Authored by Glenn Greenwald via greenwald.substack.com,
The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting “terrorism” that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This trend shows no sign of receding as we move farther from the January 6 Capitol riot. The opposite is true: it is intensifying.
We have witnessed an orgy of censorship from Silicon Valley monopolies with calls for far more aggressive speech policing, a visibly militarized Washington, D.C. featuring a non-ironically named “Green Zone,” vows from the incoming president and his key allies for a new anti-domestic terrorism bill, and frequent accusations of “sedition,” “treason,” and “terrorism” against members of Congress and citizens. This is all driven by a radical expansion of the meaning of “incitement to violence.” It is accompanied by viral-on-social-media pleas that one work with the FBI to turn in one’s fellow citizens (See Something, Say Something!) and demands for a new system of domestic surveillance.
Underlying all of this are immediate insinuations that anyone questioning any of this must, by virtue of these doubts, harbor sympathy for the Terrorists and their neo-Nazi, white supremacist ideology. Liberals have spent so many years now in a tight alliance with neocons and the CIA that they are making the 2002 version of John Ashcroft look like the President of the (old-school) ACLU.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security website, touting a trademarked phrase licensed to it in 2010 by the City of New York, urging citizens to report “suspicious activity” to the FBI and other security state agencies
The more honest proponents of this new domestic War on Terror are explicitly admitting that they want to model it on the first one. A New York Times reporter noted on Monday that a “former intelligence official on PBS NewsHour” said “that the US should think about a ‘9/11 Commission’ for domestic extremism and consider applying some of the lessons from the fight against Al Qaeda here at home.” More amazingly, Gen. Stanley McChrystal — for years head of Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and the commander of the war in Afghanistan — explicitly compared that war to this new one, speaking to Yahoo News:
I did see a similar dynamic in the evolution of al-Qaida in Iraq, where a whole generation of angry Arab youth with very poor prospects followed a powerful leader who promised to take them back in time to a better place, and he led them to embrace an ideology that justified their violence. This is now happening in America….I think we’re much further along in this radicalization process, and facing a much deeper problem as a country, than most Americans realize.”
Anyone who, despite all this, still harbors lingering doubts that the Capitol riot is and will be the neoliberal 9/11, and that a new War on Terror is being implemented in its name, need only watch the two short video clips below, which will clear their doubts for good. It is like being catapulted by an unholy time machine back to Paul Wolfowitz’s 2002 messaging lab.
The first video, flagged by Tom Elliott, is from Monday morning’s Morning Joe program on MSNBC (the show that arguably did more to help Donald Trump become the GOP nominee than any other). It features Jeremy Bash — one of the seemingly countless employees of TV news networks who previously worked in Obama’s CIA and Pentagon — demanding that, in response to the Capitol riot, “we reset our entire intelligence approach,” including “look[ing] at greater surveillance of them,” adding: “the FBI is going to have to run confidential sources.” See if you detect any differences between what CIA operatives and neocons were saying in 2002 when demanding the Patriot Act and greater FBI and NSA surveillance and what this CIA-official-turned-NBC-News-analyst is saying here:
The second video features the amazing declaration from former Facebook security official Alex Stamos, talking to the very concerned CNN host Brian Stelter, about the need for social media companies to use the same tactics against U.S. citizens that they used to remove ISIS from the internet — “in collaboration with law enforcement” — and that those tactics should be directly aimed at what he calls extremist “conservative influencers.”
“Press freedoms are being abused by these actors,” the former Facebook executive proclaimed. Stamos noted how generous he and his comrades have been up until now: “We have given a lot of leeway — both in the traditional media and in social media — to people with a very broad range of views.” But no more. Now is the time to “get us all back in the same consensual reality.”
In a moment of unintended candor, Stamos noted the real problem: “there are people on YouTube, for example, that have a larger audience than people on daytime CNN” — and it’s time for CNN and other mainstream outlets to seize the monopoly on information dissemination to which they are divinely entitled by taking away the platforms of those whom people actually want to watch and listen to:
(If still not convinced, and if you can endure it, you can also watch MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski literally screaming that one needed remedy to the Capitol riot is that the Biden administration must “shutdown” Facebook. Shutdown Facebook).
Calls for a War on Terror sequel — a domestic version complete with surveillance and censorship — are not confined to ratings-deprived cable hosts and ghouls from the security state. The Wall Street Journal reports that “Mr. Biden has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, and he has been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists and increasing funding to combat them.”
