Washington Man Accused of Hurling Molotov Cocktails at ICE Detention Center Killed by Police

[Politesse]

The owners of a for-profit internment camp are not innocents. They are arbiters of violence, and violence begets more violence. It is a fact, beyond right or wrong. And they do it for money.

Attacking the facility is very unlikely to injure the owners, and far far more likely to injure those in the facility, including both the residents and the officers.

You say that despite the clear evidence of the case; the only person injured in any way whatsoever was the perpetrator, who was shot to death.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Yeah, this guy was a reckless piece of shit. Molotov cocktails are not the answer.

The only way to accomplish an ethical goal here would require a much larger force armed with rifles, armored vehicles, heavy weapons, and coordination with those held unlawfully in custody to limit casualties.

It wouldn't even take all that many people. A small force of snipers could play havoc with the guards without being a risk to those being held. Half your force takes one shot and retreats. The other half take one shot at anyone who comes after them, then they retreat. Keep leapfrogging back until you have broken contact.

Rinse and repeat. If they guard the camp too heavily switch targets. Very soon nobody's going to be willing to be a guard.

Rather than use actual violence to threaten accomplices (guards), I say the mere threat of potential personal loss is more effective.
Dox ICE workers... all of them, not just the guards. Publish the names, addresses, children's names, schools, and school addresses of all ICE workers under the context of "if their own children are at risk, they may change their minds about supporting fascism in the name of a demagog".

You want some secretary in an office somewhere that does ICE related work to suffer because of the commands of those who control and direct ICE?

 

[Politesse]

Yeah, this guy was a reckless piece of shit. Molotov cocktails are not the answer.

The only way to accomplish an ethical goal here would require a much larger force armed with rifles, armored vehicles, heavy weapons, and coordination with those held unlawfully in custody to limit casualties.

It wouldn't even take all that many people. A small force of snipers could play havoc with the guards without being a risk to those being held. Half your force takes one shot and retreats. The other half take one shot at anyone who comes after them, then they retreat. Keep leapfrogging back until you have broken contact.

Rinse and repeat. If they guard the camp too heavily switch targets. Very soon nobody's going to be willing to be a guard.

Rather than use actual violence to threaten accomplices (guards), I say the mere threat of potential personal loss is more effective.
Dox ICE workers... all of them, not just the guards. Publish the names, addresses, children's names, schools, and school addresses of all ICE workers under the context of "if their own children are at risk, they may change their minds about supporting fascism in the name of a demagog".

Lol!

You would be the first to call that persecution and harassment if anyone tried it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The owners of a for-profit internment camp are not innocents. They are arbiters of violence, and violence begets more violence. It is a fact, beyond right or wrong. And they do it for money.

Attacking the facility is very unlikely to injure the owners, and far far more likely to injure those in the facility, including both the residents and the officers.

You say that despite the clear evidence of the case; the only person injured in any way whatsoever was the perpetrator, who was shot to death.

Because his attack failed.

 

[Politesse]

You say that despite the clear evidence of the case; the only person injured in any way whatsoever was the perpetrator, who was shot to death.

Because his attack failed.

Why? I admit that military strategy is not my forte, but if I were going onto a campus with the intent of killing people, my first shot would be aimed at the head of a human being, not an empty vehicle.

 

[ZiprHead]

Yeah, this guy was a reckless piece of shit. Molotov cocktails are not the answer.

The only way to accomplish an ethical goal here would require a much larger force armed with rifles, armored vehicles, heavy weapons, and coordination with those held unlawfully in custody to limit casualties.

It wouldn't even take all that many people. A small force of snipers could play havoc with the guards without being a risk to those being held. Half your force takes one shot and retreats. The other half take one shot at anyone who comes after them, then they retreat. Keep leapfrogging back until you have broken contact.

Rinse and repeat. If they guard the camp too heavily switch targets. Very soon nobody's going to be willing to be a guard.

Rather than use actual violence to threaten accomplices (guards), I say the mere threat of potential personal loss is more effective.
Dox ICE workers... all of them, not just the guards. Publish the names, addresses, children's names, schools, and school addresses of all ICE workers under the context of "if their own children are at risk, they may change their minds about supporting fascism in the name of a demagog".

DO NOT do this here, anyone. I will immediately ban anyone that attempts to do this here.

ZiprHead
Administrator

 

[Half-Life]

I'm just in shock that the leftists aren't condemning this. They have no problem condemning when a Christian does something bad or a right-winger does something bad. But when a leftist does something bad? Not a peep.

Maybe I shouldn't be in shock and just expect this type of hypocrisy.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'm just in shock that the leftists aren't condemning this. They have no problem condemning when a Christian does something bad or a right-winger does something bad. But when a leftist does something bad? Not a peep.

Maybe I shouldn't be in shock and just expect this type of hypocrisy.

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

The other is killing people for being gay/brown/women/trans and exercising bodily autonomy.

One is freeing the oppressed, and the other is literal oppression. That's the difference.

 

[Politesse]

I'm just in shock that the leftists aren't condemning this. They have no problem condemning when a Christian does something bad or a right-winger does something bad. But when a leftist does something bad? Not a peep.

