[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

You've heard of doublethink, and doublespeak...

But what about antithink, and antispeak?

"You're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything!"

"Psycho Killer... qu'est que c'est?"

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago

In the mean time, while we wait for IP law to fix itself over the course of decades, or probably just never: I have physical copies of most of my games.

... on an SD card, that I bought, formatted, and moved files onto.

Steam lets you make game backups, GOG releases are basically portable... make a backup, compress it, put it on a backup drive.

... and thats all without my pirate hat and pegleg on.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Banking on it, you say?

Meat and dairy prices are only gonna go up and up, pizza is gonna become a luxury food item in not too long.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

https://orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/shoe-fitting-fluoroscope/index.html

The Shoe Fitting Fluoroscope.

Stick your feet in, do a real time x ray, see how ... well your shoes fit.

According to Williams (1949), the machines generally employed a 50 kv X-ray tube operating at 3 to 8 milliamps. When you put your feet in a shoe fitting fluoroscope, you were effectively standing on top of the X-ray tube. The only “shielding” between your feet and the tube was a one mm thick aluminum filter.

Yeah... eventually phased or regulated out, due to ... a bit much direct X Ray exposure.

I have actually seen one of these in person, at a museum.

It'd been deactivated, of course, partially gutted.


For a kind of related anecdote:

Multiple victims of either the Hiroshima/Nagasaki nuclear detonations, as well as US military personnel at various nuclear tests...

Described that, even with their eyes closed, in some cases, even with protective eye equipment on...

When the detonation occurs, people held their hands in front of their faces, with their eyes closed, and basically could see xrays of their own arms and hands.

... It basically doesn't seem to have mattered what direction you are facing, if you are close enough to the detonation, for this effect to have been described.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

I mean, they're saying they think you are the same gender as them, and that they aren't interested, in a not very polite way.

I don't see how thats ... even implying anything.

'Sorry, I'm straight' is a pretty direct statement of assuming or asserting your gender, and also saying they're not sexually/romantically interested in you.

I'm basically a bi dude, trans inclusive, but I'm not gonna lie, I don't tend to find myself attracted to many... agender/ambigender/genderfluid folks. I'm not like, against dating or fooling around with such people on principle or anything like that, its just that I rarely find people who identify as such, that I consider attractive.

That being said, I wouldn't turn someone down, or accept a flirt, via assuming their gender. I'd use a bit less discriminatory/categorizing phrasing, probably involving the phrase 'my type', which is gloriously vague.

But... I've been to a good deal of bars, including gay bars, lesbian bars, bars with mostly straight folks, bars with mostly not, bars with a decent mix.

I have, many times, seen people that I know are gay, or lesbian, or bi, just lie to people they're not attracted to, and say 'Sorry, I'm straight.'

They know they aren't straight.

They're just lying, perhaps plausibly lying to that person who doesn't know them, to get that person to go away.

In both your case and my example cases... there's really no need to infer or guess that the person using this phrase is being fairly rude, and a lot of that is intentional.

I've even seen straight people say 'Sorry, I'm gay/lesbian' to get out of a heterosexual flirt from someone they're not attracted to.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

... smell-o-vision.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

Fennec has been working well for me on Android, I I've been using Waterfox on Bazzite via flatpak for almost a year, good stuff, and I think the other fork you're forgetting is maybe... IronFox?

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Waterfox.

Uh, in lieu of a mascot that I do not think they officially have:

(Author unknown, someone on Pinterest somewhere?)

Beyond a functionality/usability focus, check out that built in Oblivious DNS, DoH solution.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem

One of the very few M rated GameCube games.. and, as far as I know, has a unique core sanity mechanic that fairly routinely breaks the fourth wall, aimed at driving you, the player, at losing your own sanity, not merely depicting this happening to your character.

Also, IIRC, the first iteration of Pikmin, a genuienly novel kind of game. Luigi's Mansion, also a pretty unique kind of game.

Oh, and they remade Metal Gear Solid on it, with better graphics than the PS1.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yeah ok so you're levered up, think everyone else doing the same thing are 'fucking stupid' 'idiots', dumber than you, because you have the secret sauce to doing it slightly differently.

I will now quote my original comment:

... you've got the day traders, and they almost always get their clocks cleaned, they just develop a neurotic-obsessive personality based on 'no, I'm the one guy that can outsmart the market'.

I didn't expect one to actually appear, but, well hey there ya go.

I guess I should also amend 'grandiose narcissist' to my psych profile of the kind of person that does what you're doing.

Here, lemme throw the ZeroHedge motto at you:

"On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero."

Good luck with your dance.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 59 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Former econometrician here:

Yes. Correct.

Ever since stock buybacks became the bog standard default, and P/E ratios are between 'significantly elevated' and 'completely fucking delusional'...

Yep. None this shit makes any real sense.

Which is actually a huge problem.

Because... the economic 'point' of a stock market, in capitalism, is more or less to act as a kind of giant, collective brain, that figures out how to efficiently and rationally allocate capital and investments.

The 'invisible hand', and all that.

So when that brain spends a decade or two more or less in a euphoric psychotic break... ("irrational exuberance")... well... it doesn't exactly make sound financial choices.

Which translates into about two decades of nonsensical investment of a society's resources.

Free market fundamentalism kind of requires that you assume capital markets are rational and efficient, always.

... But ... they aren't.

Less 'theoretically': Its a giant gambling machine, and if you're not rigging the game yourself, 99.9999% chance you're the mark, you're gonna lose.

And you won't see it coming, not untill its too late for you to get out intact.

Economists have for a long time referred to state run lotteries as effectively an 'idiot tax', because anyone who can do fairly basic statistics also knows they're very likely to lose money, thus, only idiots gamble.

The stock market as it is now more or less represents a more complex version of the same kind of thing... you've got the day traders, and they almost always get their clocks cleaned, they just develop a neurotic-obsessive personality based on 'no, I'm the one guy that can outsmart the market'.

No, you can't.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 3 days ago

Hey MAGA:

You don't know what love is... you just do as you're told.

8

Hedge funds in the Cayman Islands held more Treasuries at end-2024 than US official data show, with their ownership likely to be $1.4 trillion higher than reported, according to researchers at the Federal Reserve.

The funds’ holdings had increased by $1 trillion since 2022 to reach $1.85 trillion by end-December, the researchers including Daniel Barth and Daniel Beltran wrote in an Oct. 15 note. A report from the Department of the Treasury put the funds’ ownership at $423 billion.

The Fed researchers said their figures showed the Cayman Islands is the largest foreign owner of US government securities, ranking ahead of China, Japan and the UK.

Emphasis mine.

Also my own editorializing: Those hedge funds are likely leveraged somewhere between 50:1 and 100:1.

So uh... all good, totally normal, lol.

82
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

So, I made the same post of a Variety article covering how basically the entirety of US news agencies are refusing to comply with new Pentagon press standards, I posted this to multiple World/Global news comms on multiple instances...

https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/pentagon-pete-hegseth-press-rules-fox-news-cnn-refuse-to-sign-1236552784/

... and my post to World News on lemmy.world, with ~200 upvotes in ~6 hours, 20 comments, was locked and removed with reason "Internal US News", at midnight my local time...

https://lemmy.world/post/37359472

(removed)

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55525545

(local mirror of same post)

... apparently the lemmy.world World News editorial team doesn't think it rises to the level of generally relevant to the entire world that basically all US media outlets (with the single exception of OAN, the most MAGA-culty news outlet) are unifying in a collective refusal to comply with the Trump Admin's new military reporting standards.


No other World/Global News comm on any other instance that I made this same post to acted similarly.

lemmy.zip Global News:

https://lemmy.zip/post/50994380

beehaw.org World News:

https://beehaw.org/post/22673636

(my internet is shitting itself right now and I can't load beehaw, will try to update later)

EDIT: internet's back up, link updated

lemmy.ml World News:

https://lemmy.ml/post/37548697


... the meta-irony of this is physically painful to me.

Sure would be neat if the lemmy.world admins followed through on their recent pledge to reevaluate the staffing of their mod teams.

153
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/news@lemmy.world

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP

My original post of this article to World News on lemmy.world, with ~200 upvotes in ~6 hours, good deal of comments, was locked and removed with reason "Internal US News", at midnight my local time...

https://lemmy.world/post/37359472

(removed)

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55525545

(my local instance's mirror of it)

... apparently the lemmy.world World News editorial team doesn't think it rises to the level of generally relevant to the entire world that basically all US media outlets (with the single exception of OAN, the most MAGA-culty news outlet) are unifying in a collective refusal to comply with the Trump Admin's new military reporting standards.

No other World/Global News comm on any other instance that I made this same post to acted similarly.

So, in the interest of promoting public awareness, here's the same article, in lemmy.world US News.


EDIT:

If anyone would care for meta-discussion about my last paragraph, not actually from / about the article/story itself, let's try to funnel that over to:

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55553071

... so that the discussion here can be more directly on topic.

276

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
30

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
20
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/globalnews@lemmy.zip

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
40
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/news@beehaw.org

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
42
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
71
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/world@lemmy.world

Pete Hegseth‘s Defense Department has threatened to revoke press credentials of news organization that do not agree to restrictive new coverage rules — and says it may bar journalists who don’t agree to abide by the rules from physical access to the Pentagon’s grounds. But more than three dozen news orgs have said they are refusing to sign on to the requirements.

On Tuesday, in a joint statement five major TV news outlets — ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News — said they were not agreeing to the new rules. The Pentagon has told reporters they must sign an agreement for the new rules by Tuesday or turn in their press passes by Wednesday.

According to the Defense Department’s press office, which outlined the new rules last month, reporters covering the Pentagon must sign a pledge not to obtain or use unauthorized material (even if the information is unclassified). If they do not, they will potentially be barred from the Pentagon.

