this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
228 points (98.3% liked)

News

32964 readers
6537 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — His U.S. Senate campaign under fire, Maine Democrat Graham Platner said Wednesday that a tattoo on his chest has been covered to no longer reflect an image widely recognized as a Nazi symbol.

The first-time political candidate said he got the skull and crossbones tattoo in 2007, when he was in his 20s and in the Marine Corps. It happened during a night of drinking while he was on leave in Croatia, he said, adding he was unaware until recently that the image has been associated with Nazi police.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

you don’t think it’s possible for US military personnel to get away with having Nazi or Ultra right wing nationalists tattoos

I didn't say that. Mostly, I am saying that this guy is very very clearly not a Nazi, and so the broad-spectrum freakout about this particular tattoo is an establishment funded psyop which people on Lemmy should not be dutifully freaking out about when prompted to by the media.

What I said about the military personnel side was just that the specific details of how that one other user is claiming it works in the military are definitely false.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh he's very clearly not a Nazi is he? The guy with a Nazi tattoo on his chest? The guy who's now very clearly lying about said tattoo? An ex marine? Sure very clear. What you mean to say is his current political campaign rhetoric doesn't appear to be openly Nazi based. Well thank God we would never fall for campaign rhetoric that goes against all previous records of a person cough Fetterman cough. Maybe the psyop you should be concerned about is another Democrat getting into the Senate and then immediately voting against what Democrat voters actually want.

Also I'm confused by your last paragraph there. If you're not saying that these kind of tattoos never get by the military sometimes then how is it definitely false what the other guys claiming? So which is it do they sometimes get through like he claims or they never get through like you were suggesting and now have suggested once again they are with that sentence? Can't be both.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Also I’m confused by your last paragraph there. If you’re not saying that these kind of tattoos never get by the military sometimes then how is it definitely false what the other guys claiming? So which is it do they sometimes get through like he claims or they never get through like you were suggesting and now have suggested once again they are with that sentence? Can’t be both.

You're becoming hoisted by your own control-the-conversation.

It is fine for a person with this tattoo to be in the military, because it's not a Nazi tattoo any more than the Iron Cross is a Nazi tattoo. That is an obvious conclusion that can be drawn just from the pure fact that this guy was in the military. It's only confusing if you are accepting the premise that it's an overtly and exclusively Nazi tattoo (to the same extent as having an SS lightning bolt or a swastika or something).

The objective fact of this guy being allowed to be in the military with this tattoo is a problem for the people who are pretending it's a Nazi tattoo, so one commenter tried to explain away that discrepancy by pretending that the US military is just lax and inconsistent about tattoo enforcement. I can actually believe that idea in some circumstances and depending on the details, but the person didn't know what they're talking about, so they doubled down about some weird aspects of what they were claiming in ways that revealed that they were definitely lying. They didn't know enough about the subject matter to make a well-constructed lie (which also betrays the fact that they were making up stuff they were talking about, which is it own whole type of interesting and important).

Hope that clears up your confusion.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Okay so you cleared my Confusion by doubling down and saying that the US military would never allow Nazi tattoos. Good to know. That is the hill you've decided to die on. Well seeing as how that silly statement goes against literal reality I think we know who really knows what they're talking about in this conversation don't we? Hint it's not the guy now apologizing for blatantly Nazi tattoos. Straight up downplaying nazi iconography. Wow.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

Straight up downplaying nazi iconography. Wow.

Wooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww