view the rest of the comments
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 !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
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
The NYT is garbage state propaganda with no more journalistic credibility than the Enquirer
Please. Of course the NYT are far from infallible, but "no more journalistic credibility than the Enquirer" is just a ridiculous statement. There's a lot to criticize about their reporting on Gaza, but at the same time they've published some of the rawest and most eye-opening coverage of the situation in Gaza I've come across.
The NYT definitely has problems, but saying it has the same credibility as the Enquirer just makes you look ill informed. 🤡
While I certainly agree to an extent, They’re not quite as bad as the National Enquirer, that’s ridiculous. I read the Archive version and it is very detailed and informative. Describes how Hamas, who we know is paid by Israel, spied and monitored Palestinians., to control opposition and prevent a two state solution. It’s no wonder everything turned out the way it did, Israel wanted it to. Bring on your downvotes bots
Edit:autocorrect
You 'know' they're paid by Isreal? I'm guessing you know this because of totally real sources based on evidence...? No? Oh a feeling in your tummy that you want to be true because it makes you feel better to avoid reality and imagine the world as black and white? OK.
This better?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html
https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news-01-20-24/h_4e542b6c91fa6b423bae6789075d8358
https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2023/12/12/buying-quiet-inside-the-israeli-plan-that-propped-up-hamas/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/israel-approved-millions-in-monthly-payments-to-hamas-for-years-to-keep-gaza-stable-report/ar-AA1lhyxu
https://www.thenation.com/article/world/why-netanyahu-bolstered-hamas/
There are many more articles but it’s obvious you’re arguing in bad faith. Does that make your tummy fuzzy?
Yes they are arguing that by allowing aid info Gaza this props up hamas they are right wing people saying that Isreal should have been harder on hamas - you probably think Isreal should allow more aid into Palestine so either you want to prop up hamas, you don't really belive this logic or consistency doesn't matter to you and you'll use any excuse to criticize Isreal.
You’re simply arguing in bad faith and dishonesty
Also you forgot to switch to your alt account
What are you blathering about?
Feign ignorance, move goalposts. I don’t debate liars
You made baseless accusations about alt accounts that doesn't even make sense and now me not knowing what you're trying to say is evidence I'm a liar? Are you OK? Or are you just deceptive and looking for an out on a debate because you realize that your bluster won't work and you have no facts or cohesive arguments?