Why does it really matter that issues can be “discussed” if the issue being discussed is as atrocious as what Israel is doing to Palestine.

Israel and the US know that what they’re doing is wrong. Them and their crony countries aren’t going to change course because of this.

It doesn’t exactly prevent WW2 if they tell Hitler to stop and he doesn’t listen…unless of course they choose to let him continue his goals unimpeded rather than go to war, citing their documented disagreement as sufficient counter action…

Damn, those Russian “orc hordes armed with shovels” sure are tough!

deleted by creator

My handshake brings all the boys to the yard.

So just accept your place in a broken system, got it. Just go support more increasingly right wing fascist policies and give up on any hope for Democracy.*

Pure strawman.

Pretty sure voting for a write in candidate/third party is, by definition, participating in the system.

You just accept the system is broken and undemocratic and believe others should accept this as well and give up.

You are more devoted to “order” than to justice; you prefer a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; you constantly say “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; you paternalistically believe you can set the timetable on progress and constantly advise the progressive to to wait for a “more convenient season”.

You are the “white moderate” MLK warned of, as is the vast majority of the party, though not for long, as the party increasingly seeks the support of the right to avoid allowing any policy victory for the left.

You are increasingly the Republican party of Cheney, as demonstrated by, not only his support for the party, but by the party and Kamala herself touting the endorsement, rather than ignoring it/distancing themselves.

Alaska has a Republican Governor along with a Republican Majority in the house and Senate, they have no restrictions on abortion.

Does this mean the Republican party is pro-choice or that by voting Republican we can secure abortion rights? The answer is no.

Alaska, a red state, is reportedly trying to remove their rank choice voting. This isn’t a “Dems” problem, it’s a two party problem.

This is a counter to the Democratic party supporters you see everywhere who always get irrationally upset at third party voters, not about Republicans.

The point is, if the Democratic party never plan to address it, then how will it ever get done through voting Dem? The same goes for all the other issues people claim we should ignore in the name of “vote blue no matter who”, including their genocide.

By competition and diploma.

What sort of competition and diploma?

Who do you compete with over what/in what way and who controls the competition/decides the winner? Is anything that influences this process political?

Does requiring that judges be elected remove requirements for diplomas? It definitely increases competition as you have to compete for the will of the people.

Why elect him on political bases?

Everything is political. The laws are determined by politics, every single person’s interpretation of said laws is determined by politics.

A better question is, how does your system actually effectively remove politics from the process? Or does it simply shift the political aspect from the people themselves to another third party?

Why shouldn’t the people themselves decide how they want the laws enforced in their own country? Who else should decide if not the people?

We do not elect an engineer on political criteria, we take the one who seems the best among the candidates.

Who determines which engineer seems the best off of what criteria? Is it political at all?

Example: engineer1 is great at building bridges but only alright at apartments, engineer2 is great at building apartments but bad at bridges.

The people of the city know the city requires more apartments but not more bridges.

Why should engineer1 get the job for simply being the “better engineer” when he doesn’t fit the needs of the people?

What’s the point to elect them?

Why shouldn’t a judge serve and be accountable to the will of the people? Who knows better? Why?

And how is it not an authoritarian, anti-democratic, political opinion to state that someone does better know what the people need than the people?

So how would the judges be appointed under this system and why is it better than having them chosen from the people?

If the current system hasn’t prevented political influence, then the method of choosing obviously isn’t guaranteeing unbiased judges anyway, so what’s the point in keeping it as opposed to elected judges?

Why not have elected judges and

Strong and diverse press, strong and enforced rules against politically motivated decisions.

?

This is an inheritently reactionary and anti-democratic idea.

This is probably the worst option. Political leaders should be professional and not populists pandering to the public.

China consents. 🇨🇳

Africa consents. 🌍

Isn’t there someone you forgot to ask? 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

He was similarly just an online personality (YouTuber, funny commentary)just like Drew Gooden, until recently it was revealed he hooked up with a minor, knowing they were a minor (like 9 years ago or so)

It’s funny because a couple months ago someone would have left a similar comment as you about him being included, but now he belongs with those other “evil” people.

