Tlaib refuses to apologize for blaming Israel for Gaza hospital blast, attacks Biden
3 years ago by MicroWave to c/politics
Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib refused to apologize Wednesday for saying on Tuesday that Israel is to blame for the hospital explosion that day in Gaza, an accusation that sparked political backlash against her from Republicans as Israel denies fault.
Tlaib joined thousands of protesters calling for a ceasefire in Gaza during a solidarity rally hosted by the left-leaning group Jewish Voice for Peace at the National Mall. She was visibly emotional, at times pausing her speech to openly weep and criticizing lawmakers who have not backed a ceasefire resolution.
Glad to see somebody that gets it. If one side intentionally slaughters civilians, does the other side get a free pass to do the same? Palestine deserves to be free, but how many civilian adults and children in both Palestine and Israel should be sacrificed upon the altar of war to get it? 500,000? 1,000,000? If someone claims to care about the people and not just the outcome, the answer should be zero. Period. Doesn't matter which side.
Accepting this stance doesn't magically fix the problem in the middle east, like so many trolls are glib to point out, but you can condemn the actions of Hamas and Israel without having a solution to their "thousand year grudge" (which starts with a ceasefire, anyway). I may not know how to fix things, but I know that what's happening is wrong, and that's at least better than the people who think, "[My chosen side] is justified killing [opposing side's] civilians, because they had it done to them!"
Fuck. That.
I never implied it did.
You did, because you stated that:
If Israel stopped fighting tomorrow, what do you think would happen?
Implying that the only thing Israel is doing is fighting. It's not, it's doing a hell of a lot more than that. It's doing apartheid and ethnic cleansing.
If you're saying that Israel should stop doing those things and instead only focus on defense then I agree with you. But you're acting like Isreal is completely innocent.
That’s not called “apartheid” anywhere else in the world, only when people are looking for a word to demonize Jews with.
Yeah, that's not true.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid
The term was started in South Africa, being critical of the white people in charge.
Defense does not necessitate apartheid or ethnic cleansing.
Where exactly has Israel done this recently? Attacking someone across your border because they're killing people near yours is war.
See, Ukraine attacking places inside Russia lol. Justifiably so.
Where exactly has Israel done this recently?
They've been doing it for decades.
As for the more recent:
Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, and religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making a region ethnically homogeneous. Along with direct removal, extermination, deportation or population transfer, it also includes indirect methods aimed at forced migration by coercing the victim group to flee and preventing its return, such as murder, rape, and property destruction.[3][4][5] It constitutes a crime against humanity and may also fall under the Genocide Convention, even as ethnic cleansing has no legal definition under international criminal law
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing
Attacking someone across your border because they’re killing people near yours is war.
Civilians are getting killed and forced out of their homes, all based on race. It's an apartheid, and an ethnic cleansing.
You are kidding, right?
Actually, if the extremists don't gain control- yes. There have been several instances when they have been close to peace and even a two state solution.... But then the terrorism starts.
I'm sorry but I read what you say and it sounds like you and others are taking the easy path of calling for peace while not acknowledging that there is no real way for there to be peace. How can Israel have peace when there is an organization that unequivocally demands their complete destruction. Every call for ceasefire seems simultaneously a call that Israel returns to the status quo of 100s of rockets launched per day and the threat of another invasion and raping of their civilians. What would you have them do? They're a sovereign nation, they simply won't roll over and die because it's convenient for the Middle East. I have so far refused to argue for ceasefire on the belief that Israel is defending itself from an existential threat. I continue to think that's the case and I don't see what's changed. Everyone abhorrs innocents dying, but on my view, a call for ceasefire is a call that Israeli innocents die in place of Palestinians. If innocents are going to die either way, I don't understand why we should not spend that blood trying to destroy Hamas. In the long run, when the numbers are tallied, it may truly be that this would be the quickest way to minimize the death of innocents, yet there are those who offer no solution and demand Israel stop their actions for the sake of innocents, yet make no acknowledgment that many more innocents may end up dying in the long run as a result. If I care about innocents, I don't see how I can support that right now.
I think the primary issue is that "destroying Hamas" and "killing a hell of a lot of Palestinians" currently has a large overlap and the Israeli mindset of large amounts of collateral damage/death being acceptable is not shared by most of the rest of the world, even though they're experiencing the same on a smaller mindset.