“Today, we join virtually every other news organization in declining to agree to the Pentagon’s new requirements, which would restrict journalists’ ability to keep the nation and the world informed of important national security issues,” the networks said in the statement. “The policy is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections. We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press.”

The five networks join a number of other news orgs that have already said they won’t agree to the new rules being imposed by Hegseth, a former Fox News host. Those include the New York Times, AP, Reuters, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, NewsNation and the Hill, along with conservative-leaning outlets like Newsmax and the Washington Examiner.

At press time, only one outlet has said it plans to sign on to the new rules announced by the Pentagon, which the Trump administration now calls the “U.S. Department of War”: pro-Trump network One America News Network (OANN).

...


Here’s the current full list of news outlets that have refused to sign the Pentagon’s new rules, as compiled by the Washington Post:

ABC News
AL-Monitor
Associated Press
The Atlantic
Aviation Week
Axios
Bloomberg News
Breaking Defense
C4ISRNET
CBS News
CNN
Defense Daily
Defense News
Defense One
The Economist
Federal Times
The Financial Times
Fox News
The Guardian
The Hill
HuffPost
Military Times
MSNBC
NBC News
The New York Times
Newsmax
NewsNation
NPR
PBS NewsHour
Politico
RealClearPolitics
Reuters
Task & Purpose
The Wall Street Journal
The Washington Examiner
The Washington Post
The Washington Times
WTOP
33
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

So, I was dumbfounded by this recent exchange I had on lemmy, and feel it may be appropriate to share here.







Obviously, I do not condone or encourage any harassment of this person, I have blanked out all names but my own intentionally, in an effort to comply with this comm's anti-harasment rules.

This is also why I will not be directly linking back to the actual post / comment chain.

Mods, if this sort of post is not acceptable or properly formatted, I fully understand it being removed or being reformatted.

21
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/news@lemmy.ml

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — On a visit to New Zealand, FBI Director Kash Patel gave the country’s police and spy bosses gifts of inoperable pistols that were illegal to possess under local gun laws and had to be destroyed, New Zealand law enforcement agencies told The Associated Press.

The plastic 3D-printed replica pistols formed part of display stands Patel presented to at least four senior New Zealand security officials in July. Patel, the most senior Trump administration official to visit the country so far, was in Wellington to open the FBI’s first standalone office in New Zealand.

Pistols are tightly restricted weapons under New Zealand law and possessing one requires an additional permit beyond a regular gun license. Law enforcement agencies didn’t specify whether the officials who met with Patel held such permits, but they couldn’t have legally kept the gifts if they didn’t.

It wasn’t clear what permissions Patel had sought to bring the weapons into the country. A spokesperson for Patel told the AP Tuesday that the FBI would not comment.

US FBI Director Kash Patel visits New Zealand, immediately provides local officials with 3d printed, potentially operable firearms...

... which is a crime, that could carry up to a 3 year prison/jail sentence in NZ...

... and would also potentially be somewhere between a misdemeanor and a felony depending on where you are in the US, as 3d printed firearms are generally without serial numbers and are thus 'ghost guns', which are often illegal if unregistered, if not outright banned, though this differs from state to state and city to city.

(Oh also, I guess he is so concerned about properly investigating the death of Charlie Kirk that he is uh, personally looking for leads in New Zealand, or something.)

17
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/usa@midwest.social

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — On a visit to New Zealand, FBI Director Kash Patel gave the country’s police and spy bosses gifts of inoperable pistols that were illegal to possess under local gun laws and had to be destroyed, New Zealand law enforcement agencies told The Associated Press.

The plastic 3D-printed replica pistols formed part of display stands Patel presented to at least four senior New Zealand security officials in July. Patel, the most senior Trump administration official to visit the country so far, was in Wellington to open the FBI’s first standalone office in New Zealand.

Pistols are tightly restricted weapons under New Zealand law and possessing one requires an additional permit beyond a regular gun license. Law enforcement agencies didn’t specify whether the officials who met with Patel held such permits, but they couldn’t have legally kept the gifts if they didn’t.

It wasn’t clear what permissions Patel had sought to bring the weapons into the country. A spokesperson for Patel told the AP Tuesday that the FBI would not comment.

US FBI Director Kash Patel visits New Zealand, immediately provides local officials with 3d printed, potentially operable firearms...

... which is a crime, that could carry up to a 3 year prison/jail sentence in NZ...

... and would also potentially be somewhere between a misdemeanor and a felony depending on where you are in the US, as 3d printed firearms are generally without serial numbers and are thus 'ghost guns', which are often illegal if unregistered, if not outright banned, though this differs from state to state and city to city.

(Oh also, I guess he is so concerned about properly investigating the death of Charlie Kirk that he is uh, personally looking for leads in New Zealand, or something.)

view more: ‹ prev next ›

sp3ctr4l

joined 8 months ago