Meanwhile, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) — not just one of the most dishonest members of Congress but also one of the most militaristic and authoritarian — has had a bill proposed since 2019 to simply amend the existing foreign anti-terrorism bill to allow the U.S. Government to invoke exactly the same powers at home against “domestic terrorists.”
Why would such new terrorism laws be needed in a country that already imprisons more of its citizens than any other country in the world as the result of a very aggressive set of criminal laws? What acts should be criminalized by new “domestic terrorism” laws that are not already deemed criminal? They never say, almost certainly because — just as was true of the first set of new War on Terror laws — their real aim is to criminalize that which should not be criminalized: speech, association, protests, opposition to the new ruling coalition.
The answer to this question — what needs to be criminalized that is not already a crime? — scarcely seems to matter. Media and political elites have placed as many Americans as they can — and it is a lot — into full-blown fear and panic mode, and when that happens, people are willing to acquiesce to anything claimed necessary to stop that threat, as the first War on Terror, still going strong twenty years later, decisively proved.
An entire book could — and probably should — be written on why all of this is so concerning. For the moment, two points are vital to emphasize.
First, much of the alarmism and fear-mongering is being driven by a deliberate distortion of what it means for speech to “incite violence.” The bastardizing of this phrase was the basis for President Trump’s rushed impeachment last week. It is also what is driving calls for dozens of members of Congress to be expelled and even prosecuted on “sedition” charges for having objected to the Electoral College certification, and is also at the heart of the spate of censorship actions already undertaken and further repressive measures being urged.
This phrase — “inciting violence” — was also what drove many of the worst War on Terror abuses. I spent years reporting on how numerous young American Muslims were prosecuted under new, draconian anti-terrorism laws for uploading anti-U.S.-foreign-policy YouTube videos or giving rousing anti-American speeches deemed to “incite violence” and thus provide “material support” to terrorist groups — the exact theory which Rep. Schiff is seeking to import into the new domestic War on Terror.
It is vital to ask what it means for speech to constitute “incitement to violence” to the point that it can be banned or criminalized. The expression of any political viewpoint, especially one passionately expressed, has the potential to “incite” someone else to get so riled up that they engage in violence.
If you rail against the threats to free speech posed by Silicon Valley monopolies, someone hearing you may get so filled with rage that they decide to bomb an Amazon warehouse or a Facebook office. If you write a blistering screed accusing pro-life activists of endangering the lives of women by forcing them back into unsafe back-alley abortions, or if you argue that abortion is murder, you may very well inspire someone to engage in violence against a pro-life group or an abortion clinic. If you start a protest movement to object to the injustice of Wall Street bailouts — whether you call it “Occupy Wall Street” or the Tea Party — you may cause someone to go hunt down Goldman Sachs or Citibank executives who they believe are destroying the economic future of millions of people.
If you claim that George W. Bush stole the 2000 and/or 2004 elections — as many Democrats, including members of Congress, did — you may inspire civic unrest or violence against Bush and his supporters. The same is true if you claim the 2016 or 2020 elections were fraudulent or illegitimate. If you rage against the racist brutality of the police, people may go burn down buildings in protest — or murder randomly selected police officers whom they have become convinced are agents of a racist genocidal state.
The Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and hard-core Democratic partisan, James Hodgkinson, who went to a softball field in June, 2017 to murder Republican Congress members — and almost succeeded in fatally shooting Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) — had spent months listening to radical Sanders supporters and participating in Facebook groups with names like “Terminate the Republican Party” and “Trump is a Traitor.”
Hodgkinson had heard over and over that Republicans were not merely misguided but were “traitors” and grave threats to the Republic. As CNN reported, “his favorite television shows were listed as ‘Real Time with Bill Maher;’ ‘The Rachel Maddow Show;’ ‘Democracy Now!’ and other left-leaning programs.” All of the political rhetoric to which he was exposed — from the pro-Sanders Facebook groups, MSNBC and left-leaning shows — undoubtedly played a major role in triggering his violent assault and decision to murder pro-Trump Republican Congress members.
Despite the potential of all of those views to motivate others to commit violence in their name — potential that has sometimes been realized — none of the people expressing those views, no matter how passionately, can be validly characterized as “inciting violence” either legally or ethically. That is because all of that speech is protected, legitimate speech. None of it advocates violence. None of it urges others to commit violence in its name. The fact that it may “inspire” or “motivate” some mentally unwell person or a genuine fanatic to commit violence does not make the person espousing those views and engaging in that non-violent speech guilty of “inciting violence” in any meaningful sense.
