this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
618 points (99.2% liked)

politics

23060 readers
4276 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Military pilot Jo Ellis said she had to hire private armed security for her family because of the false claims, which went viral on social media.

A transgender military pilot filed a defamation lawsuit Wednesday against a conservative influencer who falsely claimed on social media that she was flying the helicopter that collided with a commercial jet near Reagan National Airport in January, killing 67 people.

“I want to hold this person accountable for what they did to me,” Jo Ellis, a pilot who has served more than 15 years in the Virginia Army National Guard, said in a statement to NBC News. “It’s become too common that people can say horrible things about someone, profit at their expense, and get away with it.”

On Jan. 30, less than 24 hours after the crash, conservative influencer Matt Wallace, who has 2.2 million followers on the social media platform X, shared a post from another account he operates stating that the helicopter pilot was transgender, according to the lawsuit. Wallace included a photo of Ellis, and the post went viral, the lawsuit states.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works -2 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Because killing people is wrong and can very very easily get out of hand. Consider the French revolution

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I'm starting to wonder if we're going to get killed while we scream how wrong it is.

[–] untakenusername@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

And the solution is not to kill people who say awful things.

[–] SereneSadie@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The French Revolution that was massively successful in removing scum from the country?

Yeah I'm considering it alright. :)

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I'm not sure I would call it successful in the long (or even medium) term given the events that directly followed...

[–] RoundSparrow@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I’m not sure I would call it successful in the long (or even medium) term given the events that directly followed…

Based on a study of your usage of Lemmy, I'm not sure you are capable of having any ideas that are sure.

You came along to one of my messages and said "What a sad, pathetic waste of time this comment was" just a few minutes ago. I think you are here to promote anti-intellectualism on Lemmy media systems.

The French Revolution that was massively successful in removing scum from the country?

I think it promoted anti-intellectualism and violence, which many people in April 2025 on electric media systems of Twitter, Lemmy, Mastodon, Bluesky, Reddit, TikTok, Fox News HDTV, CNN HDTV seem to adore. The idea of killing and murdering human beings they disagree with, the machine powers of guns and weapons to dehumanize others.

 

::: ______________
"There is something wrong with our world, something fundamentally and basically wrong. I don't think we have to look too far to see that. I'm sure that most of you would agree with me in making that assertion. And when we stop to analyze the cause of our world's ills, many things come to mind. We begin to wonder if it is due to the fact that we don't know enough. But it can't be that. Because in terms of accumulated knowledge we know more today than men have known in any period of human history. We have the facts at our disposal. We know more about mathematics, about science, about social science, and philosophy than we've ever known in any period of the world's history. So it can't be because we don't know enough. And then we wonder if it is due to the fact that our scientific genius lags behind. That is, if we have not made enough progress scientifically. Well then, it can't be that. For our scientific progress over the past years has been amazing. Man through his scientific genius has been able to dwarf distance and place time in chains, so that today it's possible to eat breakfast in New York City and supper in London, England. Back in about 1753 it took a letter three days to go from New York City to Washington, and today you can go from here to China in less time than that. It can't be because man is stagnant in his scientific progress. Man's scientific genius has been amazing. I think we have to look much deeper than that if we are to find the real cause of man's problems and the real cause of the world's ills today. If we are to really find it I think we will have to look in the hearts and souls of men."