>

Jesus would have been effing horrified
“…luring migrants into trailers to poison them with gas."
So they’re just going full on Nazi at this point. >

I'm not sure the future tense is proper there. >

Which of those involved the future tense? >

“Going” full Nazi. They’ve been there for a while. I would argue since the caravan nonsense about how they’re bringing disease, the kids in cages, and the forced hysterectomies of migrant women. >

That's present progressive, not future. >

Oh so we're going to be going grammar nazi now are we? >

Actually, I think we're already there. >

But when will then be now? >

It's is now now.
Source: I'm in the now not the then >

TL;DR: Domestic terrorists talking to each other online about carrying out domestic terror attacks aimed at immigrants and infrastructure because, checks notes "immigrants bad". >

I’m not sure why we leave out the “religious” part of these descriptions of domestic terrorists, or insurgents, we sure don’t when they’re Muslim. Exactly zero of these terrorists at home are atheists or agnostic, they’re all Christian extremists who use their “faith” as an excuse for their actions. >

We leave it out bc that leads to uncomfortable truths about Manifest Destiny, and how religious zealotry has always played a large role in American imperialism in the Americas and the Pacific.
Harsh truth is these domestic terrorists would have a lot in common with the frontiersmen that carried out the ethnic cleansing of the West, resettled the former Mexican states, and generally pressed our claims to the North American interior. >

Richard Spencer, the suit-and-tie Nazi who got big in 2016, is the heir to Louisiana cotton farms that have been in his mother’s family for generations.
People like him understand the bloody details of how American wealth was tortured out of the bodies of poor laborers. When he rants about “octaroons”, he is tapping into a recent history of justifying racial hierarchies in the same breath as preserving Christianity in America. >

Professor Eddie that you? >

I’m guessing you’re comparing me to Eddie Glaude? 
If so, I’ll take the compliment. Big fan of Cornell West, James Baldwin, and other civil rights leaders that call out American fascism >

Yup! Your comments are well written and cogent. Rare around here. >

Welcome to reality Homeland Security, I guess. Little late, wonder if they're actually going to do anything about it. >

A lot of the guys who join CBP or ICE or what have you will be happy to turn a blind eye to “volunteers” who’ll do horrible things to undocumented people in a city or refugees out in the desert. They might even give those “volunteers” a helping hand sometimes. They get into the job for that. >

Look, I have no problem with them being here, I just want them to do it proper way, the legal way. If they have nothing to hide, why would they do this on their own, and endanger themselves and others? Like is it so hard to just go through the correct channels and fill out the paperwork and get trained and certified so you can murder migrants officially as a cop? >

These are the people who were turned away from the military and couldn't pass a physical to become a real cop.  The border is now where they can play out their special ops fantasies in the real world. >

That's a mighty fine podcast. >

I got into it a couple of years ago thanks to a friend that works in criminal justice of all things!
Missed all the Reddit drama about their sub being banned, but they seem to be pretty normal “dirtbag Left” with a funny critique of American capitalism. >

Correction; the head of DHS is warning us of this. I’m sure plenty of rank-and-file members are on the phone with their Gravy Seal militias passing them classified info as we speak. Make no mistake about it, the feds are filled to the gills with the same extremists they claim to be fighting. >

That's a BINGO! >

You just say “bingo” >

BINGO! What fun! >

Can we carve Nazi Swastikas in their foreheads also? Asking for a friend. >

So when does it go from "domestic-extremist fueled violence" to "domestic terrorist attacks"? They just changing the words cuz americans can't be terrorists? Or is it a complexion issue again? >

So wait. They’re pissed off about people coming into the country possibly being infected with a disease they believe to be a hoax? Okay man make up your mind, you can’t have it both ways. >

Oh, but they most emphatically CAN have it both ways.   That's the beauty of post-truth Trumpism.  You can believe absolutely conflicting "truths" just because you want to. >

Is this the first time in a long while they've actually called these nut jobs what they actually are? Terrorists.
It seems before they've been skating around the word. >