To illustrate this point, I have often cited the crucial and brilliantly reasoned Supreme Court free speech ruling in Claiborne v. NAACP. In the 1960s and 1970s, the State of Mississippi tried to hold local NAACP leaders liable on the ground that their fiery speeches urging a boycott of white-owned stores “incited” their followers to burn down stores and violently attack patrons who did not honor the protest. The state’s argument was that the NAACP leaders knew that they were metaphorically pouring gasoline on a fire with their inflammatory rhetoric to rile up and angry crowds.
But the Supreme Court rejected that argument, explaining that free speech will die if people are held responsible not for their own violent acts but for those committed by others who heard them speak and were motivated to commit crimes in the name of that cause (emphasis added):
Civil liability may not be imposed merely because an individual belonged to a group, some members of which committed acts of violence. . . .
[A]ny such theory fails for the simple reason that there is no evidence — apart from the speeches themselves — that [the NAACP leader sued by the State] authorized, ratified, or directly threatened acts of violence. . . . . To impose liability without a finding that the NAACP authorized — either actually or apparently — or ratified unlawful conduct would impermissibly burden the rights of political association that are protected by the First Amendment. . . .
While the State legitimately may impose damages for the consequences of violent conduct, it may not award compensation for the consequences of nonviolent, protected activity. Only those losses proximately caused by unlawful conduct may be recovered.
The First Amendment similarly restricts the ability of the State to impose liability on an individual solely because of his association with another.
The Claiborne court relied upon the iconic First Amendment ruling in Brandenburg v. Ohio, which overturned the criminal conviction of a KKK leader who had publicly advocated the possibility of violence against politicians. Even explicitly advocating the need or justifiability of violence for political ends is protected speech, ruled the court. They carved out a very narrow exception: “where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action” — meaning someone is explicitly urging an already assembled mob to specific violence with the expectation that they will do so more or less immediately (such as standing outside someone’s home and telling the gathered mob: it’s time to burn it down).
It goes without saying that First Amendment jurisprudence on “incitement” governs what a state can do when punishing or restricting speech, not what a Congress can do in impeaching a president or expelling its own members, and certainly not social media companies seeking to ban people from their platforms.
But that does not make these principles of how to understand “incitement to violence” irrelevant when applied to other contexts. Indeed, the central reasoning of these cases is vital to preserve everywhere: that if speech is classified as “incitement to violence” despite not explicitly advocating violence, it will sweep up any political speech which those wielding this term wish it to encompass. No political speech will be safe from this term when interpreted and applied so broadly and carelessly.
And that is directly relevant to the second point. Continuing to process Washington debates of this sort primarily through the prism of “Democrat v. Republican” or even “left v. right” is a sure ticket to the destruction of core rights. There are times when powers of repression and censorship are aimed more at the left and times when they are aimed more at the right, but it is neither inherently a left-wing nor a right-wing tactic. It is a ruling class tactic, and it will be deployed against anyone perceived to be a dissident to ruling class interests and orthodoxies no matter where on the ideological spectrum they reside.
The last several months of politician-and-journalist-demanded Silicon Valley censorship has targeted the right, but prior to that and simultaneously it has often targeted those perceived as on the left. The government has frequently declared right-wing domestic groups “terrorists,” while in the 1960s and 1970s it was left-wing groups devoted to anti-war activism which bore that designation. In 2011, British police designated the London version of Occupy Wall Street a “terrorist” group. In the 1980s, the African National Congress was so designated. “Terrorism” is an amorphous term that was created, and will always be used, to outlaw formidable dissent no matter its source or ideology.
If you identify as a conservative and continue to believe that your prime enemies are ordinary leftists, or you identify as a leftist and believe your prime enemies are Republican citizens, you will fall perfectly into the trap set for you. Namely, you will ignore your real enemies, the ones who actually wield power at your expense: ruling class elites, who really do not care about “right v. left” and most definitely do not care about “Republican v. Democrat” — as evidenced by the fact that they fund both parties — but instead care only about one thing: stability, or preservation of the prevailing neoliberal order.
