this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
418 points (96.9% liked)

News

29513 readers
1846 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Police said a suspect was in custody after the shooting near the Capital Jewish Museum

A suspect is in custody after shooting dead two Israeli embassy staff outside a Jewish museum in Washington on Wednesday night.

The gunman, named by police as Elias Rodriguez, 30, of Chicago, approached a group of four people leaving an event at the Capital Jewish Museum and opened fire, killing Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim.

Metropolitan police chief Pamela Smith said the shooter had been pacing outside the museum, which is steps away from the FBI’s field office, before the shooting.

After killing the pair, who officials said were a couple, he walked inside, where event security detained him. The suspect yelled: “Free, free Palestine,” after he was arrested, police said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

a massive false equivalence comparing what Israel has done against the murder of two individuals.

People aren't trying to equivocate the two, that would be insulting, not only to the people who were murdered, but to the tens of thousands of people being killed in Palestine.

The guy that got murdered isn't Israel. He's a person with opinions, right or wrong. He got murdered for a few tweets and an affiliation with Israel.

I mean he's a representative of the state, which is why this is a politically motivated murder.

He's not a combatant, but a civilian. Same for his wife. People justifying these murders are flat out wrong

Explanations aren't justifications, just because people understand and even agree with the motivations of the killer doesn't mean the agree with how he acted upon them.

I find the cries for the sanctity of protecting civilians to be pretty meek considering the state these civilians represent have overwhelmingly killed more civilians than armed combatants.

This is the inherent problem with a state targeting civilian populations, it provokes violence upon your own civilians.

In order to have a system where free speech is protected, you can't allow people to be murdered for their views.

Another person misunderstanding the Constitution.....Free speech doesn't protect you from the public's reaction to your speech, it guarantees protection from the government targeting you for your speech.

This isn't an example of someone's free speech being violated. An actual example would be students being arrested for their protest about Israels actions in Gaza.

There is no defending these murders or trying to justify them.

Again, understanding a motive isn't justifying. No one said they agreed that those people deserved to be murdered , you're just moralizing.

[–] OccamsRazer@lemmy.world -1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Seems like a lot of victim blaming in here. It can be very simple. Don't murder people you disagree with. Also, free speech needs to be protected culturally as well, and not just through the government. But the government must also protect free speech, and that includes protecting people from others. There doesn't need to be a discussion about understanding motives at all. It's wrong and needs to be condemned, full stop. Otherwise you don't have a free country. You can't hand wave it away or shrug just because you understand their motive.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Seems like a lot of victim blaming in here. It can be very simple. Don't murder people you disagree with.

Moralizing once again, no one here advocated for murdering anyone.

Also, free speech needs to be protected culturally as well, and not just through the government.

The idea of freedom speech is a constitutional right, it's not a social mores. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, you are just trying to erect a strawman argument.

doesn't need to be a discussion about understanding motives at all. It's wrong and needs to be condemned, full stop.

Lol, kinda ironic someone who is whining about free speech is trying to get people to stop talking about someone's motive. We can discuss whatever we want, if you don't like it you can leave. Hypocrite.

Otherwise you don't have a free country. You can't hand wave it away or shrug just because you understand their motive.

Lol, free speech means stop talking about something I don't like because of freedoms......You are a moron.

[–] OccamsRazer@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Free speech means being able to say and support things you believe in without the threat of being murdered for it. Any sympathy for the murderer undermines free speech and democratic society. This is not complicated...

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Free speech means being able to say and support things you believe in without the threat of being murdered for it.

According to whom? You can't just redefine legal terms to suit your argument. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, again this is just a strawman argument.

You are already legally protected from being murdered for what you say, last time I checked murder is still illegal.

Any sympathy for the murderer undermines free speech and democratic society

First of all....who was expressing sympathy for the murderer? Understanding someone's motive isn't the same as being sympathetic towards something. The CIA has reported that 9/11 was the result of political blowback from our previous involvement in Afghanistan. By your logic the CIA is sympathetic towards the terrorist responsible for 9/11?

Secondly, you don't get to dictate what people get to feel or talk about. Especially while hypocritically accusing people of undermining the freedom of speech for their beliefs or statements.

Lastly you have no fucking clue what the freedom of speech clause of Constitution actually means, because as I have previously stated..... you are a moron.

This is not complicated...

I'm pretty sure tying shoe laces is complicated for you, this has obviously gone over your head.

[–] OccamsRazer@lemmy.world 1 points 14 minutes ago

I'm addressing the victim blaming apologists in this thread. If that isn't you then carry on.