Radical Christian Terrorists >

So the ''covid isn't real'' crowd is using ''covid isn't over'' to inflict hardship on other people.
They really do have their brand dialed in at this point. >

They aren't arguing in good faith and they never have been. They'll say whatever is convenient to push their agenda at the time, and they don't care if they know it's incorrect or if they directly contradict themselves with the next issue that comes up. The card says moops. >

Upvoted for the reference to “alt right playbook” >

It amazes me how anti-immigration all these non-native americans are. >

How’d nonstop immigration work out for native Americans >

Immigration has been non stop for the past 200 years. What year has the US not accepted immigrants? >

Extremist fueled violence…uhh that sounds like terrorist activity. >

Perhaps if we started jailing terrorists in America, we could put an end to this headline popping up every week or so.
Or at least slow it down. >

Remember, these acts are committed by conservative christians, who believe they are acting in the "name of god" or some woowoo shit. >

Can someone please ELI5 Title 42, I've read it but I'm a bit lost as to why the supreme court ruled as it did. >

SCOTUS ruled that way because they are Republican dominated and the GOP wants to be able to keep brown people out >

Thank you. If you can, I'm looking for an explanation with more depth, maybe ELI5 wasn't the correct nomenclature here. >

so title 42 is part of a law that says the government can deny/slow the entry of people into the country during a public health emergency. >

Ah, thanks. >

with this, the Biden administration has said "COVID-19 is still a health emergency, but we do not need to enforce title 42 anymore"
CDC has said "This is still a public health emergency, but Title 42 does not need to be enforced anymore"
GOP States: "BUT IT IS A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY, WE CAN'T HAVE BROWN PEOPLE COMING INTO THE COUNTRY!!!!" >

i feel like 80~90% of people in this thread and 100% of the fashy fucks in the article dont really understand title 42 >

That is correct >

The word they’re looking for is domestic terrorist, not extremist. >

Wow, how shocking… Conservative Americans don’t get their way so they react with violent threats and sometimes actions.
It would be great if the mushy middle part of America that doesn’t like to pick sides would understand that a third of this country is willing to pull on embraced violence and fascism against fellow Americans so they can get their desires met.
Really people at this point if you get any family members that vote Republican you need to give them an ultimatum you’re either with us (America) or you’re against us. There is no two ways about it. You can’t attack democracy and freedom with violence and threats of violence and claim to love this country. It just doesn’t fucking work that way. >

Everything’s not so black and white ya fuckin dork >

Yes and no. I respect Americans who believe in the basic republican principal of social or economic conservatism, even if I don't agree with them (note: I will point out that principal does not inherently mean supporting hate, or religious intolerance, or any of that). I think there's room for that. I think there's room for people that don't agree with Democrats and want an alternative. As there should be. A democracy, or even a republic, thrives when multiple points of view are available.
However, the GOP in its current state is a machine built to cause harm and radicalize constituents to get its way and obtain power. I think the people that don't want to vote Dem, who want something more conservative but not nazi theocracy, should stop voting republican and get their own damn party going that respects their values rather than using them to push worse ones.
And yes, I could say the same about Dems too. >

BoTh ParTiEs ArE tHe SaMe >

That's literally the opposite of what they said, though. >

Mealteam 6 and Gravy Seals are on the warpath. >

Hey remember that guy who shot up the Walmart in El Paso? He was the kind of thing DHS is talking about. >

For every one of those guys there are hundreds LARPing and servicing each other next to their ARs. 
DHS will do the best they can and hopefully start laying some frightening punishments on them. >

They’re LARPing until they’re not. >

Then they are introduced to those who aren't LARPing. >

Or they just fucking shoot up a grocery store >

Does living in fear of these terrorists stop that? 
No. DHS, FBI, Police, they are tracking down the terrorists and arresting them.  Meanwhile them shooting up a grocery store will happen whether I insult their role play fantasies or not. >