Unlike so many ordinary citizens addicted to trivial partisan warfare, these ruling class elites know who their real enemies are: anyone who steps outside the limits and rules of the game they have crafted and who seeks to disrupt the system that preserves their prerogatives and status. The one who put this best was probably Barack Obama when he was president, when he observed — correctly — that the perceived warfare between establishment Democratic and Republican elites was mostly theater, and on the question of what they actually believe, they’re both “fighting inside the 40 yard line” together:
A standard Goldman Sachs banker or Silicon Valley executive has far more in common, and is far more comfortable, with Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan than they do with the ordinary American citizen. Except when it means a mildly disruptive presence — like Trump — they barely care whether Democrats or Republicans rule various organs of government, or whether people who call themselves “liberals” or “conservatives” ascend to power. Some left-wing members of Congress, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) have said they oppose a new domestic terrorism law, but Democrats will have no trouble forming a majority by partnering with their neocon GOP allies like Liz Cheney to get it done, as they did earlier this year to stop the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Germany.
Neoliberalism and imperialism do not care about the pseudo-fights between the two parties or the cable TV bickering of the day. They do not like the far left or the far right. They do not like extremism of any kind. They do not support Communism and they do not support neo-Nazism or some fascist revolution. They care only about one thing: disempowering and crushing anyone who dissents from and threatens their hegemony. They care about stopping dissidents. All the weapons they build and institutions they assemble — the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the NSA, oligarchical power — exist for that sole and exclusive purpose, to fortify their power by rewarding those who accede to their pieties and crushing those who do not.
No matter your views on the threat posed by international Islamic radicalism, huge excesses were committed in the name of stopping it — or, more accurately, the fears it generated were exploited to empower and entrench existing financial and political elites. The Authorization to Use Military Force — responsible for twenty-years-and-counting of war — was approved by the House three days after the 9/11 attack with just one dissenting vote. The Patriot Act — which radically expanded government surveillance powers — was enacted a mere six weeks after that attack, based on the promise that it would be temporary and “sunset” in four years. Like the wars spawned by 9/11, it is still in full force, virtually never debated any longer and predictably expanded far beyond how it was originally depicted.
The first War on Terror ended up being wielded primarily on foreign soil but it has increasingly been imported onto domestic soil against Americans. This New War on Terror — one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting “extremists” and “domestic terrorists” among American citizens on U.S. soil — presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.
That a new War on Terror is coming is not a question of speculation and it is not in doubt. Those who now wield power are saying it explicitly. The only thing that is in doubt is how much opposition they will encounter from those who value basic civic rights more than the fears of one another being deliberately cultivated within us.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
In keeping with the idiocy of our “leaders” and govt in general they foment exactly what they’re against.
War on poverty? The govt created enormous amounts of poverty.
War on drugs? They created an enormous appetite for drugs.
War on domestic terror?
They will create enormous numbers of domestic terrorists.
Do they do this to ensure job security and the ever expansion of govt or are they merely idiots?
I’m left wondering….but have my suspicion which is found in the first line of this post.
They have written of their plan to destroy the US Middle Class for decades. Now they are doing it.
All part of the plan since the UN was established and prophesied 1000s of years ago:
DeKulukization, Amerikan-styled.
They’re not idiots. Their doublespeak just hides their true intentions.
Excellent article and very germane to what these creatures are fixing to do to the Deplorables.
I just picture a stereotypical Communist and what I would think they would do if in charge. Look at the leadership here and what they say and do and presto change o. Do as I say not as I do Communist. We keep hearing about the Russians who are doing nothing but laughing at us and the real model for the left are the Chinese. Do you see a purge of people who don’t follow the party line? social credit scores and A.I. are slowly coming. The reset? Does anyone else feel that Commie vibe from these creeps? Comrade, you will own nothing but will be happy and thank us later. Personal freedoms? Your guns and rights? That’s what messed up the country. You silly boob, just do as we say, we are much smarter than you. ok, it’s coffee time for me.
And you will drink your coffee cold komrade because electricity and gas are in short supply, and you will like this. yes…
Exactly right, YahRight.
The Capital (hardly a) riot was just a convenient excuse, they were looking for this all along and would have created a false flag anyways. I’ve seen several threads wondering if a rouge National Guardsman is going to off Biden today so Harris can take over. Guess who’ll get the blame for that.
Anybody watching this garbage? Trump had more people at the airport than Gropey Joe has at the Capitol.
The Florida crowd is huge for Trump.
With the coming “Gender Identification” BS from Senile Joe’s group I guess the old adage, ” When Penis’s Are Outlawed,Only Outlaws Will Have Penis’s “. As for me…I’ll be an outlaw ! LOL
We need 70 million Trump voters to contact the FBI about suspicious activity 3 times a week for the foreseeable future.
Look for it:
The phrase “freedom of speech” will be replaced by references to “freedom of the press”.
