91–100 of 199 posts
Buried under the rest of the article is this, since some people only do headlines I'll copy it here for visibility: >Shanbehzadeh was sentenced to five years for alleged pro-Israel propaganda activity, four years for insulting Islamic sanctities, two years for spreading lies online and an additional year for anti-regime propaganda. >His lawyer, Amir Raisian, told Shargh Network, a reformist newspaper in Iran, that he…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A liberal prohibition on violent speech is an aspirational privilege of a people who have solved all their social problems to such a degree that the credible threat of violence is never necessary for justice or progress. Or an aspirational privilege of an aristocracy who have solved all of their material problems at the expense of everybody else, and demand militant proactive protection of their hoard and their perso…
>In our history, the credible threat of social violence has been absolutely necessary for justice & progress Even in very similar Anglosphere cultures like Britain, a liberal constitutional monarchy, all of that had been achieved, even earlier in many cases, without the overt glorification of violence as a normal part of the political process. In fact liberal monarchies, even before they were democratic had done a pr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately his concerns are all too reasonable. Here's a recent case where Putin's people had a dual Russian-American citizen arrested while visiting her family, and then slapped with a 12-year jail term for the crime of donating $51 to a humanitarian charity (from within the US): https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2024/08/15/us-russ... While small, the chance of getting caught up in these shenanigans is fa…
"Humanitarian" charity is not exactly a fitting description of the organization she donated to (though I agree that the sentence is out of proportion). To flip this around: imagine that someone was going through US customs and border clearance, and it became known that they donated money towards Russian FPV drones that hit Ukraine. Would you support giving this person a jail term or not? Now imagine that this person…
We see they had a project in 2022 that did provide some drones, but this seems to have been in the context of supporting search and rescue operations and the like, not military operations.
Razom maintains that it does not provide military supplies of any kind. Let alone "weapons and ammunition" per the FSB charges.
Overall the charges seem to have as much credibility as the initial charge against her of "swearing in a public place".
Buried under the rest of the article is this, since some people only do headlines I'll copy it here for visibility: >Shanbehzadeh was sentenced to five years for alleged pro-Israel propaganda activity, four years for insulting Islamic sanctities, two years for spreading lies online and an additional year for anti-regime propaganda. >His lawyer, Amir Raisian, told Shargh Network, a reformist newspaper in Iran, that he…
I sometimes asked people on HN, what news sites they consider to be of decent quality. And npr.org was recommended several times. Seeing this cheap manipulative article suggests they were mistaken. PS. Maybe his 12 years sentence is completely unjust, I don't know. But titles like this... How about "A man is sentenced to death after having cofee for breakfast" for an article about Charles Manson? (I suppose he had co…
It's worth pointing out that similar stuff (although not quite as egregious) is happening in Belarus, Brazil, and even the UK.
Could you point to something happening in the UK you think is similar to this? Edit: I guess there's this [1] which free-speach maximalists would probably disagree with. Personally I think there's a line between free speech and calls to violence at which point its reasonable to prosecute people. She tweeted calling for people to set fire to buildings where migrants were being housed. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/arti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sometimes asked people on HN, what news sites they consider to be of decent quality. And npr.org was recommended several times. Seeing this cheap manipulative article suggests they were mistaken. PS. Maybe his 12 years sentence is completely unjust, I don't know. But titles like this... How about "A man is sentenced to death after having cofee for breakfast" for an article about Charles Manson? (I suppose he had co…
[flagged]
Nonsense. Not even by US standards and absolutely not by global standards.
Overall, we rate NPR (National Public Radio) Left-Center Biased (a slight to moderate liberal bias) based on story selection that leans slightly left and High for factual reporting due to thorough sourcing and accurate news reporting.
For comparison:
Overall, we rate Ground News Least Biased based on publishing news stories from both sides of the political spectrum and appropriately labeling their bias. We also rate them mostly factual rather than High due to the use of poor sources that can publish false or misleading information; however, these news stories are typically reported by other credible media outlets meaning they most likely are factual.
So it's a toss up between the two; one with a mild left bias and high factual reporting Vs one with less bias but not so well researched.
It's worth pointing out that similar stuff (although not quite as egregious) is happening in Belarus, Brazil, and even the UK.
Could you point to something happening in the UK you think is similar to this? Edit: I guess there's this [1] which free-speach maximalists would probably disagree with. Personally I think there's a line between free speech and calls to violence at which point its reasonable to prosecute people. She tweeted calling for people to set fire to buildings where migrants were being housed. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/arti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Can you visit a Pro North Korea/ISIS/Iran website? How about the website for Iran's supreme leader[1], with headlines like "ZIONIST REGIME FACES SEVERE CONSEQUENCES FOR ITS ACTIONS"? It's not blocked in the US. [1] https://www.leader.ir/en
Is that a relevant example? I though US government was separate from Israel’s , thought lately I am less sure!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sometimes asked people on HN, what news sites they consider to be of decent quality. And npr.org was recommended several times. Seeing this cheap manipulative article suggests they were mistaken. PS. Maybe his 12 years sentence is completely unjust, I don't know. But titles like this... How about "A man is sentenced to death after having cofee for breakfast" for an article about Charles Manson? (I suppose he had co…
[flagged]
I asked people primarily not because I want good news sites for myself. For my news reading method polarized, manipulative and biased sources are sometimes more informative. But I am interested to know what people read and who they believe.
Although, having a high quality source maybe useful to me. Also interesting to see novel approaches and experiments, like the bias measurement the ground.news seems to have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> NPR is very very far left. Nonsense. Not even by US standards and absolutely not by global standards. Overall, we rate NPR (National Public Radio) Left-Center Biased (a slight to moderate liberal bias) based on story selection that leans slightly left and High for factual reporting due to thorough sourcing and accurate news reporting. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/npr/ For comparison: Overall, we rate Ground News…