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
One can only commit an injustice against a person if it's an immutable characteristic? That seems dumb in and of itself.
Ftr, possessing drugs is not a immutable attribute either.
But if that's your hang up, the logical next thought would be "what if I take race out of it" and it's just a conservative cheering on someone doing serious jail time for possession of a small amount of marijuana.
Then that's a different issue and should be handled according to what a person does/possesses and why on a case-by-case basis.
You avoided an important question in my post which undermined your whole point.
I stand by my point, their desire (and probably yours) is to make a gun owner suffer because you don't like them, justice and objectivity be damned. It's just like a racist conservative.
I can't take your argument seriously.
People are (rightfully) glad that reckless idiots travelling to other countries carrying literal explosive devices have been arrested, and your takeaway is there is... racism directed towards gun owners?
You're delusional.
You and I both know this is not what I saying, why the dishonesty?
You're drawing parallels to racism because some people aren't up in arms that these idiots with explosives have been arrested.
That's pretty damn close.
Holy shit, more dishonesty.
People are glad that these people have been arrested for carrying explosive devices and you're drawing parallels to racism because of it.
That's your argument, and it's absolutely ridiculous.
And it's very funny that you're calling me dishonest, when earlier in the thread I mentioned that nobody was being punished for actions of their state, and you claimed you never said that. I then pasted you saying exactly that and you went off talking about something tangentially related.
No, what's ridiculous is you lying by claiming I said they are racist, and then turning around and lying and saying that I'm on people for not being "up in arms" about it, when all I've been doing is pointing out the injustice of the prison terms. I'm not even up up in arms about it. I just think it's wrong. But, don't worry, I won't lose any sleep if these people do jail time.
You keep flailing around trying to make my argument ridiculous, but all it does is reveal that you're uninterested in actually thinking about this, but instead just making up reasons in order to claim I'm wrong.
Yeah, because I said people want them to be punished because of actions of their state, not that they were being punished for actions of their state. At first I thought this was probably just a case of poor reading comprehension, but in light of your current dishonesty, I'm not so sure anymore. And, besides, even if I was being dishonest, that doesn't preclude you from being dishonest.
You can write walls of text about how "that's not what I said" all you like, but it's clear to anyone reading what you've said that you tried to compare racism to people being glad about these morons being arrested.
You also tried to claim you didn't say "unjustifiable position of thinking individuals should be punished for the actions of their state", when you said exactly that in your previous message, when referring to people traveling with bullets they brought in their own luggage.
If anyone's being dishonest, it's you.
You already quoted it, anyone coming here can see that what you claim I said I didn't. Screen capping it was entirely unnecessary. but good effort.