• 4 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2025

help-circle

  • TLDR: poor education, poor medical industry/insurance system, poor economy, propaganda/misinformation, everyone has a mental limit; and unfortunately many Americans can’t differentiate between anything they’re having pushed at them/taking in.

    Most of the U.S. population can’t afford regular medical care. For some who can, interactions with doctors can at times feel almost hostile (rushed through 15 minutes of a doctor hastily reading from a computer screen, visibly upset if you ask any questions, spoken to like a child), generally physically limited, and an additional financial consideration (new births reporting bills for ‘$1,000+’ for an anesthesiologist literally only leaning into the room the day after birth to ask “feeling alright?” and then leaving.

    So, even outside of “anti-science” and/or “anti-vaccine” perspectives, hospitals and doctors are viewed to have a profit seeking motive, and patient interactions can sometimes be incredibly rude (see huge understaffing; partly for that profit seeking from most hospitals; and then just general ‘being an asshole’; because working in medical care doesn’t preclude someone from just being overall inconsiderate and cruel).

    Therefore, some may only barely be able to afford being at the hospital for any reason, were possibly treated ‘less than kindly’ by hospital staff somewhere at least once, already have a generally poor U.S. education, living in near squalor like conditions, and are being bombarded from multiple avenues with misinformation regarding almost every aspect of reality. Then, they’re still needing to justify; to themselves and significant portions of their own society; why they deserve food, shelter, housing and any other thing at all because of some idea pushed at everyone that you’re inherently worthless and only those who “prove themselves ‘enough’” are justifying in getting or having… anything.

    People are animals, they’ll shutdown and perpetuate into basic survival when overwhelmed enough. A significant amount of the U.S. population sees medical care as a luxury and a nearly illicit money hungry one at that. I fucking hate justifying this type of behavior, but it’s a reality for the growth of many perspectives here. They are cattle and they’ve internally shutdown or don’t have the time, physical resources, or education to differentiate between anything they’re having pushed at them/taking in; and (idk what generalized quantity to use here; most, some? because god damn it feels like most) it’s quite possibly rare for any random U.S. Citizen to read… at all, not even getting to the point of ‘articles online’.

    So, generally, no, people in the U.S. may not treat the statements of a doctor with high regard. I try to be empathetic… but it can be really difficult when they can be such fucking assholes.





  • Yeah, I get that for sure. It’s totally unlikely this would have been the result without their prior relationship with the Police Chief.

    What I’m confused about is how anyone in that chain of interactions knew how to get in touch with those specific ICE/CBP people; as it supposedly was a phone call directly to them which had them turn around and take her to the police station.

    So, I’m hypothesizing either the local police had some amount of knowledge of what ICE/CBP people were in the area and contact info for them, or a beneficial enough relationship between the chief or the local LE that contacting someone higher up in ICE/CBP/DSHS resulted in such a quick turn around (or any at all, based on their refusal to cooperate with seemingly every request anywhere else).

    Sorry, does that make more sense?


  • Something seems to be missing here…

    After the officers put her in their car and drove toward the Twin Cities, they themselves received a call, the woman said, and quickly turned back.

    How did the call to the police chief result in these people receiving a call…? This is seemingly stated as a determining factor in them turning around and taking her to the police station. But… how did this happen like that without some type of cooperation between local police and the feds?

    Knowing what individuals were working in the area, where they were, what type of vehicles they were using (another article stated the police chief, on the call with the husband, described the vehicle the woman was taken away in to confirm it with the husband), and how this all resulted in a supposed phone call/the woman being taken to the police and turned over to them.

    A personal relationship with the police chief is one thing, but the rest I can’t make out at this point.


  • Amid tensions over President Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minnesota and beyond, federal agents were told this week that they have broader power to arrest people without a warrant, according to an internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo reviewed by The New York Times.

    The change expands the ability of lower-level ICE agents to carry out sweeps rounding up people they encounter and suspect are undocumented immigrants, rather than targeted enforcement operations in which they set out, warrant in hand, to arrest a specific person.

    The shift comes as the administration has deployed thousands of masked immigration agents into cities nationwide. A week before the memo, it came to light that Todd M. Lyons, the acting director of the agency, had issued guidance in May saying agents could enter homes with only an administrative warrant, not a judicial one. And the day before the memo, Mr. Trump said he would “de-escalate a little bit” in Minneapolis, after agents fatally shot two people in the crackdown there.

    The memo, addressed to all ICE personnel and signed on Wednesday by Mr. Lyons, centers on a federal law that empowers agents to make warrantless arrests of people they believe are undocumented immigrants, if they are “likely to escape” before an arrest warrant can be obtained.

    ICE has long interpreted that standard to mean situations in which agents believe someone is a “flight risk,” and unlikely to comply with future immigration obligations like appearing for hearings, according to the memo. But Mr. Lyons criticized that construction as “unreasoned” and “incorrect,” changing the agency’s interpretation of it to instead mean situations in which agents believe someone is unlikely to remain at the scene.





  • Not to create an argument, which isn’t my intent, as certainty there may be a thought such as, “scraping as it stands is good because of the simplification and ‘benefit’”. Which, sure, it’s easiest to wide net and absorb, to simply the concept, at least as I’m also understanding it.

    Yet, maybe it is the process of scraping, and also absorbing into databases including AI, which is a worthwhile point of conversation. Maybe how we’ve been doing something isn’t the continued ‘best course’ for a situation.

    Undeniably, more minutely monitoring what is scraped and stored creates large quantities, and large in scope, of questions and obstacles, but, maybe having that conversation is where things should go.

    Thoughts?