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
Jeez, and I seem to recall a few .ml accounts calling me a shitlib just before the inauguration because I didn't think the orange dumbass was going to do anything to stop bibi from continuing murdering people within a couple months.
People are being bombed to death in Gaza and your first instinct is to gloat about a political grievance. They were right to call you a shit lib.
Yep, my talking about tankies being wrong is gonna change bibi's murderous campaign. Good job, you've solved the gaza situation with how pure your thoughts are.
I'm sure the people being deported for supporting Palestine are very happy the "genocide enabling" Democrats lost.
republicans will allow a genocide in Ukraine though right? and news flash, democrats dont enable genocide, we are in fact, very against it, and we also in fact, didnt like biden either
That is why I put "genocide enabling" in quotes.
You must be extremely happy Trump is finally bombing Gaza too. Sure owned those tankies.
Definitely what I said
There have been 7 weeks of ceasefire this year. There would have been 0 under Biden.
wait....so if its biden its bad. but if its trump its "stop funding oversea wars" pot calling the kettle black a bit.
Both are bad. Between two bad options, the one that provides a 7 week ceasefire is better than the one that provides no ceasefire.
How are you so sure Harris wouldn't do anything? I'm very curious where this all comes from. It's funny because rep is like "stop wasting our tax money over seas" but when a president says "I won't be a part of it" then reps say "oohhhhh they support genocide oohhhhhh"
Like dude. It's a WAR overseas. Russia trampled Ukraine, shot and raped civilians. But what do reps say? "Stop funding a war overseas".
Like hypocritical, just stfu. Eat your words or go away.
Did Harris provide any small indication she would push for a ceasefire in Gaza? Did she regret anything the Biden administration do? No…
If you can’t have a civil discussion with someone who has a different opinion than you, it says a lot about your (lack of) character.
Okay then when did say anything about Gaza? Because I don't recall anything at all. When did she say "yes, let this war continue I don't care"
When she said she would not have done anything differently than Biden. That means refusing to apply any meaningful amount of pressure on Israel, even if it’s just for a temporary ceasefire deal.
She did, every month between becoming the nominee and the election. Cease fire + two state solution. The problem was, nobody was paying attention.
July: https://www.the-independent.com/tv/news/kamala-harris-says-two-state-solution-is-the-only-path-after-meeting-with-netanyahu-b2586161.html
August: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/23/politics/gaza-israel-harris-convention-speech/index.html
September: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-harris-says-two-state-solution-end-of-israel-hamas-war-is-crucial
October: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/harris-dodges-direct-question-on-palestinian-deaths-calls-for-2-state-solution-during-cnn-town-hall/3372480
Oh. So this is the opposite of what people are saying then.
Yup, as usual, lemmings a) not paying attention b) wilfully distorting reality.
She did, every month between becoming the nominee and the election. Cease fire + two state solution. The problem was, nobody was paying attention.
July: https://www.the-independent.com/tv/news/kamala-harris-says-two-state-solution-is-the-only-path-after-meeting-with-netanyahu-b2586161.html
August: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/23/politics/gaza-israel-harris-convention-speech/index.html
September: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-harris-says-two-state-solution-end-of-israel-hamas-war-is-crucial
October: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/harris-dodges-direct-question-on-palestinian-deaths-calls-for-2-state-solution-during-cnn-town-hall/3372480
Those are empty words, the same Biden had been repeating with zero conviction. Actions speak louder than words.
As VP she couldn't take action, that's not the job of VP. She campaigned on a cease fire and two state solution, you were ignoring what she was repeatedly telling you.
Yes, I try to ignore lies when I can. She could have spoken out against the complicity of the Biden Harris administration at any time, and especially once she became the presidential candidate and she chose not to, indicating it will remain business as usual with her.
Again, no, she couldn't:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5191087-harris-trump-biden-harris/
You're choosing to ignore cited sources, that's your issue.
Is this a joke? Are you pretending Harris did not make a choice here?
She didn't have a choice. Her entire campaign was Biden people and Biden money. She towed the line or had no campaign.
Of course she had a choice.
She had access to the campaign funds. https://hls.harvard.edu/today/can-kamala-harris-access-biden-campaign-funds/
Campaign funds that would have evaporated if she tried to backbite Biden.
After dropping from the race Biden no longer had control over the campaign funds.
Besides, even if we were to imagine that Biden could still hypothetically somehow take away the campaign funds, Harris still chose to play ball.
Again, the money came from Biden people. If Biden said "pull the money" it would have evaporated. Harris wouldn't have had more donations, and her staff would have left.
This is how politics works in this country.
How do you “evaporate” money that is already under Harris’ control?
The money she had access to when she became the nominee was already spent, it would not be replaced if she broke with Biden.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/17/us/politics/harris-campaign-finances.html
The article you shared does not substantiate your claim that "the money she had access to when she became the nominee was already spent"
Besides, she raised plenty of money on her own https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/07/kamala-harris-drives-record-fundraising-after-biden-exit/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-campaign-fundraising-1-billion/
Campaign funds that were there to fund a losing message.
The electorate wanted a break from Biden, and if Harris' campaign funding relied on not breaking with Biden, what does that tell you about the influence and intent of that funding?
It wasn't just the money, her staff came from Biden as well. So she would have had to re-build the entire campaign from scratch with 30 days to the convention and 100 days to the election.
It wasn't possible, and everyone (well, everyone outside lemmy) knew that.
She took a gamble, a stupid one. Stick with Biden, keep his infrastructure, hope for the best.
It was a losing gambit, but it had a better chance of working than going out on her own.
Harris' rhetoric of a two-state solution and ceasefire were no different than than Biden's rhetoric, both were not genuine. Both are on record for opposing the weapons embargo, which was THE way to force Israel is agree to the ceasefire. It was always empty rhetoric, meanwhile the administration continued to fund the genocide with billions of our tax payer dollars.
Year of Empty Rhetoric From the White House on Israel’s Wars
Here Are 34 Polls That Show A Ceasefire & Weapons Embargo Help Kamala Win
Kamala Would Have Won With A Weapons Embargo
Good thing Biden wasn't on the ballot then
Harris went on record, repeatedly, claiming she would have done nothing differently than Biden.