News
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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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.
view the rest of the comments
Wallz and Harris have both spoken at AIPAC conferences, but it's been years since for both of them.
Even if they're "pro Israel" theres no chance they're as unquestioningly as supportive as Biden.
And Wall has shown that he's open to different viewpoints and modified his stance on the genocide long before being picked as VP.
Definitely still need to keep pressure up. But I'm cautiously optimistic
Based on the past couple of months and internal reporting I really don't think either Harris or Biden like Netanyahu at all. I just think Biden and the Democrats overall have for so long been conditioned to protect Israel lest their high ground on right-wing extremism and antisemitism backfire and they lose Jewish-American votes or others sympathetic to Israel; so from a campaign perspective it can be perceived as zero-sum at best or worse a net-loss.
Then there's the power of AIPAC, who are almost solely responsible for both Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush losing their primaries because of their outspokenness on Gaza.
So I fully expect a Harris administration post-election will be far more cold to Netanyahu and take more decisive action, but not before. Which doesn't change much for me, considering in this dichotomous choice we all know Trump is far worse for the outcome of Palestinians.
There is one notable member of the squad absent at the convention, Rashida Tlaib. While Ilhan Omaar and AOC have endorsed Harris, she — the first and only Palestinian American in Congress — has yet to endorse. I do think it would be useful for Harris to meet directly with her.
Nevertheless I've been saying to my fellow advocates for Palestinians: The key to influencing administrative policy is side-stepping the administration and convincing your friends, family, acquaintances, and those on social media who are still sympathetic to Israel and who are ignorant to the atrocities they have committed. If you shift the polls, you will shift the administration who will perceive less risk in cutting aid to Israel. Even then from the administration's perspective, there is still significant risk because Netanyahu could just so happen to ignore intelligence on an impending attack on Israeli soil and if another October 7th-like attack happens following a withdrawal of aid to Israel from the US, then that is going to look very bad and sink the Democrats. Don't put it past Bibi to commit a false flag. That fucker is evil.
AIPAC is bad. But being from Missouri. Bush was always a weak candidate. My understanding is that Bowman was in a similar position? Bush in particular was swept in based largely around contemporary events that have since cooled. She doesn't have a big history of civil service to build support from etc. She has some fairly signature legislation that she's been involved with related to her community and district. But voters are ignorant, fickle, and more concerned with other things currently.
True Bowman was the guy who pulled the fire alarm during a vote. There was also some pretty tame ethics stuff with Cori Bush that if not for the amplification from millions of dollars from AIPAC probably wouldn't have gone too far.
According to NYT, "Those two races became the most expensive in congressional history, because of AIPAC's cash infusion." (most expensive House primary in history, mind you). The damage of that money cannot be overstated.
Definitely. But a couple things to keep in mind. Primaries depending on office can be quite rare. And their budgets compared to general election campaigns are almost non existent.
It sounds like a big record because most people thinking money in politics think about state wide or national races. When they think money in politics. It's still something to take note of, and a bad prescident. Because we should have less to no money tied up in politics. But it's not as bad as it might seem. They had to break primary campaign Financial spending records. To remove two of the most vulnerable pro Palestine Democrats. And they didn't even try with many of the rest. That's the lens to look at it through.
I love the fire alarm thing. If Democrats are actually worried about fascism, about what Republicans do, and they were doing super sneaky and under handed shit, then that's the kind of things they need to do. Was it a great idea? Obviously, probably not. But it's the kind of thing people who are actually worried about a threat to the material conditions of their constituents do in a panic, as opposed to roll over and let the country suffer again for the sake of rules and decorum, something Republicans like McConnell basically never let get in the way of their evil. It was dumb but it showed he understands the stakes of politics and cares.
Still better than Trump. Also, digging up a video from SEVEN YEARS ago? hahahah
Newsflash: People can change. Only Harris is advocating for a permanent ceasefire; Trump is trying to undermine it with calls to Bibi LOL.
Aw I'm sorry buddy -- it's not my problem you can't read and adhere to the rules hahaha.
Harris already said no weapons embargo on israel. There's no reason to be optimistic.
Pretty sure that was one of Biden's aides that said she wouldn't?
But there's a lot of room between the current situation and "full weapons embargo" for improvement
An arms embargo in some form is literally the only leverage the US has that could change Netanyahu's mind, at this stage. Personally, I don't think Kamala has the guts for it.
For a full on embargo?
Almost definitely not
But they can limit it to just missile defense and such.
That's not a full weapon embargo, but it's an embargo on the worst items and frankly if they do t get that shit from us, their only option is China, and China would know that and charge them out the ass for anything. Which means they get less than everything.
Shit is rarely black or white. But with Biden they had a blank check, anything they wanted and Biden went around Congress for an arm's "sale" already. Which frankly is a straight up war crime and violates US and international law, but it looks like some people are above the law despite what Biden said.
No the top Kamala aide said it. No weapons embargo means there's no chance of any embargo.
There's a weird thing going on where any negative news about Kamala is said by an aide instead of Kamala.
Her track record is consistent with support for the Genocide as well. Especially this 2019 article explains a lot
I googled it
There was an anonymous aide who said something, then National Security Advisor to the VP said they wouldn't do a full embargo that would leave an opening for Iran to attack.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/08/dnc-arms-embargo-uncommitted-pledge-petition-kamala-harris/
But they also said Biden wasn't stepping aside for any reason right up until the second Biden stepped down.
That article I linked is a good read, there's a lot of pressure from within the party for an embargo. And both Harris and Wall's are open to discussions, and have already been having them.
They're not perfect, but they're open to a dialog. It's a huge improvement from Biden.
They could still drastically limit what types of weapons get "sold" to Israel and what quantities.
Put it on Israel:
If Bibi uses them for genocide and leaves Israel open to an attack from an actual country with a functional government and military, that's probably the fastest way to get Bibi out of power. There's already been huge protests in Israel for months calling for him to step down. And he's delaying an election he's almost guaranteed to lose.
It just doesn't take as much as you seem to think to end this.
The article you linked has great language but effectively means absolutely nothing. Empty words are the same thing we've heard from Biden the last 10 months.
Harris is in an awkward position where even if she disagrees vehemently with the Biden administration's policies, she can't really do or say anything about it because she's still a part of that administration. Undermining her boss right now would only cause a backlash from all directions that would be far more damaging than simply sitting on it until after the election.
A President Elect Harris will have far more leeway to steer policy on such a delicate issue than a Vice President Harris ever could.