I will say this
ICE is asking for retaliation
The ppl of Chicago will not sit back in silence
A civil war is what #45 wants
To declare martial law
To stop future elections so we can't vote their asses out
I hope the ppl see this for what it is

These counter insurgency units have long existed in local police in the US. What is unprecedented is that now Trump is creating one in the NG, which gives him the kind of direct control he does not have at the local level. This is now a militarized national police state.

11/11 If the paper even insinuates that their study says anything about indoctrination, it betrays the authors’ own biases, & unveils the paper’s lack of objectivity. To get back to my point 2: I might assign this paper but not to praise it, rather as an example of poor science.

10/11 I agree that controversy in scholarship should be taught. But this paper says nothing about whether it is or is not being taught.

9/11 The paper can be commended for trying, but the only thing we can learn from the paper’s data is that certain texts tend to be assigned. Absolutely nothing can be concluded about what viewpoints are taught, much less anything about indoctrination. Nothing.

8/11 The authors dismiss the idea that certain texts might be assigned to offer a counterpoint to dominant narratives in the world. They treat the classroom as hermetically-sealed, & as the only class students will ever get on the topic. Who thinks this?

7/11 The “two sides” of criminology is Sharkey vs. “radical” Stuart? I love Stuart’s work but it’s hardly “radical.” It’s rooted in deep scientific & ethnographic study, unlike this paper; there are definitely properly “radical” alternatives to Sharkey. Again: the paper is biased

6/11 Same with Said’s book. The only counterpoint to Said, according to the paper, is Huntington? There are countless critiques of Said, from both the right & the left (abdel-malek!) but they only bemoan the right (and the most discredited book among them, i.e. Huntington)