3 ms·
> Okay. How many Americans being murdered, beaten and deported without warrant, due process or oversight, all in explicit and direct violation of the Constituti
by lurk2 1y ago
> Okay. How many Americans being murdered, beaten and deported without warrant, due process or oversight, all in explicit and direct violation of the Constitution are you willing to tolerate. Ten? A hundred? A hundred thousand? […] As for me, I won't tolerate any violations of the rights of those protected by the law.
This is demonstrably false; if you aren’t violently resisting it, you’re tolerating it the same way that I am tolerating it. Consider this; Israel’s security is effectively guaranteed by the United States. Israel has killed innocent civilians. The United States is at least partially complicit in these crimes insofar as it continues to finance Israeli national security. This is ongoing. It’s happening now. You can say you won’t tolerate it, but you are tolerating it; you’re here with me now having this conversation, and not engaged in a campaign of guerrilla warfare against those facilitating these crimes.
When I say “the ideal number is 0,” it means just that; there’s not a situation in which it would become legally acceptable for a citizen to be deported, but it could feasibly happen, and if it did, this would not invalidate immigration enforcement as a practice.
> So you want to have a society like the USSR, East Germany and the like, where masked, anonymous police can demand identity documents without warrants, probable cause or exigent circumstance and even if you produce such they can ignore them and abduct you off the street without recourse?
None of that appears anywhere in my post.
> [1] Let's deport you and your family to CECOT "by accident." Oh gee. Sorry, lurk2. But our app says you're a dangerous alien. No, you don't get a lawyer or in front of a judge -- you're illegal, you don't have rights -- even though the Constitution says that all people in the US are entitled to due process.
You’re trying to use this as a rhetorical flourish (“How would you feel if the thing I’m pretending like you’re endorsing happened to you, huh?”) but the way you’ve written it betrays that it isn’t meant as a parable for me to learn from, but a fantasy for you to indulge in. You’re doing this because your arguments are weak and you have to rely on a resentful dream that I’ll be proven wrong in an /r/LeopardsAteMyFace style comeuppance.
- nobody9999 1y agoI see that you're not willing to substantially engage in discussing the blatant constitutional violations of DHS/ICE/CBP. That's fine. I'll note your username and ignore your blatherings from now on. Have a good day. I hope you don't run afoul of the masked thugs.
- lurk2 1y ago> I see that you're not willing to substantially engage in discussing the blatant constitutional violations of DHS/ICE/CBP. I've explicitly addressed everything you've posted. > Have a good day. I hope you don't run afoul of the masked thugs. I hope that you develop a maturity in your old age that obviously didn't come to you in your youth.
- nobody9999 1y agoI apologize. I completely missed your issue. I'll try to address it here. >I've explicitly addressed everything you've posted. Actually, you ignored (at least IMHO) the most important issue I addressed: that of the curtailment of our hard-won individual rights of free expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, due process and privacy, among others. You know, those rights that are explicitly enshrined in the Constitution, paid for with the blood and treasure of our ancestors and protected with the blood and treasure of more recent ancestors. You didn't address that at all. That's what's got me up in arms here. You appear to have imagined that I must think that "everyone on the planet, especially the darkies from Central and South America must be allowed to live in lurk2's house, eat his food and fuck his wife." Far from it. My problem with all of this is that when you take away the rights enshrined in our Constitution for some, you set the precedent to do so for everyone. And I'm not okay with that. I guess I also asked you the wrong question. You appear to be okay with the diminution and curtailment of the rights explicitly protected in our highest law. I guess I'd like to know why you're so willing to do so. And yes, I strongly suspect that you're not posting in good faith, since you ignored (and then claimed otherwise) the most important parts of the discussion we ('we' meaning the HN community) were having about this. Sadly, I expect you're channeling the anti-semites that Sartre mused upon[0] many years ago. And more's the pity. [0] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7870768-never-believe-that-anti-semites-are-completely-unaware-of-the-absurdity https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7870768-never-believe-that-...