The pendulum swings the other way and there are absolutely bad faith actors out there (and on here) who have no problem with Israel continuing to take a barrage of rockets on a regular basis, because they either have no skin in the game or genuinely want Israel as an entity to collapse. They aren't helpful here either.
Historically speaking, land claim issues involved one side stomping out the other. But that's pretty much frowned upon today (not that has stopped Russia but, yeah, that's another topic). This is still the most likely outcome here and will ultimately favor the larger, better funded Israel - it doesn't make it right in any sense, though, but that's frankly just what is going to happen eventually. None of the countries complaining are interested in actually helping the people on the ground in Palestine, on either side, because they are more useful as a political tool if left in the wastes to perish as a symbol
Which I keep telling people, so far Israel has shown more restraint than any other nation which would have leveled Gaza within the first few hundred rockets. Israel is going to spend even more of its blood preforming a ground invasion. Those are innocents dying too, surely. They didn't ask for this enemy or this war. I still support them, because there is no compromise that can be had with Hamas.
It's true that self-defense doesn't give Israel the right to indiscriminately destroy all Palestinians. But, outside of the online rhetoric, it seems they've been very clear about the target of their war and they repeatedly are taking steps to attack that target specifically. I just read an article from a Palestinian journalist returning to her home in defiance of Israel's warning to evacuate. These Palestinians quite literally are supporting Hamas, because they are willfully standing in front of Israel's aimed attacks. It's sad to see, but if I believe in Israel's right to self-defense, it means supporting them when they destroy those who defend Hamas.
Edit: correction, more bombs dropped in 1 year of the war
Israel has dropped more bombs in this latest "offensive" than in the US did in the entire war in Afghanistan.
More restraint my hole.
Also Israel has no right to preemptive self defence because this level of damage and the threat Israel faces would not meet the Caroline test.
Palestine has the right to resist occupation under the Geneva convention but I don't see any Zionists making sure that right isn't trampled on.
Israel is going to spend even more of its blood preforming a ground invasion.
Those poor innocent invading soldiers trying to invade and colonize more and more land from these savage indigenous people. If only the indigenous people just accepted their fate peacefully and just give up their homes to the colonizers. They simply are the wrong ethnicity so they have to leave their houses or be shot. Not enough people consider how bad that makes the colonizers feel. Not leaving your house means you are just asking to be killed.
Apartheid would never end in South Africa. Until it did. Peace would never exist in Northern Ireland. Until it did. The cold war would never end. Until it did. The belief that the situation is unresolvable is the problem
Again, one side has a stated charter to destroy all Jews and Israel? What ceasefire or peace do you think you will accomplish here? Why must Israel bear the burden of allowing endless attacks and endless threats of attacks?
Israel controls the land and the Palestinians don't have a seat at the table. Those are the preconditions for brewing up a deep rooted terrorist organization.
So you have no solutions and you demand Israel accept living under hundreds of rockets per day and the constant threat of terrorism. No. They don't have to. What do you call it when you have a charter to kill all Jews and destroy Israel? Geno-what?
Facts are that Gaza is still there. The citizens are still there. Israel is starting to let humanitarian aid in, which must frustrate you.
You think if Hamas violated a ceasefire agreement that people's judgment of them wouldn't change? At all?
Trolling
I don't think you're completely right here. The two-state solution isn't very popular with regular Palestinians either. A two-state solution cements Israel as ethno-state and doesn't address all the Palestinians already deported.
Also Israeli settlers keep violently stealing people's houses, which I would also consider breaking the ceasefire.
I think it's fair criticism . At the very least walk back and reserve judgement until there's more conclusive evidence. But I think until there's better evidence, there should be more respect given to the US intelligence community. It was not long ago trump was criticized for accepting foreign intelligence over the US intelligence community. I think it's fair to criticize tlaib for this as well.
And the thing is, the blame of who bombed the hospital isn't critical to advocating for peace, criticizing unproportial Israeli response, or other pro Palestine messaging.
Here is the available evidence: https://www.npr.org/...
That's a difference between your understanding and the author - the level of shrapnel damage from an air detonated bomb would be an order of magnitude higher than shown from the hospital explosion, but that doesn't mean no shrapnel is produced by a rocket explosion or cars cooking off.
If your munition is designed to explode above the ground its designed to spread a hail of shrapnel in the detonation zone. There are plenty of pictures from ukraine showing the effects of these munitions, it turns the area into a cheese grater.
