What we know about Alex Pretti, the ICU nurse shot and killed in Minneapolis
Widespread protests began again in Minneapolis hours after Pretti's killing.
For another individual to be gunned down in the street by ICE agents is appalling. Among the alphabet soup of government organizations that need to be abolished, ICE ranks among the highest. There is no reason for Alex Pretti to be dead right now. As a law-abiding citizen of the United States of America, he was exterminated because of his own individualism. The fact he had a right to carry a firearm shows that the Second Amendment only applies to only a few.
As an ICU nurse living in South Minneapolis, he exemplified what it means to be a true fighter for life. Once the one to go to aiding people in their most trying and turbulent times in their lives, he succumbed from an agent’s bullet(s).
The nation will mourn him as they did Renee Good. The reality is apparent. No matter the skin color, individuals can catch shots based on their “inferiority” to the ICE agents. This mongrel breed of State organizations should be stopped immediately. They don’t go by due process. They don’t have warrants. All they have is a gun and an attitude for destruction.
Pretti is just the latest example of a victim who never got the chance to walk away from an ICE situation with his life intact. The harsh cold of the winter winds in Minneapolis, Minnesota carry the names of Good and Pretti. Their positions as citizens of a government that extinguished their lives places them in the minds of those who lean towards justice.
To take into account all the horror stories surrounding ICE, it’s almost proper that these cases be analyzed sufficiently. There is no way the president should condone such acts of fatal aggression. For a leader of the once free world to aggrandize these miscreants with face masks, makes it all the more plausible for the world to see just how low grade and vicious this administration actually is.
In a time where people have been swept off the streets like dust from a floorboard, they’re now killing people without reason, without regard. There’s a definite set of principles that the ICE agents have passed over in their training. Instead of military or police officers, they are paramilitary and lack the proficiency in actually policing citizens. So quick to squeeze the trigger, they blank out the idea of them being citizens themselves. Like ogres filled with power and a firearm, they terrorize fellow Americans in an effort to appear overbearing and lust for power.
Gone largely unchecked, ICE has devolved into a horrific group hell-bent on destruction. Their chances at becoming police officers or members of the United States Armed Forces could be tangled in the fact that most of them probably did serve in one of the branches or had a patrol. The allure of the ICE agency without its checks and balances brought them to this state of delusion and self-deception.
With the death toll rising and families ripped apart, there’s a possibility for ICE to be eliminated completely. There ought to be an act of Congress to end the insanity. What these people have done stands as some of the most heinous acts in American history. This idea goes back to when Foundational Black Americans (FBA) had to prove their freedom with documents. These are modern day slave catchers. ICE is a failure and an abysmal example of poor governance. What they don’t tell in most schools is how slave catchers could burst into any home, any time. That’s why houses along the Underground Railroad became outfitted with trap doors, hiding places, and other mechanisms.
About the Creator
Skyler Saunders
I will be publishing a story every Tuesday. Make sure you read the exclusive content each week to further understand the stories.
In order to read these exclusive stories, become a paid subscriber of mine today! Thanks….
S.S.
Keep reading
More stories from Skyler Saunders and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Smartystan
Chanda sent home money every two weeks. In a small village in India, she deposited money into the bank account of her aunt and uncle who sent her to live in America. The place seemed so remote, almost cut off from the rest of the country. There, a festival took place where participants hurled cow eliminations at each other. The muddy, mucky sense of it had been known for centuries. Locals tied it to an ancient god who they believed restored people’s health with the cow plops. During the festival, thick patties passed through the air and smushed into the bodies and faces of those rollicking around in the filth.
By Skyler SaundersExclusive • 12 days ago
Andrew Invited Epstein to Buckingham Palace After Child Sex Offender’s Release, Files Show
Recently unsealed court documents and previously undisclosed correspondence have reignited scrutiny of the relationship between Britain’s Prince Andrew and the late financier Jeffrey Epstein. According to the files, Epstein—who had been convicted in the United States for sex-related offenses involving a minor—was invited to Buckingham Palace after his release from prison. The revelation has intensified public debate about judgment, accountability, and the responsibilities of public figures when associating with individuals known to have committed serious crimes.
