Submitter is Canadian and re: America, posted "I read recently that Patrimonialism is a good way of describing the current regime" about 10 months ago.

Doesn't sound like paid DHS/ICE psyopper.

Any reason to think it is?

EDIT: Got the "you're posting too fast", so in reply to OP below:

> Submitter's nationality has nothing to do with it nor does his post history. WTF

Well, yes it does, its exculpatory evidence for a stranger you publicly accused of dredging up the news to try and win sympathy for DHS/ICE. (twice now)

Original post, by you: "It is old news dredged up to try to win sympathy for DHS/ICE." This post, by you: "why do they need to dredge it up today?"

▲

doodlebugging 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Submitter's nationality has nothing to do with it nor does his post history. WTF

I suggest you read the article as it appears from your initial (pre-edit) reply that you didn't. Put this in context with contemporary events involving DHS/ICE and assimilate the knowledge that the story related happened more than 10 years ago. Then ask yourself, since this same story was already reported more than a decade ago, why do they need to dredge it up today?

Do some critical thinking so that you don't come across as a gullible shill.

	▲	pgalvin 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You are wrong, this same story was not reported more than ten years ago. The article is not a report of a man being arrested, tried, and sentenced (doubtless the extent of reporting in local news when it happened). This article is about the wider background of one story, of many, from a behind-the-scenes documentary that has been filmed over the last five years and just released. Did Britain's public broadcaster decide, half a decade ago, to begin making this documentary so that they could secretly and nefariously support a US government agency long before it was embroiled in its current controversies?

▲

4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

morkalork 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

From the fine article itself:

>Within hours, local Homeland Security agents had arrested the offender, who had been raping Lucy for six years.

	▲	pgalvin 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Are you suggesting that the BBC, the world service arm of a British public broadcaster (that is editorially independent from the state and even the wider BBC), began spending five years filming a documentary across the US, Portugal, Brazil, and Russia, just so that they could secretly support a US government agency half a decade before it became embroiled in controversy?
	▲	refulgentis 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The claim is that an article was submitted intentionally to manipulate public perception of DHS. We can't relax the claim to "well, it says DHS found a pedo, so it's propaganda ipso facto, because DHS did something good": they specifically argue the submission was the propaganda, specifically because it'd be absurd to claim it was published as DHS propaganda. (it's an article by the BBC)