this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2026
933 points (99.6% liked)

News

34490 readers
3758 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Gift link, with URL shortener so that Lemmy doesn't remove the gift token

Additional reporting from Bring Me The News. They have removed the following text from their coverage:

Federal agents briefly detained our reporter at the scene, who says he was tackled to the ground and had a gun put in his face.

New York Times

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 225 points 1 day ago (11 children)

Watch the video.

It's tough, because it's literally a video of a murder.

But we all have to watch it.

3-4 Icicles at holding a man down and beating him, one of them lets off a single shot that instantly makes their victim go limp. Then 2-3 other icicles all draw and fire multiple shots into the body while the rest scatter.

Shit isn't getting better and complying doesn't work.

[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 99 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This is why I'm saying we need to get even more violent in retaliation.

People can downvote me all you want, but you know I'm right. It's literally the only thing these actual monkey-brains understand: violence.

If there's 4 of them beating and killing one person, there needs to be at least 10 of us with knives and aluminum bats hitting right back. We need to mix up our own chemical warfare agents.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 7 points 18 hours ago

we need to get even more violent in retaliation.

That's how you lose.

That's what they want.

Right now two white people getting killed by ICE in broad daylight with dozens of cameras on them is slowly but surely destroying the GOP. There's nothing that shifts public opinion more than a clear narrative of "good guys" and "bad guys". When one side is armed and the other side is unarmed, and the armed people are killing unarmed people, there are clear good guys and bad guys. The white house is doing everything they can to spin the Minneapolis victims as "terrorists", but when they're unarmed it's a matter of seconds to disprove what they're saying.

As soon as the anti-ICE protesters start getting armed and start shooting back, the story gets complicated again. It becomes much easier to claim the protesters are violent if they're shooting back. It's dead easy to claim an ICE goon feared for his life if someone shot at him.

"They're shooting at ICE" gives Trump the excuse he needs to send in the military and start having guys in APCs start shooting heavy weapons into a crowd. It's also much more likely the soldiers are going to obey if they're getting shot at. If they're sent in against unarmed protesters and ordered to mow them down, it's very likely they'll refuse that order. And, refusing that order would be a big step in the end of the Trump regime.

Not shooting back is the main thing that the Minneapolis protesters have done right so far. It's also the most difficult thing to do.

But hey, it's America. America thinks guns solve problems. So, go solve that problem Americanely, while the rest of the world just watches the US tear itself apart and shakes their heads.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 69 points 1 day ago (2 children)

there needs to be at least 10 of us with knives and aluminum bats hitting right back.

No, because that will make them open fire...

What will work is protesters in plated vests with rifles.

Every state is different. For Minnesota it's illegal to open carry a rifle, and there's no permit to open carry a rifle. But if you get a permit to carry a handgun, you're now allowed to carry a rifle.

The threat of effective violence is more effective than the actual act of ineffective violence, even when the threat is just passively implied by the presence of rifles and plates.

It costs less than a grand to get kitted out just like an ICE agent, hell, most of them don't even seem to carry rifles, but all the more reason for protesters.

[–] Wytch@lemmy.zip 42 points 1 day ago

The Black Panthers seem to understand what it's gonna take to deter Miller's stormtroopers. Superior firepower.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 12 points 1 day ago

Protesters should assign disciplined guardians: Kitted out, and watching from rooftops and windows.

These terrorist cowards might come to understand the words "constitutional oversight" when they break RoE and are gravely punished from above in return.

[–] silentjohn@lemmy.ml 41 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Show up alone, you get arrested. Show up with 100 people, you get shot. We need to show up with 100,000+ people.

Organize! Join an organization! DSA, PSL, something anything!

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago

What you do is break that 100k up into 100 separate 1000 person marches. That then also spreads out the Feds and makes it basically impossible for them to round everyone up.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@reddthat.com 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Pretty sure they did have 100k+ people yesterday at least. Maybe not yet this early, but 100k people does not mean much when the organized violent thugs just wait until they can find people away from the large crowds and murder them on the street.

[–] silentjohn@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I see one person in this video. Imagine if there was 100,000.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@reddthat.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There was. And then they left ICE intact, which then found a spot the next morning with maybe a dozen or people and did a murder.

[–] silentjohn@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

maybe a dozen people

I think you're missing my entire point.

What is it then? 100k+ people should exist 24/7 around the entire nation on each block?

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Other people who read the news are not idiots and do not need this thinking outlined for them, it does nobody besides feds trying to make bullshit arrests for terroristic threats any good to share these thoughts on public forums

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Implying the feds aren't running a troll farm to incite people.

[–] brooke592@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I just don't want our guys to get hurt.

