The news woman says:
-
News is often biased but there is something surreal and disorienting when the lies are this transparent.
The truth is that ICE shot a man, possibly the wrong man, possibly they lost their temper over nothing. The local people were instantly outraged and the police responded to shut down the protest even though in theory you are allowed to hold a sign and say what you want in America.
In theory. But, this kind of protest? The order is out to nip it in the bud.
@futurebird ahh you see it then, this is the essence of control, the narrative.
control is all about owning the narrative, what is happening is they’re realizing they actually don’t have anyone on their side, so control is all they have left.
-
@futurebird
I can understand the desire to believe things still make sense and you don't live under the power of cruel and erratic liars. Or it's maybe only temporary and necessary, or not so bad after all, or it can be put right without tearing out half of your comfortable world view by the rotting roots.Yeah, it's easy for the police or border gestapo to get away with only a half-assed pretext or a clumsy lie. People look away. I can't blame them wanting to. But it's cowardice.
When I read 'shot in the back' I hear 'auf der Flucht erschossen'. I grew up in the Netherlands where the WWII Nazi occupation and its crimes were still living societal discourse.
-
They couldn't even find a clip of a teen tossing a water bottle, or someone with an unhinged sign.
The protestors must have been too beautiful to show. I think news has become especially wary of showing multi-racial protests. The vision of suburban white ladies and little elderly black people and Latinos and and everyone all upset together that their neighbor was shot doesn't tell the right story.
The racist oligarchs who own the media want to paint a narrative of racial division. If there were cross racial solidarity against these murders, it would shoot a hole in MAGA's narrative.
-
The news woman says:
"... and protests that turned violent ..."
The footage shows a crumpled car with half a dozen bullet holes in the door. The footage shows police holding batons with helmets and body armor walking backwards through the dusty Texas soil. A coordinated maneuver. But they do not show the protestors or their signs, or their voices.
But "it turned violent" we are told.
It seems to me like 'it' turned violent when ICE shot a man in the back.
@futurebird
What is wrong with law enforcement in the USA?
They just act like thugs who got a weapon and 0 training.In my country it is rare that the police take out their weapon, let alone shoot.
The last time I remember when it was not against armed criminals it was a big drunk crowd cornering 4 agents. After the warning shots they resulted to “shoot to kill”
-
The news woman says:
"... and protests that turned violent ..."
The footage shows a crumpled car with half a dozen bullet holes in the door. The footage shows police holding batons with helmets and body armor walking backwards through the dusty Texas soil. A coordinated maneuver. But they do not show the protestors or their signs, or their voices.
But "it turned violent" we are told.
It seems to me like 'it' turned violent when ICE shot a man in the back.
@futurebird "... and then the violence team arrived on scene to administer violence"
-
Who was this man? You might think.
Maybe there was a good reason for him being shot?I really think we need to raise the bar on what we consider a "good reason for being shot" but even by that standard. If you care (and you shouldn't) he didn't have a gun, he didn't attack the officers, he was even here legally it seems. If you care about that stuff. Which if you think about it is immaterial to shooting at someone to kill them.
@futurebird
You nailed a key point (IMO)America desperate needs a serious discussion about what justifies deadly force.
"Failure to immediately comply" should not be one of them.
-
@futurebird
You nailed a key point (IMO)America desperate needs a serious discussion about what justifies deadly force.
"Failure to immediately comply" should not be one of them.
@TCatInReality @futurebird Not just IYO but anyone with an intact conscience.
-
@TCatInReality @futurebird Not just IYO but anyone with an intact conscience.
@shannonpersists @TCatInReality
What is IYO?
-
@shannonpersists @TCatInReality
What is IYO?
@futurebird @TCatInReality Sorry I assumed you would know it's just in your opinion.
-
@TCatInReality @futurebird Not just IYO but anyone with an intact conscience.
@TCatInReality @futurebird In your opinion *
-
@TCatInReality @futurebird Not just IYO but anyone with an intact conscience.
There's the rub.
There's an enormous amount of effort, money and tech being used to switch off people's conscience.
Musk has gone so far as to explicitly attack human empathy.
Until we stop/slow the hatemongers, I'm not sure how we stop the decline of society.
-
There's the rub.
There's an enormous amount of effort, money and tech being used to switch off people's conscience.
Musk has gone so far as to explicitly attack human empathy.
Until we stop/slow the hatemongers, I'm not sure how we stop the decline of society.
@TCatInReality @futurebird I believe sometimes it's best to not say anything, but sometimes it's just as important to come back with a ruthless clapback. I definitely agree with you on that. Psychopathy has become mainstream and widespread.
-
Who was this man? You might think.
Maybe there was a good reason for him being shot?I really think we need to raise the bar on what we consider a "good reason for being shot" but even by that standard. If you care (and you shouldn't) he didn't have a gun, he didn't attack the officers, he was even here legally it seems. If you care about that stuff. Which if you think about it is immaterial to shooting at someone to kill them.
@futurebird the fact that there is no national law on rules of engagement for cops is gonzo. "Do not fire unless fired upon" could be the basis.
The frozen water army pricks are, of course, unhindered by any ROE, because fascism. It's scary AF.
-
@futurebird the fact that there is no national law on rules of engagement for cops is gonzo. "Do not fire unless fired upon" could be the basis.
The frozen water army pricks are, of course, unhindered by any ROE, because fascism. It's scary AF.
The thing is there are some laws that could apply, but the way that the public sees "law enforcement" creates this useful blindspot.
Many people, even people who think they aren't "MAGA" who don't like Trump and say they aren't racist will assume that if police shoot someone "there must have been a good reason"
It's unpleasant and uncomfortable to realize this isn't the case, not just in exceptional cases of "bad apples" but systemically. Over and over and over and over.
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
S suneauken@mastodon.world shared this topic