By Sain Hafizabout an hour ago in The Swamp
Pentagon Defends Restrictions on Media Outlets
The United States Department of Defense has defended its recent decision to impose restrictions on certain media outlets, saying the measures are necessary to protect national security and ensure accurate reporting during sensitive military operations. The move has sparked debate among journalists, civil rights groups, and lawmakers, raising concerns about press freedom and government transparency. Pentagon officials explained that the restrictions were not intended to silence criticism or limit independent journalism but to prevent the spread of classified or misleading information that could endanger troops and compromise ongoing missions. According to defense spokespeople, some reporting in recent weeks had included details about troop movements, operational planning, and military infrastructure that could be exploited by hostile actors. National Security Concerns The Pentagon stated that modern conflicts are no longer limited to physical battlefields. Information warfare has become a central part of global security challenges, with adversaries using media reports, social networks, and leaked data to gain strategic advantages. “We are not restricting the press,” a senior Defense Department official said. “We are ensuring that sensitive operational details are not published in ways that could put American service members at risk.” Officials emphasized that accredited journalists still have access to briefings, press conferences, and public military facilities. However, some outlets now face limitations on embedding with military units or attending certain classified briefings. The Pentagon insists these decisions are based on security assessments rather than political pressure or content criticism. Reaction from Media Organizations Several major media organizations and journalist unions have criticized the Pentagon’s actions, arguing that the restrictions threaten the principles of a free and independent press. Press advocacy groups say the government must not use national security as a blanket justification to control narratives or discourage investigative reporting. They fear that tighter rules could set a precedent for future limitations on journalists covering defense and foreign policy. “This raises serious questions about transparency,” said a representative of a U.S. press freedom organization. “Journalists play a critical role in holding powerful institutions accountable. Restrictions must be narrowly defined and clearly justified.” Some reporters have said that the new measures make it more difficult to verify information independently and could lead to greater reliance on official statements rather than on-the-ground reporting. Legal and Constitutional Debate The controversy has reignited debate over the balance between the First Amendment and national security responsibilities. Legal experts note that while the Constitution protects freedom of the press, it also allows the government to impose limits in cases where lives and military operations may be endangered. Historically, the U.S. government has restricted certain information during wartime or sensitive operations, including during World War II and the War on Terror. However, critics argue that today’s restrictions appear broader and less clearly defined. Civil liberties groups have called for clearer guidelines explaining exactly what information is considered restricted and how long the rules will remain in effect. Without transparency, they warn, trust between the military and the press could erode. Global Implications The Pentagon’s decision is also being closely watched internationally. The United States has long promoted press freedom as a democratic value and criticized authoritarian governments for censoring journalists. Some foreign observers argue that restrictions on American media could weaken U.S. moral authority on human rights and freedom of expression. International journalist associations have urged the Pentagon to review its policies and engage in dialogue with news organizations to prevent misunderstandings and protect professional reporting standards. Meanwhile, adversarial nations have pointed to the controversy as evidence that even democratic governments struggle with balancing security and transparency. Pentagon’s Defense of the Policy In response to criticism, Pentagon officials reiterated that the restrictions are temporary and targeted. They stressed that the measures apply only to specific circumstances involving classified or highly sensitive operations. “Our goal is not to block coverage but to ensure that coverage does not unintentionally assist hostile forces,” the Pentagon said in a written statement. Officials also noted that the military has worked closely with journalists for decades and values their role in informing the public. They pointed out that thousands of reporters continue to cover defense matters without interference. The Pentagon has promised to review the policy regularly and adjust it as security conditions change. Impact on Journalism For journalists covering defense and national security, the situation presents new challenges. Reporters must navigate stricter rules while still fulfilling their responsibility to inform the public accurately and independently. Some fear that reduced access will limit their ability to verify official claims and uncover mistakes or abuses. Others believe that cooperation between the military and the press can continue if clear boundaries are established. Media experts say the outcome will depend largely on how the restrictions are enforced and whether dialogue continues between defense officials and journalists. The Road Ahead As debate continues, lawmakers have begun asking for briefings on the policy to determine whether it aligns with constitutional protections and democratic values. Congressional oversight could play a key role in shaping how the restrictions evolve. The issue highlights a broader tension in modern democracies: how to protect national security in an age of instant information while preserving freedom of expression and accountability. Whether the Pentagon’s decision will be remembered as a necessary security measure or as an overreach against press freedom remains to be seen. What is certain is that the controversy has opened a critical conversation about the future relationship between the military and the media in an era of global conflict and misinformation.
By Fiaz Ahmed about 9 hours ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.