Domestic terrorists* grow some
balls and call them what they are. >

ah homeland security.... years late to the party >


With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

​
Waylon: "Hey, Cletus, let's go put land mines in the dessert and blow up sum uh dem MexiCans tryin' ta come steal our jerbs!" 
Celtus: "I got a better idear, Waylon, let's go get us some Zyklon B, I herd Clyde dun got sum. And we put sum welfare checks in a trailer to trap dem dirty beaners, and BAM! Gas, em."
God Bless America... God Bless it right down the toilet. >

I'll gladly trade the migrants at the border for the right wing terrorists who are already here. >

Yup.  I'd happily take all those immigrants at the border if we could deport all Trump supporters to Russia. >

Half way works. >

Awful lot of government warnings of violence lately.
They don't seem to be doing too well containing it. We know they work forces, but no way they ALSO burn crosses, or so I assume. >

The 4 of July bomber was it for me. Too many 'potential terrorists" end up being mentally unstable boys who stumbled unknowingly into a relationship with an FBI agent or informant via social media before magically deciding to become violent. Go figure, convince a guy to build a bomb, record it, leave out the entire part where you tell him it's a good idea and how to build it and that you will supply the materials, and BAM! You just made a great headline for the holiday weekend. Job and funding safe for now.
God bless america. >

"the memo notes that planning by domestic violent extremists is often shielded by online security measures, limiting exposure by law enforcement"
​
cough, cough, twitter. >

Does Twitter have private groups? 
Not getting how Twitter can be used to organize crimes. >

We could spend a couple of billion to bring peace and stability to our southern neighbors and the migrant problem would solve itself. Politics these days is more about howling over non issues and finger pointing than solving real issues. >

Bro, a couple billion? You're really not seeing how massive the issue is in Mexico alone, plus many other Central American countries.  I doubt even if they legalized all drug that things would get better to the point people wouldn't want to leave their southern country of origin. >

I realize it is a totally low ball estimate for what needs to be done but it seems that no action is being taken because there is no money to be made doing it. >

I believe it's because the current status quo makes a whole lot of money in various forms. Everyone once in a while you can go down a rabbit whole when "why doesn't the US invade Mexico or why doesn't the US do a massive campaign to kill or stop the cartels" or "why doesn't Mexico's government team up with the U.S. military and start a massive anti-cartel campaign" etc topic comes up; it's not so straight forward. But anything less than that is difficult too because to sheer amount of corruption and infiltration of organized crime. I believe most major cartels have also diversified financially; like owning tourist areas and even the avocado industry.
But that's just a part of it. How to make Mexico very economically viable in other ways, increase wages, investments, etc so more people want to stay and live there is another huge challenge.
Plus then the Central American countries to add on top of that. 
I don't really know what to solution is. >

There’s absolutely no way you can convince me that a Republican / conservative is a good person. Supporting this behavior in any way is 110% unacceptable and repugnant.
Someone needs to put a stop to them, and if the police / feds won’t do it, somebody else unfortunately will and things will only continue to escalate from there. >

Aren't the Republicans the pro-life party? Poisoning migrants and setting up bombs is not very pro-life. >

Pfft they don't care once the "life" is outside of the womb, silly! >

Life begins at conception and must be protected, but its value plummets to zero once it’s out of the womb. >

Oh so conservative federal court judges, and the SCOTUS majority who backed them, are also getting in on the game of encouraging hate crimes and terrorism directed at perceived “illegals,” but in a way that keeps their hands clean.
Yeah, someone had to say it. >

Technically, Bin Laden didn't kill anyone on 9/11.
The GOP keeps learning the wrong lessons from wicked men. The road that they are now on leads to being a Xtian version of the ME extremists crossbred with White Christian Nationalism. I hope that dog never catches the car. >

They want to be the Sons of Jacob insurrectionist movement from Handmaids Tale and like June said, we’re not safe until they’re cold.  
As a vet I suggest not trying to reason with terrorists.  They don’t give a fuck about peace with anyone who isn’t them, they never will, and even among their ranks they’ll just in fight over purity tests until they eat themselves. >

Right wing terrorists speak one language: fear. Biden’s first priority should’ve been giving them a taste of their own medicine. >