Maybe I shouldn't be in shock and just expect this type of hypocrisy.

You don't quite get it. No one approved when "a leftist", for instance, opened fire at a bunch of congressman on a baseball field a couple years ago, genuinely wounding six people and endangering many more. The thing about the left is that we are capable of critical thinking and don't just evaluate the morality of a situation based on the political affiliation of those involved. Attacking a concentration camp is not, however, either a terrorist attack or an assassination attempt. Only one person, the perpetrator, was harmed in any way and no one is "terrified" except a bunch of Nazis-for-hire. Even you aren't "terrified" by this event, you are feigning outrage to score a political point. I daresay in your heart of hearts, you're happy that this event occurred. You like it when leftists get shot to death, for one, and more importantly, you like having fodder for a tu quoque argument that is frustratringly difficult for people on the right to make with any vigor all that often, given the customary pacifism of the center left.

 

[Derec]

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

Wrong. He was trying to release illegal aliens detained by ICE in detention centers.

Why is violent crime defended by leftists when one of their own commits it for leftist reasons?

By the way, this guy was a member of the antifa.
The Man Killed In An Attack On An ICE Jail Said He Was Fighting "Against The Forces Of Evil"

Willem Van Spronsen aka Emma Durutti: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

 

[Derec]

Funny you should mention the ballot box, Captain Ignorant, because, once again, that's the one fight she didn't lose.

Yes, she did. According to the rules of US presidential elections she lost.
Running up the score in California gets you nothing. Ignoring Wisconsin and Pennsylvania loses you everything.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

One is freeing the oppressed, and the other is literal oppression. That's the difference.

Bullshit. When people throw molotovs at cars randomly or when Antifa attacks random white people or riots in the street, they are not freeing any oppressed people. That's just their propaganda.

 

[Half-Life]

I'm just in shock that the leftists aren't condemning this. They have no problem condemning when a Christian does something bad or a right-winger does something bad. But when a leftist does something bad? Not a peep.

Maybe I shouldn't be in shock and just expect this type of hypocrisy.

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

The other is killing people for being gay/brown/women/trans and exercising bodily autonomy.

One is freeing the oppressed, and the other is literal oppression. That's the difference.

How was he trying to liberate people inside? He threw a bomb at a jeep outside. How was that supposed to free people?

 

[Politesse]

I'm just in shock that the leftists aren't condemning this. They have no problem condemning when a Christian does something bad or a right-winger does something bad. But when a leftist does something bad? Not a peep.

Maybe I shouldn't be in shock and just expect this type of hypocrisy.

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

The other is killing people for being gay/brown/women/trans and exercising bodily autonomy.

One is freeing the oppressed, and the other is literal oppression. That's the difference.

How was he trying to liberate people inside? He threw a bomb at a jeep outside. How was that supposed to free people?

Oh, now you start asking logical questions about the incident.

Well, I'll follow it up: How was it supposed to, as you claim, kill anyone?

 

[Elixir]

One is freeing the oppressed, and the other is literal oppression. That's the difference.

Bullshit. When people throw molotovs at cars randomly or when Antifa attacks random white people or riots in the street, they are not freeing any oppressed people. That's just their propaganda.

Yeah! Just like when neo-nazis murder people with cars! That guy fucking KILLED a goddam jeep!

 

[Arctish]

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

Wrong. He was trying to release illegal aliens detained by ICE in detention centers.

Are you deliberately conflating illegal aliens with asylum seekers as a rhetorical device, or are you unable to grasp the difference between them?

This is an extremely important point, so please answer the question. Because illegal aliens have been found to have committed a crime, whereas asylum seekers are following the law. Your constant accusation that asylum seekers are criminals is either profoundly ignorant or just a bullshit excuse to justify their imprisonment.

 

[Elixir]

Are you deliberately conflating illegal aliens with asylum seekers as a rhetorical device, or are you unable to grasp the difference between them?

I'm sure Derec will be pleased to clear this up.

Your constant accusation that asylum seekers are criminals is either profoundly ignorant or just a bullshit excuse to justify their imprisonment.

QFT

 

[ruby sparks]

I read that the guy was attacking the buses, that were going to be used in ICE 'round ups'.

Even that can't be justified, imo.

Plus, people could have been killed or injured, regardless of whether that was his intention. Especially if, as reported, he was trying to ignite a large gas cylinder. And carrying a rifle? Guy was crazy and dangerous (and possibly suicidal, if reports of him leaving a 'goodbye' note are correct). I'm not even confident he wouldn't have been shot by armed police here in generally much less gun-toting UK.

 

[Jarhyn]

I never said he wasn't a fucking idiot. In fact I'm pretty clear in my other posts in the thread that he was. His tactics were awful.

 

[RavenSky]

The difference? One is attempting to liberate victims of a concentration camp from racists, oftentimes who are literal (Neo-)Nazis.

Wrong. He was trying to release illegal aliens detained by ICE in detention centers.

Are you deliberately conflating illegal aliens with asylum seekers as a rhetorical device, or are you unable to grasp the difference between them?

yes