Comment by reliabilityguy
4 days ago
> You want concrete proof?
Yes.
> Vasquez Perdomo v Noem is your proof.
This court case has nothing to do with the claim made that US government explicitly stated that they want to promote racists and fringe-right ideology among our allies.
I don’t know about the rest of Europe but your administration has repeatedly been promoting the AFD in Germany - most prominently your vice president.
The AFD is recognised as a far right party by the German state and is being investigated for anti-democratic activities and goals.
Sure, but it is not the same thing as explicitly promoting racist and fringe-right ideas.
JD Vance may have voiced support (I didn’t listen to his speech) for conservative or right-wing political forces in Europe, but it is not the same as promoting explicitly racist and fringe-right ideas. There is a night and day difference between the original claim, and the evidence presented.
Sorry but you are just riding semantics here - what is the difference between far-right, extreme-right and “fringe”-right?
AfD is classified as extreme-right by German intelligence.
The US vice president gave them an endorsement in public speeches and met with their leaders privately.
The AFD is actively promoting racist, fringe(sic!)-right ideas such as “remigration” (aka trying to get rid of all German citizens that don’t look “german” enough)
The US government is explicitly promoting the racist ideology that parties like the AFD represent.
If that isn’t enough to open your eyes, please explain what level of “evidence” would be enough - but I rather feel like you have made up your mind long before and aren’t really looking for an honest discussion
5 replies →
The court case established the ability for ICE to go and harass anyone who they think looks like they're potentially a migrant. Hmm, I wonder what they'll use to profile those people...
And this domestic ruling is, in your view, an evidence of the “very explicitly stated goals of sowing discord within the US's former "allies", to weaken Europe, and to promote racist and fringe-right views.”?
You can’t be serious. The original claim is about the foreign policy of US government to promote racist ideologies, and your “proof” is a ruling about constitutionality of using race and language as a indicator to investigate someone’s immigration status?
> to promote racist and fringe-right views
So yeah, this is promoting racist views of "assume everyone who looks non-white and speaks a language other than English as a potential undocumented migrant and go harass them with impunity".
7 replies →