World News

39325 readers

2151 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

404

Iraq could allow marriage for girls as young as 9. A survivor says it will fuel rape and child abuse (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

Proposed amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law could allow girls as young as 9 to marry, sparking outrage from rights groups and survivors like “Batta,” who endured abuse after being forced into marriage at 11.

The changes would shift decision-making power to clerics, undermining existing protections for women and children established in 1959.

Supporters claim the amendments promote family values, but critics call them a violation of children’s rights and a step toward legalized child abuse.

Activists and lawmakers are working to block the controversial proposal.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh, is this going to be like the last time you played dumb as to your past statements, and then when I brought receipts you went silent on the topic and proceeded to waste my fucking time? If it is, I'd at least like to know beforehand.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You certainly have a wild imagination because if you're referring to the time I think you are, the last time you brought "receipts" it was you linking to posts of mine not containing anything you claimed I wrote. I don't know why you're so angry at me, but perhaps you would be better able to read my posts and not hallucinate patterns if you weren't in a blind rage.

It really is unfortunate because I appreciate the information you gave in your initial response, but the hostility was so off-putting.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You certainly have a wild imagination because if you’re referring to the time I think you are, the last time you brought “receipts” it was you linking to posts of mine not containing anything you claimed I wrote.

Fucking lol

Maybe stop cheerleading atrocities and fascists if you can't even keep track of how often you fucking do it.

It really is unfortunate because I appreciate the information you gave in your initial response, but the hostility was so off-putting.

Oh, I'm sorry that I was rude to you when all you were doing was trying to play your usual "Amerikkka Bad" card by whitewashing a dictator who tortured and murdered on a literally genocidal scale. You know, not unlike what you do with Assad? Would you like to play apologist for the Taliban next? I know you're just drooling over the possibility.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago

I don't know what you think that link is supposed to show, but you'd have to be on something powerful to think me saying democrats should try to stop the genocide instead of sending billions in support is somehow me "cheerleading atrocities".

I still don't know what I did to piss you off so much, but apparently you're so angry that you've built a whole strawman of me and you've just been fighting with that strawman this entire time. Have fun with that, hope it helps you relieve stress.