Powers that be, don’t want to stop them.  On that, we all and the right wingers agree.  The oligarchs don’t give a fuck of democracy falls and we become a fascist theocracy as long as we all don’t own anything and have to rent everything from them. >

Radicalized Republican terrorism. >

Wait until they figure out since migrants are being removed due an executive order instead of a law there isn't any criminal charges and anyone who crossed the border since it's been in place can't be denied a visa due to it. >

That's not true though. Undocumented immigrants who have not been inspected by a CBP officer are not eligible for any Visa status (mexico border hoppers). Not even if they married a US citizen.
Undocumented immigrants who come on a temporary non immigrant visa like a B1/B2 legally and were inspected by a CBP officer can qualify for immigrant status if they marry a US citizen for example. >

Let’s get some trend going for the single younglings, marry someone outside the US. 
Just be friends and enjoy dual income. >

This kind of behavior would not even have been mentioned if it was Israel doing this to Palestinians. >

Bin Laden was the voice of Al Qaeda who radicalized thousands and inspired terrorism.
He was on top of our most wanted list.
So why do those who radicalize our domestic terrorists still get a 9pm slot on Fox News? >

Alternate headline: Republican propaganda fueling threats of extremist violence >

This isn't just Republican anymore. Biden could have gotten rid of it but he leaned into it >

what will be even more disgusting is everyday Republican voters who support this >

We're not going to be able to solve this problem.
The US is essentially 50 different countries. We can argue about this (Maybe it's 5 countries, or 7), but we're not one nation like France or Japan. We never have been.
A few of these 50 countries, Texas, Arizona, NM, California, have thousands of migrants entering every day. Lately, because of unrest in South America the number has increased. 
The Federal Government wants to help these folks, who are fleeing real hardship and despair. But most of us can't understand what it's like to have thousands of hungry people show up with nowhere to go and nothing to do.
I can kinda understand this (a little) because I live in a city where there are about 10,000-20,000 people living in tents on sidewalks around me. It sucks for them, and it sucks for people living here. I look at the migrant issue and I think that if we can't feed, clothe, medicate and give jobs to homeless US cititzens, how the heck are we going to help 1-2 million migrants coming into the country.
I'm no right-winger, and certainly no nazi. I just don't think this particular problem has a solution. >

In that sense the USA is more comparible to the EU, where there are some solutions that are shown to be workable.
Problem there is it costs money and the USA hates taxes, even in the first world standards of health care you won't spend money. >

Not sure about explosion of crime, sounds like usual US media bullshit.
But yes those tent cities are there, that's kind of what happens during wartime displacement. A LOT of people have to move and there is nowhere to go.
The issue there is scale of resettlement. The point is there IS a means of dealing with such issues and having a disjointed council of leaders as stated here isn't a valid excuse. >

Yes indeed, linked to the huge issues around the cost of living. Mirrored here in the UK by widespread strikes. Mostly driven by energy prices and a post covid economic downturn, also Brexit here in the UK.
But definitely not an explosion of crime and definitely not relating to migration. >

Indeed, such as picking up specific incidents and using them to illustrate an issue that can't be shown through the use of wider data?
If there is an explosion in crime why are we not seeing a rise in crime rates? In fact more specifically why aren't we seeing a rise in crime rates where ethnic minorities are the purpertators.
You are literally seeing what you want to see by cherry picking some stories with ethic links and ignoring all other crimes reported within a time period. There is no explosion of crime, only standard crime. >

And these people have the gall to call themselves "Christian"
Fucking horrible humans just like their cult leader(s) >

But they are Christian. I mean after all, don't we always ask the Muslim community to apologies for Muslim terrorists? Christians should start doing the same. >

...and I didn't say anything about the christian community at large apologizing for people who may commit terrorism in their name, I'm pointing out that people who do those kinds of things aren't Christian and definitely aren't following in Jesus's supposed teachings. >

...then again, millions if not billions have been slaughtered at the hands of supposed christians over the centuries.