@kluurs said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
@Horace said in ICE kills a US citizen in Minneapolis:
->
"That's an absolute joke of a take. He was there to agitate, and he aggressively inserted himself into the middle of an already violent law enforcement encounter. "
ICU nurses have a long history of domestic terrorism. Really?
You got that from "he was there to agitate"? Try harder here. He was actually there to agitate. He had another physical run-in with ICE a week or two prior to this one. Again as a totally innocent bystander I'm sure.
My take...
Best to not light a match to see where the dynamite is. It was foolish to bring the gun. If you're facing off against Bruce Lee, the knife in your hand will not likely provide protection - but gives Bruce the opportunity to "defend himself" to your detriment. I think we're all in agreement that bringing the gun was a mistake - but many of the 2nd amendment crowd would typically support - e.g. Kyle Rittenhouse brought weapon to protest - no problem.
Kyle was there to potentially use it to lawfully protect something or someone, if necessary. You can do the thought experiment if you think Alex had similar motivations. Any such experiment ends with him shooting ICE officers.
While you've suggested otherwise, I don't think the nurse represented an intentional agitator, let alone domestic terrorist. He was classified as an observer to document ICE activities. In the videos, things seemed to go south when he tried to assist the woman who had been pushed to the pavement. Some would think that assisting a woman thrown to the ground was a compassion gesture - maybe something a nurse would be do. But, other more knowledgeable people, of course, see this as wanton aggression perpetrated against authority
He was there to agitate and disrupt. I have no doubt of that. You don't thrust yourself between a person involved in a violent dispute with an officer, then resist arrest as the officer attempts to subdue you, and just claim innocent bystander good Samaritan status. Yes, that is the absolute joke take.
There are potential scenarios where there's a really bad cop doing a really bad thing where such an action would be legit heroic. In this case, it was an agitator responding to the narrative running through his head, without regard for whether he was interfering with police activity.
The shooting began while Pretti was pinned on the ground by several agents, and continued after he collapsed motionless. One agent fired three rounds into Pretti's back while he was bracing himself with one hand still holding his phone. This is a measured response to a perceived threat? Not excessive? Appropriate? How was he aggressively resisting when pinned to the ground after the first shot? Was his aggression attempting to help up the woman?
I am definitely not claiming that level heads ruled the day, and I won't be surprised if an ICE officer or three gets convicted here. I AM claiming that the situation was intentionally and aggressively made possible by the agitators, of whom Alex was one. It would be interesting to know what prompted the original shove that spurred Alex into heroic action. A random shove of someone walking by peacefully, I'll bet.
Within hours, without any investigation, high-ranking officials provided the following: White House advisor Stephen Miller alleged without evidence that Pretti was a "domestic terrorist" who tried to "assassinate federal law enforcement". DHS Secretary Kristi Noem accused Pretti of brandishing his firearm and committing "an act of domestic terrorism". Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino speculated Pretti was "more than likely" there to assault officers. That's nonsense.
Yes that was all garbage, and everybody in the pundit class on the right admits it, from what I've heard. It does nobody any good for the administration to be spouting nonsense like that.