Lack of crater and a large fire are hallmarks of a conflagration vs an explosion.
But I think until there’s better evidence, there should be more respect given to the US intelligence community
The US intelligence community isn't an objective organization with a mission to inform US citizens of what's really going on in the world. Anything they release is at the direction of political actors and intended to cause some effect. They can be good at their jobs and their released information is still inherently untrustworthy.
So what is the unbiased source that investigated this faster than the US Intelligence community that was not directly involved in the current conflict?
Yes, there are blemishes on the US Intelligence's history. But a US Politician should have a little more deference you the US Intelligence Community.
It doesn't matter if the US Intelligence community is faster, they're still not trustworthy. Within the government, hopefully intelligence is just a confidential useful tool to inform government officials, but press releases are political actions.
And frankly, US politicians (outside of the president) shouldn't be overly trusting of the intelligence community. They're heavily influenced by the executive's wants and were (under pressure) a key player in justifying the war in Iraq. That's not a small blemish, and I'm not aware of any changes that would make that impossible in the aftermath.
It feels like she is too close to this, and is expressing her passion instead of allowing evidence to be presented. It's gonna look real bad if things don't pan out her way, and she's the one supporting terrorism.
How would she be supporting terrorism?, she's one of the few in Congress calling for a ceasefire and an end to the violence. Even if she's wrong and islamic jihad were responsible that doesn't mean she accidentally supported them. She said the bombing of the hospital was horrific and unless she changes her tone once she realizes Palestinians did it then this isn't supporting terrorism.
She said the bombing of the hospital was horrific and unless she changes her tone once she realizes Palestinians did it then this isn't supporting terrorism.
She didn't just say the bombing of the hospital was horrific. She explicitly said that Israel bombed the hospital:
Israel just bombed the Baptist Hospital killing 500 Palestinians (doctors, children, patients) just like that.
There's enough evidence - from third parties, not from either Hamas or the IDF or another invested party - out there that runs counter to the claim that it was an Israeli airstrike that Tlaib should have at least modified here initial statement.
But she hasn't.
I agree that she hasn't openly supported terrorism, but blaming one side for something that was very likely caused by the other side, and then completely refusing to acknowledge that once evidence to the contrary comes out is, at the very least, doing nothing to calm tensions.
Even if she’s wrong and islamic jihad were responsible that doesn’t mean she accidentally supported them.
War doesn't exist in a vacuum. If you add weight to one side of the scale, the other side is raised. If I have a can of Coke and a can of Pepsi, and I point to the Coke and say, "This one gave me diabetes," it doesn't matter that the Pepsi is just as bad, all that matters is that I pushed the blame on Coke.
From the article:
"Our office cited an AP report yesterday that the IDF had hit a Baptist hospital in Gaza. Since then, the IDF denied responsibility and the US intelligence assessment is that this was not done by Israel," she wrote. "It is a reminder that information is often unreliable and disputed in the fog of war (especially on Twitter where misinformation is rampant). We all have a responsibility to ensure information we are sharing is from credible sources and to acknowledge as new reports come in."
Omar called for a "fully independent investigation to determine conclusively who is responsible for this war crime."
It sounds like she acknowledges Israel probably isn't behind it, but also isn't apologizing for her initial remarks like some Republicans were calling for. The story should probably mention that higher up and more explicitly, rather than burying the lede.
rather than burying the lede.
but then we cant farm those juicy outrage page hits.
also isn’t apologizing for her initial remarks
I dunno this strikes me as an issue. Like, if a known serial killer is accused of murder for obvious reasons, and we find out they were actually innocent -- we weren't wrong for our initial suspicions and accusation, but we do owe them an apology once all the information is out.
If you accuse someone who turns out to be innocent, the polite thing to do is apologize for thinking badly of them, however much you were justified in thinking so to start with.
Omar's comment calling for further investigation is completely appropriate, while Tlaib's refusal to apologize is inappropriate, especially since she conflated the whole thing with being anti Muslim.
but we do owe them an apology once all the information is out.
No - we don't owe a serial killer an apology if turns out they murdered ninety-nine people instead of a hundred.
the polite thing to do is apologize for thinking badly of them
No, there is nothing "polite" about "apologizing" to a genocidal settler-colonialist state.
Huh, when you put it that way... I see what you mean.