Don't make a stand in a blaze of glory. The goal should be to make sure nobody knows who did it.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 39 points 1 day ago

https://youtube.com/shorts/m1xOMR7R4q8

The video

Grabbed this from a lower comment, should be attached to the top comment.

[–] Taldan@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm about to watch the video, but just want to state my thoughts after reading the article:

Video shows several agents wrestling the man to the ground and shooting him multiple times

This is the only information the article states. Their passive language suggests to me the sequence of actions is unclear, but probably that while wrestling him, he was shot before being fully restrained

Now to watch the video and find out if the wording is propaganda


2 notes:

  1. That shooting is so much worse than the wording would suggest

  2. I didn't realize the article was in a feed format. Explains why it was only 1 sentence

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I watched it multiple times and they just executed that guy. They just unloaded the entire clip into the body. Fucking hell that's just gruesome.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 12 points 1 day ago

At some point for these highly insecure "warrior alpha" types: "stopping the threat" just turns into jacking off with excitement.

[–] Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm trying really hard to see how this could be anything else than a straight up execution. It's hard to see any way that dude could be threatening the life of anyone here. He's shot on his knees with his hands down looking away from the shooter (granted the footage we have here it's kind of hard to tell just cause there's so many people). There's footage of him talking to the agents before just holding his phone to record and then they start shoving him. There's also 8 bajillion agents beating the shit out of him right before. The woman's footage from the other side of this will show a ton if she was recording.

Anyways, I look forward to hearing how this heroic agent saved the lives of all his fellow warriors during this altercation. Hope the agent recovers from the assault safely and quickly in the hospital...

Edit: few things, someone pointed out the agent in the grey coat disarms the victim and runs away with his weapon before he's killed which I did not see at first.

Also, second lady's footage is now out and it doesn't show anything different than a bunch of thugs beating the shit out of this guy and then killing him.

[–] foofiepie@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

Her footage (NSFW)
From this it seems more obvious to me that they saw a gun on him (I think I hear the agents shout ‘gun’) and they panicked and shot. Lack of training and discipline. Just horrific.

Why they unloaded the rest of the mag when he was clearly incapacitated I don’t know. Total lack of respect for human life.

This is outrageous, and there should be swift justice.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 day ago

The mag dumping was so egregious.

[–] taco@anarchist.nexus 9 points 1 day ago

But we all have to watch it.

Repeating for emphasis. Official stories are already being posted that are blatantly not what happened. There will be some portion of the population that believes the lies they're told. It's powerful for your own sanity to be able to know with certainty that you're being fed bullshit because you remember seeing it with your own eyes.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

3-4 is a generous underestimate.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Link?

EDIT: Nwvermind. It had been pushed further down the thread.

[–] pipi1234@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Here is the video link

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I disagree about everyone having to watch it.

I am capable of believing you, others that have seen the footage, and the reports coming out about what's happened here. Seeing the act in full detail isn't going to strengthen my resolve against ICE, nor make me more empathetic to this man or his family.

This is all barbaric, and while I similarly don't think it's getting any better, I don't have to watch a recording of the last moment of this man's life to know he was murdered, just as you don't have to go see his corpse in the morgue to know the same.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

No.

You need the visceral emotional reaction.

That's different than logically understanding the abstract concept a murder happened. That's not new, but what happens in this video is new. It crosses the line in an inexplicable fashion and either enough people see it happen once in this video all at the same time, or we all wait to see it individually in person

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With respect, don't tell me what I need based on what you need.

I don't need to see a thing to have an emotional reaction to it. I am not a child lacking object permanence.

Being able to watch a dozen different angles of a person's death in high definition isn't necessary for everybody. Most murders have no footage, and empathy can still be experienced for them. Surely you also run the emotional gambit when you read of a school shooting, whether or not there is footage of the carnage, don't you?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

With respect, don’t tell me what I need based on what you need

You don't understand any of this, but if you were polite and asked questions I would have explained it and you'd have walked away from this with more knowledge than you had now.

Think about who really lost in this exchange

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

Who really lost? You perceive this back and forth as something that can be won or lost? Both you and I are arguing semantics from behind screens, not out risking our life and limb. There are no winners here.

[–] supamanc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You do though, because one the authorities start spinning their lies, there will be an element of doubt in everyone who has not seen this video.

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

An element of doubt? I can think critically. Can you not? The default thought hasn't been 'trust the authories' for quite a while now. Rather the opposite.

[–] supamanc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you hear two conflicting stories, without witnessing for yourself, there will always be an element of doubt. I'm not saying trust the authoritys, and I don't know where you got that from. I'm saying you shouldn't blindly believe what anyone says.

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I got it from the comment you wrote.

because one the authorities start spinning their lies

I haven't suggested anything about blindly believing a singular source. My point is that a video source isn't necessary for everyone.