Yeah, they’re so untrustworthy because MBFC says so …

Analysis / Bias

Headlines and articles use moderately loaded language like this: NFL Freezes Policy Barring Players From Kneeling During Anthem. This particular story is republished from the conspiracy website ZeroHedge. Typically, Mint Press sources their information, but sometimes it is from Mixed factual or conspiracy websites. In general, story selection moderately favors the left, such as this Trump Administration Opens Door for Corporate Attack on Vulnerable Wildlife.

Okay? Neither of those articles are untrustworthy or wrong…

Mint Press News primarily focuses on stories about the middle east, Iran, Syria, and Israel. Most stories are negative when covering Israel, such as this CHRIS HEDGES: ISRAEL AND THE RISE OF JEWISH FASCISM.

Almost like Israel is a genocidal apartheid state and most coverage of them should be negative, that’s not bias. It just shows MBFCs bias…

Politically, Mint Press News aligns with the far-left and frequently reports negatively on establishment Democrats like this WHO IS BIDEN WORKING FOR? ON ISRAEL VISIT, “ZIONIST” BIDEN WHITEWASHES ISRAEL’S CRIMES and conservative such as this EMBOLDENED BY TRUMP AND NETANYAHU, JEWISH SETTLER TERRORISM IS SPIKING. Finally, according to the Rutgers University Network Contagion Research Institute, Mint Press “promotes anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.”

Almost like Israel is a genocidal apartheid state and most coverage of them and “establishment Democrats” and “conservative” who defend/support them will be “biased” against them, unless you agree with said genocidal apartheid…

On to

Failed Fact Checks

Millions of Muslims protested against the Islamic State in November 2016, but a “media blackout” prevented people from hearing about the event. – Mostly False

Let’s see how “false” this is and how ruined their credibility should be because of it…

Although the original article was published under a misleading clickbait title, it was at least based on a real event: millions of Shia Muslims did embark on a pilgrimage in November 2016 to visit the shrine of Imam Hussein in Karbala, Iraq. This pilgrimate is an annual undertaking for Arbaeen, which marks the end of forty days of mourning of the martyrdom of Hussein:

The pilgrimage was reported (as it is every year) by multiple mainstream news outlets. While it is a religious event and not specifically a political one, some news outlets reported that the annual pilgrimage has taken on a defiant tone as attacks from the Islamic State have plagued the area

So it was millions of people gathering in a defiant tone against the Islamic state…it’s just false because “some news outlets” reported it as such so there was no “media blackout”…

No single source or site is perfect. MBFC is just as biased and shouldn’t be used to dismiss an entire source of information because they say they are biased.

NOTE: This is less a defense of mintpres news (they do get a little crazy) and more a statement against the use of MBFC and similar as a crutch.

The fact Cody Ko fits both 💀

The diversion is more significant than the article makes it out to be.

What diversion? Russia hasn’t had to slow down it’s advances in other regions at all, in fact in some cases Russia has made faster gains, because Ukraine diverted its own best troops…

On face value, Kursk region isn’t that important to Moscow and they’ve got the strategic points like the nuclear plant on lock. However it’s hard to deny the value of the morale boost that Ukraine desperately needed,

It’s only a morale boost to westerners observing the news as if it’s a game. It doesn’t help the real world situation for Ukraine or Ukrainians. That’s what this was for, to signal boost to the west.

The Kursk incursion does not change losses caused by poor military coordination present from Ukrainian and Russian command structures.

No, it’s an example of said poor military coordination present in the Ukrainian command structure…

deleted by creator

War, war never changes.

Yep, you’re right that she wouldn’t win and you would be propping up Trump

Actually I’d be propping up Kamala by not voting for Trump.

Considering the vast majority who are protesting against him are doing it for reasons other than seeing Palestinians as people deserving of equal rights. Yes, for most of them.

They’re all colonizers, they’re just arguing over the best way to colonize. The enemy of my enemy is a useful ally, not a friend.

deleted by creator