redballooon @ redballooon @lemm.ee

Posts

6

Comments

714

Joined

2 yr. ago

Confused. So that’s a thing where you agree?

Or do you think that’s my position?

Or do you just post something to shut down calling outs of propaganda narratives?

As I said in the other comment, not falling for one sides propaganda doesn’t automatically mean the other side is right. What we have on social media is propaganda for a supposed Palestinian side, but overwhelmingly it’s Hamas’ talking points, which are clearly anti Israel, but lacking in the “pro Palestinian” cause.

Oh dear.

Distancing yourself from one propaganda side is all well and fine, but that doesn’t mean the other side is automatically in the right, you know?

And you are using the other side’s words and narratives, which frankly is their propaganda.

Pretty sure you could answer that yourself if you wanted to.

To focus so overly much on Israels propaganda in today’s social media landscape is propaganda itself.

Pretty much on all channels there’s a between 10:1 and 20:1 relationship between pro Palestinian vs pro Israel comments.

Source: https://www.tagesschau.de/faktenfinder/israel-hamas-social-media-100.html

Oh yes. With that sort of thing better double check each time.

If it spits out the wrong syntax my compiler will tell me immediately.

I understand. You refuse to accept something that is fairly obvious for many Lemmy users and want to put a burden of proof on me, and because I don’t want to take on additional work for someone I neither know nor agree with, you are happy to keep your opinion, as am I to keep mine.

Introducing regulations usually doesn’t mean complete and utter ban.

First of all, gun laws have been more or less the same for the past 100 years in the U.S., so how can they be the cause of the recent rise in mass shootings? Simple answer: they’re not.

So guns changed over the past 100 years, but the laws did not adjust. Sounds like a bad idea. How can a new technology a cause for a new problem? Did that ever happen???/s

Semi-automatic rifles were not overly widespread before the 1990, and when they became, in 1994 there was a time-limited ban for semi-automatic firearms, which then expired in 2004. And what are the major concerns for mass shootings in recent years? It is semi-automatic firearms.

If they were serious about curbing gun violence, their focus wouldn’t be on mass shootings so much as smaller-scale gun crime.

Why do you think they want to ban all guns? But when you've a gun proponents such as in the US you gotta get real about what you can achieve. So it is not hypocrisy to focus on assault weaponry.

That hobby thing can be said about many forbidden things, for example smoking cannabis.

"Just ban guns" is the slogan for demonstrations. Any politician who is elected for doing that will obviously need to have a better plan. Usually such plans don't fit on a poster.

Civilian disarmamends happened in various countries, i.e. Australia in 1996/97, UK after the Dunblane school massacre in 1996, Japan post WW2, South Africa in 2000, Colombia in 2000 and 2016, New Zealand after Christchurch.

Strategies and success vary, but it's not unheard of.

Many liberals have terrible views about gun violence in general IMO, and a serious lack of comprehension of the problem.

Could you elaborate that a bit?

What country is that?

Ok, Stalin

Oh there certainly is. You gotta read those comment threads yourself.

It’s popped up in this one, too. It’s really curious how you can read and write enough to answer here, but not see that.

What’s your view on Trump?

ok so far.

It'll become funny once I understand the double meaning. What does it mean the way it is written "coo sticks"? I get the "coo" as the sound of the pidgeon, but the "sticks" escapes me.

That's very abstract and doesn't mean much. With as many words you can say capitalism is based on scientific reasoning.