The left just struggles with separating the sane part from the crazy-democrat-version-of-maga-part. Gotta stick together to show those stupid Republicans who are sticking by their crazy maga crowd.
Wut.
There's no reason to apologize, if Isreal is so adamant to prove it's innocence let an international investigation open. But they won't because like for the killing of the journalist Shereen AbuAkleh they are guilty.
There's a link above to NPR with the (Al Jazeera?) footage of the missile failing and part of it hitting the parking lot
Then why lie to strengthen your cause if it is already justifiable without the facts being known?
The ones that have a long track records of lies and deceit are Israeli and US government. History is the witness. I don't need to strengthen the case I want the end of civilians murder, humanitarian aids and international investigation on war crimes such as this.
There's a good essay on The Atlantic by a former AP reporter on how the press fails to counter Hamas strongarming them to give them a pass their failures in Gaza. Walking into the office armed to make them pull articles about misfires killing civilians and such. Rest assured that the 'history' you've seen is heavily colored by the Palestinian side as well, and perhaps even more.
This is actually an interesting point worth consideration. For all the talk of the propaganda and lying and manipulation, we often don't apply similar scrutiny to Hamas nor question their numbers.
So they are not believing the Pentagon's assessment? Or just don't care and going with feels instead?
Also said Russia was going to invade Ukraine, and people were skeptical of it for the exact same argument.
Sometimes they're right. You can't take them as an absolute authority nor always lying. In the broader context, with analysis that other independent groups have done, it seems to me they're telling the truth here.
True, but different time, different administration, different circumstances. Just because a government lied once doesn't necessarily mean everything they say in the future is a lie, but certainly should be taken with a grain of salt.
Yeah, I definitely trust the pentagon not to have a motive to lie about it. After all, they've proven to be trustworthy in the past! You gotta support the veterans, they never lie!
As a former service dog trainer who trained dogs specifically for disabled veterans there's a reason I refuse to talk about the military and how it treats their people.
Who? For the lazy. She's Palestinian as well so the bias is understandable.
A member of the Democratic Party, Tlaib represented districts 6 and 12, respectively, in the Michigan House of Representatives before her election to Congress.[3] In 2018, she won the Democratic nomination for the United States House of Representatives in Michigan's 13th congressional district. She ran unopposed in the general election and became the first woman of Palestinian descent in Congress, the first Muslim woman to serve in the Michigan legislature, and one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress (the other being Ilhan Omar).[4][5][6] Tlaib is a member of The Squad, an informal group of six (four until the 2020 elections) U.S. representatives on the left wing of the Democratic Party.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashida_Tlaib
The hospital attack was a failed rocket by Islamic Jihad coming from Gaza toward Israel.
At the very least she should recant her statements. There's been enough chaos from it being attributed to Israel that she has a responsibility as a public official to issue a retraction.
Not everyone's American, we don't know your entire portfolio of talking heads.
... You know all 435 voting members of the US House of Representatives which she's a part of and 100 Congressman?
Right lmfao.
She needs to have her bias confirmed. The fog of war is a powerful thing. Unfortunately, her vocalizations do no service for her district.
That's not true, they prove that she has a brain and is trying to use it unlike about 430 of her colleagues
You can acknowledge that there is uncertainty around who is responsible for the hospital, you can apologize for attributing blame prematurely without confirmation, and still hold Israel accountable for being reckless and disproportional in it's response and call for peace. It's damaging to her reputation and cause to double down on this when more evidence is coming out contrary to her initial claims.
Why do you think she's doubling down?
The headline said she's not apologizing for her earlier remarks, not that she refuses to consider that it might have been a case of friendly fire.
In fact, the article itself shows she's not doubling down. She's just not apologetic about taking initial reports at face value.
"Our office cited an AP report yesterday that the IDF had hit a Baptist hospital in Gaza. Since then, the IDF denied responsibility and the US intelligence assessment is that this was not done by Israel," she wrote. "It is a reminder that information is often unreliable and disputed in the fog of war (especially on Twitter where misinformation is rampant). We all have a responsibility to ensure information we are sharing is from credible sources and to acknowledge as new reports come in."
Evidence like that Pentagon report? Lmfao
Sorry if I'm a little callous about the Pentagon reporting on the middle east
So what sources are you holding in higher esteem?
It's the "everybody is wrong except me" group heard from.
Seems like her heart is in the right place, but I fear peace talks at this time would be unproductive. Neither side can be described as conciliatory.
If not now, when? They've been at this for decades
I would love to be able to force them to try, as doubtful as such a peace would be. Any ceasefire would be preferable to this.
The new rules will have a simple "Keep it civil" rule, this comment would be removed under either the old rules or the new rules so removing it now. You can disagree without calling someone a terrorist.
Ahhh the beheaded babies claim that even Biden had to walk back .
Save it for the peace talks.
There was a ceasefire you fucking terrorist apologizing moron, then Hamas invaded Israel and slaughtered 1500 men, women, and children
There was a ceasefire? When?
Israel's objective is that Hamas no longer exists and that Gaza can no longer pose a security threat to Israel. They won't accept a return to the status quo that just results in more rocket attacks and another wave of attacks years from now.
I understand wanting to see an end to violence and calling for a ceasefire based on that, but to do so is to de facto support more intentional attacks on Israeli civilians, which Israel is simply not going to allow. The time to discuss the future of Gaza will only come once Hamas and other militias are conclusively out of the picture.
There is nobody Israel can talk to, while Hamas is in power, and convince them to return the hostages, stop the rocket fire, etc.
There is. Hamas. It happened before. And Israel didn't follow through with it. Look up the 2008 and 2012 blockades (or I can give a breakdown on them).
The thing is that the Islamic Jihad and Hamas don't want to negotiate, since they won't accept a two-state solution, so peace is not possible while any of them has a militarized branch. There are plenty of people in Israel that don't want to negotiate but at least on the Israeli side the only group that needs to stick to the plan is the IDF which will follow the orders they get.
If you see what's going on in the West Bank, Israel is also doing everything it can to make a two state solution impossible
since they won’t accept a two-state solution,
They will. Well at least Hamas well. They changed their charter in 2017 to reflect that.
Yeah, but then Hamas went ahead and murdered 1,400 civilians in Israel. After this, why exactly would Israel want to negotiate with terrorists?
I liked her in her involvement with the progressives… but this is a real bad look. I understand her emotions especially given her Palestinian roots, but she needs to provide evidence if she’s going to use her political platform to rail against the currently accepted explanation of things.
Her initial reaction and statements are completely fair. But as a public official, she needs to issue a retraction and apologize for being incorrect.
Nice username dweeb
she has nothing to apologise for considering she is right
Listen, I'm on the side of innocent Palestinian civilians as much as the next guy, but Hamas does have a habit of using human shields and putting military equipment near schools/hospitals. Truth is, none of us know truly who shot the missile. The fact that it's actually still being investigated means everyone should stfu
Those glasses aren't doing her any favours.
I don't like the glasses.
"Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., said that Israel is to blame for the hospital explosion in Gaza despite Israel denying fault."
Shes completely unhinged. The facts are irrelevant to her. She will blame and denounce Israel no matter what. She is failing to demonstrate rational thinking.
They both made that statement based on reports at that time. Omar has since retracted that claim after US officials concurred with the evidence, but Tlaib hasn't said anything. Sure, I agree that she should walk back the statement and issue a correction, but I don't think anything about calling for a "ceasefire" is unhinged. It's worth noting that she's also Palestinian. This is an issue that literally hits home for her. I'm happy that she's one of the few that is standing up to support the Palestinian people here, and not just blindly siding with Israel.
So you imply I'm blindly siding with Israel? Who are you talking to? I've stated why I support Israel so far and why Palestinian innocents will die as a result. I argued that calls for a simple ceasefire must be understood as calls to allow more attacks on Israel from Hamas. It is not possible to separate the two. How do you intend to cease fire when one side is chartered to destroy all Jews and Israel? What do you intend to tell Hamas so that they stop? If they say they will stop, what prevents them from biding their time until a future strike on Israel? You and your supporters have so far failed to answer any of these questions. It's because I care about the deaths of innocents, that I cannot support a ceasefire at this time. I don't believe that Palestinians should be spared so that Israelites die in their place.
Blindly supports Hamas? Point where she fucking did that at all...ever....in any of her speeches, because I guarantee you that's not true. You're literally making shit up at this point.
This can only be construed as support for Hamas's continued existence, since only invasion will end their autocracy
she has never said anything about supporting hamas why are you conflating the palestinian people with hamas?
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
go to feed...
save