss you off. Lol
To be fair that person did actually invite me to critique them. I wouldn't have invested that much energy into responding otherwise.
Nevertheless, I don't envision getting in any disputes with you where you literally ask me to publicly dress you down. So I think you're safe 😅
No, feel free to correct me when I’m wrong. That’s how I learn. Just make sure to do it with the most esoteric vocabulary you can think of, because I like to look terms up. Lol
I used these pronouns in order to prevent the repetition of words. Seriously, you are grasping at straws.
No, you read into it what you want to read into it in order to achieve maximum personal outrage.
No, I describe the status quo and what is happening and why it is likely to continue. At no point am I supporting injustices like indefinite detention and if you go back in my comment history, you will find examples of me explicitly condemning these practices. In one of the comments you made a screenshot of I call these measures cruel. Does this look like me calling those things reasonable?
I don't even know what to say to your pseudo-intellectual attempt to somehow link what I wrote to a Jewish terrorist group and their relationship with Nazis. I mean, feel free to write an essay on this elsewhere, but I fail to see any connection with the topic at hand.
Again, you are remarkably creative in your liberal interpretations of what I wrote. I mentioned Hebrew artifacts to illustrate the absurdity of Palestinians claiming that they are the indigenous people of the land and as to Hamas selling them, 1) I wonder if some of them realize that what they are doing does nothing but undermine their positions and 2) no matter if it's Hebrew, Roman or Martian, it's still disturbing historic sites, preventing us from learning more about our shared past as a species. To quote that famous archaeologist with the whip, dashing hat and a talent for beating up Nazis: "It belongs in a museum!"
I'm not in the both-sideism business. I've got a hunch that you aren't either, except when you think it suits you.
You are not grasping at straws with me, but also with entire countries. When nation states assume control of an area, they tend to give places names that the predominate group in that state can pronounce and write down. Jenin for example was originally called Gina, then Ein-Ganim and Beth-Hagan before getting its current name, based on the original Canaanite name, as the result of Arab conquest. Are you just as angry with all of these past people for renaming places as well?
And I only need one word to describe you: Hysterical.
I can only advice to look out of the window for a second, maybe go for a walk, look at some trees swaying in the wind, listen to the birds sing and then evaluate how you are conducting yourself, how you are treating your fellow human beings, how you are accusing others you know nothing about in the most vile ways. Do you see a person frowning in public and immediately think that this person must be the worst human being in the world? That's what you are doing here. It's kind of sad to see someone who has such a good grasp of the English language waste it on going on a wild diatribe based on the worst interpretations of what others are writing, compelled by an almost religious desire to communicate to the world just how morally upstanding they are. I only wish that you become a better person and grow out of this eventually. Oh, and consider asking people about what they are actually thinking before assuming the role of a moral judge, jury and executioner based on nothing but your vivid imagination.
I appreciate that, thank you. You're quite the wordsmith in your own right. With that being said, I still don't like you.
Ditto. It would seem there are two points on which we can agree.
I won't belabor this conversation anymore. I said my piece, and you said yours. Therefore we are at an impasse. I don't hate you, but I don't respect you either. My guess is you probably feel the same. If we each consider the other to be a fool's messenger then at least we have parted on common ground.