ICE misconduct megathread (Immigration "enforcement" in the US)

[The Brain]

The US is a write-off. Domestic policy: death squads. Foreign policy: attacking allies.

[crazy canuck]

The person ICE murdered

The man fatally shot by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis was Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a U.S. citizen with no criminal record, officials said.

Mr. Pretti, who was 37, was a registered nurse who worked in the intensive-care unit at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Minneapolis, according to interviews and public records, and lived in an apartment in Minneapolis a short drive away from where he was killed.

I suggest the cutsie thread title be changed

Edit: someone put together some of the victim's pictures

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DT6045sDZ3Z/?igsh=MWg5NGwyd3J1eWwwdg==

[crazy canuck]

I have watched the latest incidents from a few angles and this is very obviously another execution.

And an extremely dangerous one to his fellow agents as well. The agent claims to have been in fear of his life from an unarmed (they'd removed his gun) blind man (pepper sprayed from within inches of his eyes) on his knees, facing away. And HSA claims this was a counter-terrorism action.

The felons then fled the scene of the murder.

Yeah, they didn't even know he had a gun until they had him pinned on the ground. Shortly before executing him for the audacity of shielding a women from pepper spray.

[Maladict]

I suggest the cutsie thread title be changed

Agreed

[Syt]

I suggest the cutsie thread title be changed

Fair point

[crazy canuck]

Thanks

[Tamas]

I know I shouldn't be surprised, and I am not, but I am still finding it extraordinary that the FBI director and other senior government and federal leaders continue to completely ignore the well-documented reality and talk absolute and obvious falsehoods about the murder.

We keep crying about social media and such but trivially easy access to cameras and even more importantly to the sharing of recorded footage is, once again, instrumental in holding the ones in power to account.

If it wasn't for those recordings all we'd know now is the official narrative and eye witnesses (fellow protesters) disagreeing with it. No doubt there'd be a debate on this very forum on which one we should take at face value.

[frunk]

I know I shouldn't be surprised, and I am not, but I am still finding it extraordinary that the FBI director and other senior government and federal leaders continue to completely ignore the well-documented reality and talk absolute and obvious falsehoods about the murder.

We keep crying about social media and such but trivially easy access to cameras and even more importantly to the sharing of recorded footage is, once again, instrumental in holding the ones in power to account.

If it wasn't for those recordings all we'd know now is the official narrative and eye witnesses (fellow protesters) disagreeing with it. No doubt there'd be a debate on this very forum on which one we should take at face value.

Social media lets people ignore the obvious evidence in favor of either distractions from what is happening or by providing convenient narratives about the event rather than viewing and judging it themselves.

So I think it still bears a considerable responsibility.

[crazy canuck]

And before social media people were able to video things.

Social media allows the US government to spread its lies to its followers, who have no idea they are being lied to because that social media is their only source of information.

[Tamas]

Yeah we had no overwhelming propaganda through the media before social media, what the hell are you guys smoking. Fox News and that's not even a state one.

With social media people can connect and organise.

If that was so inconsequential like you claim, autocracies wouldn't be limiting access to it.

[viper37]

Social media reinforce our own echo chamber.
I get fed with right wing propaganda conspiracy theories as soon as I click on a link to read what I think is some news. Deleting cookies and browsing in private windows ain't enough anymore.

[Tamas]

You are missing my point. I will try again:

Newspapers: improve the reach of the government and those with substantial financial resources. Heavily limited by distribution logistics. Extremely limited option as platform for an individual or a disorganised community.

Radio and TV: as above except near impossible as a individual or not tightly organised community/organisation to utilise, at least not without the government having trivial and effective tools to curtail it.

Social media: very effective for the government and other malicious actors with significant financial resources. Extremely low barrier of entry for utilisation by individuals and disorganised communities.

So yeah, cross of social media from that list and you have curtailed the government's arsenal to 3 otherajor media areas. But you have also eliminated the only efficient way for a grass roots movement or for mere individuals to resist l, inform, and be informed.

[Tamas]

Meanwhile:

Meanwhile, at the Department of Homeland Security press conference in Minneapolis, the commander of the US border patrol Greg Bovino lectured the hall and listeners virtually about "choices" and how "many actions that take place are due to our choices."

"And then when you choose," he said, "When someone chooses to listen to a politician, a so-called journalist, a community leader that spouted that type of vilification towards law enforcement or anything else we choose to listen to that that is a choice, and there are consequences and actions there also. I think we saw that yesterday."

It's a fairly polite way to threaten protestors, I'll give him that much.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah we had no overwhelming propaganda through the media before social media, what the hell are you guys smoking. Fox News and that's not even a state one.

With social media people can connect and organise.

If that was so inconsequential like you claim, autocracies wouldn't be limiting access to it.

If you don't see the difference, I'm not sure I can explain it to you

I now know how old you are, you post like you are a lot younger because you seem to not know the world before the Internet.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah we had no overwhelming propaganda through the media before social media, what the hell are you guys smoking. Fox News and that's not even a state one.

With social media people can connect and organise.

If that was so inconsequential like you claim, autocracies wouldn't be limiting access to it.

Yeah. I think there is a bit of both here. Law enforcement, intelligence agencies, the coercive wing of the state lie - and they have always lied.

There is an element of social media that makes it easier for the truth to be recorded and spread. The new thing in the context of senior leaders of a law enforcement agency depending their guys killing someone is the sheer volume of video being circulated from different angles showing the shooting.

On social media more generally though I'm really struck by a line in the list I shared of the German journalist from what she'd heard from people in Iran where one was just saying they had no idea they were so infiltrated. We look back 15 years ago and social media had a huge, transformative role in the Arab Spring, I think it was important in other revolutions too like the Maidan Revolution. One is purely anecdotal/perceptual but there seem to be fewer of those revolutions in recent years and also that line from Iran. I can't help but wonder if repressive regimes are now technologically sophisticated that social media is as (perhaps more) helpful in infiltrating, tracking and disrupting activist networks as it previously has been in organising them and disseminating.

Edit: Also - could be totally wrong - but I think the failed Turkish coup was maybe the pivot point between these two eras.