Let’s recap. The comment you replied to said that it would be false to say “ICE executes a US citizen by shooting him in the back of the head” because ICE didn’t kill him, and he wasn’t shot in the back of the head.
You replied (sarcastically) with “That’s OK then,” implying that you thought it was necessary to tell someone who stated correctly that ICE didn’t kill a man that what ICE did wasn’t OK. To be clear, that person didn’t say, “this is fine because the guy is still alive”, they were just correcting someone who falsely said ICE killed someone.
So why do you think literally anyone here thinks it is OK that someone got shot? Nobody has said that it’s OK. Just to spell it out:
you have read someone making a correct point that ICE didn’t kill someone as “ICE shot someone, but it’s OK.”
To me, that says one thing: you think that it is not important to speak the truth about ICE if that truth is that they didn’t behave in the worst possible way. Any truth that doesn’t align with the narrative of “ICE bad” is not important truth to you, right? The only statements that should be written are those which criticise ICE.
Does that sound about right? If so, then I’ll just say again: you need to be better than that. If not, then what possible reason do you have for asking “do you think it’s OK he got shot” when no-one said that it is OK?
Per the article:
He is still alive
ICE attempts to murder a US citizen with a shot in the back of the head in front of children.
Nailed it?
That’s ok then.
Does the truth only matter to you if it’s aligned in all respects with the narrative?
Be better.
Do you think it’s ok he got shot? Thats the problem, that ICE thought shooting someone, anyone, was ok. It’s not.
Let’s recap. The comment you replied to said that it would be false to say “ICE executes a US citizen by shooting him in the back of the head” because ICE didn’t kill him, and he wasn’t shot in the back of the head.
You replied (sarcastically) with “That’s OK then,” implying that you thought it was necessary to tell someone who stated correctly that ICE didn’t kill a man that what ICE did wasn’t OK. To be clear, that person didn’t say, “this is fine because the guy is still alive”, they were just correcting someone who falsely said ICE killed someone.
So why do you think literally anyone here thinks it is OK that someone got shot? Nobody has said that it’s OK. Just to spell it out:
you have read someone making a correct point that ICE didn’t kill someone as “ICE shot someone, but it’s OK.”
To me, that says one thing: you think that it is not important to speak the truth about ICE if that truth is that they didn’t behave in the worst possible way. Any truth that doesn’t align with the narrative of “ICE bad” is not important truth to you, right? The only statements that should be written are those which criticise ICE.
Does that sound about right? If so, then I’ll just say again: you need to be better than that. If not, then what possible reason do you have for asking “do you think it’s OK he got shot” when no-one said that it is OK?
But that was not the point. The point was did someone get executed or shot in the back? No-one is saying either story is ok but only one is true.
Literally no one said anything to that effect. Learn to read.