You'd probably look better as a Mexican because right now you look/sound like a genocidal maniac.I am glad I don't look/sound mexican.Here is a 5-minute video showing some of the crimes ICE has committed in Minnesota.
I think the ambiguity was unconscious, like the racism of people who “have black friends” but have never been at a black family’s dinner table or invited any black person to their own.@Derec -- What's your immediate emotional response when you read facts like the above?From Trump's 2025 Inauguration to December, there have been 622,000 deported, 1,900,000 self-deportations and at least 65,735 migrants currently in ICE detention.
Derec said:Had democratic politicians allowed immigration laws to be properly enforced instead of protecting illegals, we would not be here.
“We”?? You and ICE are an item?
Your slip is showing, ma’am.
Everything is Dems’ fault so fuck ‘em if “we” decide to murder them, disappear them or whatever. All for the public good! Ask any Trumpsucker, and they’ll agree.
Could the 1st-person pronoun have been deployed for even more personal reasons?
The ambiguity in "we would not be here" is interesting. There is a literal meaning and a more figurative meaning. I'm not sure what my initial reading would have been. (I first read the Derec quote inside Elixir's response.)
"We"
Literal: "We" == "I (Derec) and one or more others (ICE agents?)"
Figurative: "We" == "The country"
"Here"
Literal: "Here" == "Minnesota"
Figurative: "Here" == "The situation where fascist ICE thugs are committing crimes."
I strongly believe that Derec intended the figurative meaning (perhaps with "noble warriors" substituted for "fascist thugs" and "cleansings" subbing for "crimes") but find it interesting that there is a literal meaning in conformance with Derec's politics. Freudian slip on his part? Probably not, but I don't think we can rule it out.
It's the same crowd that also says that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.One side is arguing that officers have absolute immunity (they don't), and are excusing their actions no matter what they do, the other side isn't. Actually this is all on the law and order crowd who believe the law and order "enforcers" can do whatever the fuck they want.There are federal troops in our cities, which is killing people and causing tension to skyrocket. Arguing that "both sides" are responsible for what is inarguably an authoritarian policy doesn't do the word "absurd" justice. This is a violent, frightening, abusive exercise of power intended to cause unrest in order to escalate things so that more oppressive policies can be brought to bear.It's not partisan to acknowledge that both sides contributed to the mess we find ourselves in.A page out of the GOP partisan playbook. What utter crapola.
The Dems are undoubtedly incompetent and they are severely out of touch with most Americans, but their intentions are not to take away rights and terrify people.
White middle-class women apparently aren't safe either, so be glad you're not anyone near ICE.I am glad I don't look/sound mexican.Here is a 5-minute video showing some of the crimes ICE has committed in Minnesota.
And Trump has not sent ICE to Siberia yet.White middle-class women apparently aren't safe either, so be glad you're not anyone near ICE.I am glad I don't look/sound mexican.Here is a 5-minute video showing some of the crimes ICE has committed in Minnesota.
Just wait!And Trump has not sent ICE to Siberia yet.White middle-class women apparently aren't safe either, so be glad you're not anyone near ICE.I am glad I don't look/sound mexican.Here is a 5-minute video showing some of the crimes ICE has committed in Minnesota.
Yeah, all that. I still didn’t expect Stephen Miller to be such an effective President. His ability to bully, grift, lie, cheat and steal is truly impressive.Why on Earth not? It's been pretty obvious that the Trump "administration" are a bunch of bullies, grifters and thieves, and we have plenty of historical precedent for what happens when such people get hold of a nation state.
I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
Then ICE should make them mandatory. Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed. This is why. But I bet they are breathing a sigh of relief that the cop wasn't wearing one when he was "hit".I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
They generally don't. I'm sure that DHS doesn't want them to. They were ordered to wear them in Portland OR by the judge there. But that order doesn't apply to MN.
Of course it's the same asshole in charge. Gregory Bovino
Then ICE should make them mandatory. Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed. This is why. But I bet they are breathing a sigh of relief that the cop wasn't wearing one when he was "hit".I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
They generally don't. I'm sure that DHS doesn't want them to. They were ordered to wear them in Portland OR by the judge there. But that order doesn't apply to MN.
Of course it's the same asshole in charge. Gregory Bovino
I see Bastula posted the 10 sec (and more) in post no. 261.But Harry, the video is 10 seconds too short!I can't believe what you are saying.That is what I am asking. We just do not know.Do you want to speculate what could have happened 10 seconds before the video that could justify Good's murder.But what was happneing 10secs before the videoes we see?
Did she/they yell abuse at the ICE (doubt their parentage etc.).
Speed in?
I do not know
You do realise that, even in the police-gun happy US, none of those actions are punishable by summary execution in the street?
Yep. That is the issue. She probably violated the law by obstructing ICE and not following their commands to get out of the SUV. <<BTW: FUCK ICE>>. But does anyone say that she deserved to get shot in the face over this? It's also stunning that anyone could say that she was trying to run over him. Are we all seeing the same video? Clearly, she turned the wheels in the opposite direction from him, trying to drive away. How can anyone disagree with this???
Not only are body cams DHS policy, a federal judge ordered them to wear and use them. What a surprise, the federal hov’t ignoring its policy and a judge’s order!Then ICE should make them mandatory. Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed. This is why. But I bet they are breathing a sigh of relief that the cop wasn't wearing one when he was "hit".I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
They generally don't. I'm sure that DHS doesn't want them to. They were ordered to wear them in Portland OR by the judge there. But that order doesn't apply to MN.
Of course it's the same asshole in charge. Gregory Bovino
Not only are body cams DHS policy, a federal judge ordered them to wear and use them. What a surprise, the federal hov’t ignoring its policy and a judge’s order!Then ICE should make them mandatory. Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed. This is why. But I bet they are breathing a sigh of relief that the cop wasn't wearing one when he was "hit".I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
They generally don't. I'm sure that DHS doesn't want them to. They were ordered to wear them in Portland OR by the judge there. But that order doesn't apply to MN.
Of course it's the same asshole in charge. Gregory Bovino
Sure, holding the phone in both hands will give you steader vids. But how will you aim the gun? with your teeth?Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed.
ICE GOONS BOOTED OUT OF SHOP
Also ordered in Chicago.Not only are body cams DHS policy, a federal judge ordered them to wear and use them. What a surprise, the federal hov’t ignoring its policy and a judge’s order!Then ICE should make them mandatory. Holding a cell phone in one hand while shooting at a person should never be allowed. This is why. But I bet they are breathing a sigh of relief that the cop wasn't wearing one when he was "hit".I thought ICE officers had body cams. Why did this one have to use his cell phone? If he had a body cam, we could all see exactly what he was facing, which was the left front side of the car. And ICE training needs to get back to the basics for officers safety...don't walk in front of a car.
They generally don't. I'm sure that DHS doesn't want them to. They were ordered to wear them in Portland OR by the judge there. But that order doesn't apply to MN.
Of course it's the same asshole in charge. Gregory Bovino
The district court judge who ordered them to use body cams was for the Portand, OR area. That ruling doesn't apply to MN. Unless you know of a different judges ruling for MN.
That was my unspoken point!crazyfingers said:I'm not surprised at all that they are ignoring policy. They ignore constitutional rights. What's policy next to that.