World News
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 !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
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
view the rest of the comments
Because that's a broad generalization that's based on the assumption that being well-traveled makes you more likely to flee the law. Her continual travel to and from her home country has no bearing on whether or not she poses a flight risk. If that were true, anyone that moves away from home and regularly travels by car to and from their hometown should be held in custody.
...
I'm just going to quote this until you read it apparently. Somehow "hometown" = "Country" to you.
Was she leaving the country legally? Yes.
Was she re-entering the country legally? Yes.
Did she ever have a warrant out for her arrest during those times that she left the country? No.
That's the bottom line. But for the sake of the argument, I never equated hometown and country. I merely used it as a metaphor to show you how travelling to her home country doesn't qualify her as a flight risk.
So leaving a town to you is equivalent to the travel it takes to leave the country? You don't see significant differences between the two? Then I can't communicate with you on that particular point. We will not come to any consensus there. Especially when you say "I never equated hometown and country. I merely used it as a metaphor" I never did... but did. Your two sentences directly contradict.
How do you know this? She thought her stuff was expunged. Which clearly it wasn't since apparently they pulled it up. If it's still in the records somewhere... or she reported it to them inaccurately. That's inconsistent information and I would expect agents to investigate.
Other than distance traveled, the time afforded to travel said distance, and providing the requisite documents needed to cross a border(which she had), yes. The article doesn't mention how often she traveled to Ireland. Maybe she went every other year to celebrate Christmas with her family.
No, using a metaphorical comparison does not literally equate the two things being compared. A metaphor suggests that one thing is like another in some figurative or symbolic way, not that they are literally the same.
It says in the article that she presented them with documentation of the expungement of her charges. So if she was able to provide them with documentation, it clearly took place. It shouldn't take a law degree to figure out that having your criminal records expunged doesn't wipe any trace of them from government databases. It only removes them from the public eye and prevents them from coming up during background checks for things like housing or employment. The government would still have a record of her prior convictions.
So then not the same at all? And we know she didn't have all the documents she needed because she had to go get some.
That would have been a month after the initial detainment. That's why she had to leave to go get the documents. She didn't have it with her at the initial detainment. That's my point. She likely filled out some form incorrectly which didn't match up with what their database says. And now they are detaining her until it's cleared up by a court. It sucks, sure... but this is how it goes.
What are you not getting about this situation? She traveled with no issue for 2 decades before this. Why would you need to travel with expungement documents in the first place. That doesn't apply to travel at all, which is why she was released to get them. Being detained by ICE indefinitely isn't a "that sucks...but that's just how it goes sometimes" situation. And that's why there's an article about it. But if you want keep licking boots, you might just get to the center. I won't stop you.
WAAHHHH I have nothing to say so I'll talk about boots!
I'm not sure why so many people have a foot fetish on the fediverse. It's kind of sad.