By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Three federal law enforcement officials have stated that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem fabricated a story about a cannibal who ate himself on a deportation flight. The Department of Homeland Security has claimed that Noem was simply relaying an air marshal’s account, but investigators found no evidence of such an incident. This fabricated story is presented as another instance of deception by Noem and her department, contributing to a pattern of misleading the public.
Read the original article here
It seems there’s been a bit of a stir surrounding claims made by South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem. She’s been quite vocal, repeatedly stating that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported an individual who was a cannibal. The assertion, as reported, is that this wasn’t just an isolated incident but something Noem brought up more than once, painting a rather alarming picture of the individuals entering the country.
However, the narrative takes a sharp turn when it’s revealed that this particular story, the one about the cannibal being deported by ICE, has been described as “completely made up.” This isn’t a minor detail; it suggests a significant fabrication at the heart of Noem’s claims, raising serious questions about the accuracy and intent behind her statements.
The implication here is quite serious. If a public official, especially one in a position of leadership like a governor, is fabricating stories of this magnitude, it erodes trust and potentially misleads the public about critical issues like immigration and national security. The idea of deporting a cannibal, rather than prosecuting them for such heinous acts, already presents a logical conundrum, but the fact that the scenario itself is alleged to be untrue adds another layer of concern.
One common sentiment surfacing is that lying seems to be a recurring theme. There’s a strong feeling that when accusations are thrown around, especially from certain political circles, it’s crucial to “check the receipts,” meaning to verify the facts thoroughly. This isn’t about questioning every single statement, but about recognizing a pattern where fabrications might be employed to serve a particular agenda.
The question arises: has anyone in a position of power made claims that *weren’t* fabricated lately? This sentiment suggests a broader dissatisfaction with the perceived truthfulness of public figures, implying that dishonesty is not an exception but perhaps the norm for some. The idea that “all these people do is lie” is a stark accusation, pointing to a deep-seated concern about credibility.
Furthermore, the practicality of the alleged cannibal story is questioned. If someone were genuinely engaging in cannibalism within the United States, the logical response would be apprehension and prosecution, not deportation. Sending a person accused of such extreme acts to another country, rather than holding them accountable for crimes committed on U.S. soil, seems counterintuitive and potentially irresponsible, even if the initial claim were true.
The fictional character Hannibal Lecter is brought into the discussion, with some suggesting a connection between Noem’s claims and obsessions with such figures within certain political factions. The idea of “projection” is raised, implying that the accusations themselves might be a reflection of the accuser’s own internal state or motivations, a concept often summed up as “every accusation is a confession.”
There’s a stark contrast drawn between the alleged actions of the deported individual and the typical profile of those deported. Reports suggest that a vast majority of individuals deported by ICE have no criminal records at all, often being deported simply for immigration violations. This statistical reality makes the specific, sensational claim of a cannibal being deported seem all the more likely to be a manufactured narrative, designed to evoke a specific emotional response from the public.
The repeated nature of Noem’s claims, despite them being labeled as fabricated, highlights a tactic of persistent assertion, even in the face of evidence to the contrary. This approach aims to embed the false narrative in the public consciousness, making it difficult to dismiss even when debunked. The comparison to other unsubstantiated claims, like litter boxes in schools, points to a broader trend of right-wing media creating narratives that fuel outrage and distrust.
The current political climate is described as one where “lies and the lying liars who tell them” are prevalent. This sentiment extends to the highest levels, with criticisms directed at former leaders as well. The observation that “it’s just Republicans being Republicans” suggests a view that such fabrications are not anomalies but rather characteristic of a political movement.
The effectiveness of such fabricated stories is often aimed at a specific audience. The idea that these “ridiculous statements were meant for dumbass MAGA that would eat it up” indicates a cynical view of how political narratives are constructed and consumed, targeting those perceived as easily influenced by sensationalism.
Ultimately, the core of this issue revolves around a claim of cannibalism by an individual deported by ICE, a claim that has been vehemently denied as being “completely made up.” This discrepancy between the governor’s repeated assertions and the reported factual inaccuracy raises significant questions about the integrity of the information being disseminated and the motives behind such fabrications. It underscores the importance of critical thinking and fact-checking in an era where sensational narratives can spread rapidly, often obscuring the truth.