“freedom of the licensed press (only)”
A few observations on this so-called “War on Domestic Terrorism”. Greenwald is, of course, spot on. The maniacs who have just taken power are crazy enough and stupid enough to plunge the country into violent chaos. Frankly, it does not bother me because now only armed struggle will overthrow them. Stop bullshitting yourselves about withdrawing to the simple life or just ignoring them, much less “resisting” by writing turgid prose (like I am doing right now) or – LOL – taking over the Republican Party. None of us can predict how, where, or when the final spark will come but I suspect it will be the result of one of the deranged Biden cabinet appointees ordering Federal cops to carry out some illegal act. In the process cops and citizens will die, and then, game on.
It should be obvious by now that these traitors have been planning this for a long time. It should also be obvious that the same amoral, greedy Military Industrial Security Complex shits who profited so much from the first “War on Terror” after 9/11 are slobbering over the money to be made by installing a hard police state in our own country. I knew some of these “patriots”; they would sell their mothers into a Nigerian brothel to make a nickel, all the while wearing their cheap, Lee Greenwood patriotism on their sleeves. As for the military and police, stop thinking that they will do anything but follow their unconstitutional, Bolshevik-inspired orders. Yeah, the ordinary troops are in large part good people, but the senior officers are rotten to the core.
The only thing that will make a difference is a nation-wide program of massive refusal to recognize the illegitimate regime or obey its diktats. This will inevitably be followed by an attempt to crush dissent, which will be followed by real resistance, which will spiral into outright civil conflict.
Nobody wants it to happen, but until motorcycles start pulling up beside the cars of the main culprits and bringing them face to face with their consequences of their actions, we will not get their attention.
At the risk of repeating what I have written so many times before:
–Work locally. Restrict your confidence to a handful of people. The Communists learned long ago to use the cell system and you sure had better learn right now.
–Do not broadcast your views. You will be surrounded by rats who will gleefully report you to the Thought Police. Keep your real views to yourself and trusted friends.
–Never let a stranger enter into your confidence until they are completely vetted. Learn to spot informants and plants. Agents provocateur’s will be used extensively by Federal, state and local police.
–Avoid oddballs and criminals at all cost. Oddballs will do odd things that will attract attention. Criminals are criminals and can NEVER be trusted. Queers, also, do queer things. If a man or a woman is sexually disordered, we do not need them. Log Cabin Republicans need not apply.
–Do not participate in mass events or movements until the tide has turned enough to make it safe. The Feds are even now busily trying to use facial recognition to identify the good people who went to Washington on 6 January, all of them. The days of overt, public political resistance are over.
–Start quietly collecting intelligence on treasonous elements as well as regime capabilities, locations, and personalities in your area.
–For God´s sake, get off of social media! All of it. Cancel your accounts today. Just use things like Signal or Telegraph for communications, and use code. Do not tell the world what you think of them. They are listening.
–Do not maintain any relationships with leftists or “normies” who do not get it. Nothing good will come of having any but the most superficial contact with them.
–Your cellphone is a radio transmitter and every few seconds it precisely records where you are. Of course, all you say is recorded as are your call records, etc. Don´t forget it. And don´t forget the cameras that are everywhere and the license plate readers. Go totally low tech to defeat them.
–If you do anything at all that might invite serious attention from the Gestapo, get rid of ANYTHING incriminating in your house, care, computer, etc.
–If the police in any form ask to speak to you, the only answer is no. You have nothing to say to them. Even if they seem to be there on some worthwhile mission unconnected to you, it may well be a trap. Be polite but say nothing and ask for their business cards.
–Never forget that you are surrounded by complete idiots who have no idea what is going on and who actually buy into the drivel pouring out of things like CNN. Wonderful example this morning on Linked In. Some slack-jawed moron named Nic McKinley – a white man, a typical meathead security type – posted a missive to all of us to “honor the life and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and continue his work in the fight for justice for ALL Americans [his capitals]”. The dumb bastard then spews some gibberish about something called a “National Day of Service” and asked what you are doing to improve your community today?
Well, thank God I was sitting on the can when I read this. Think about it. There are still adult white men in this country today who are capable of putting out such twaddle with their names and photographs posted right beside it.
Celebrate St. Martin´s Day! Jesus take me home! This dumkopf actually believes this! If we still had a country, he would be triced up and whipped to ribbons on general principles alone. He has apparently managed to reach the age of 40 or so without noticing that white America – the real America -is fighting for its life against mortal enemies. Our enemies sure know what they are up to. And this asshat wants to celebrate their patron saint! I leave aside the fact that MLK, Jr. was a puppet of Communists and aliens who wished to destroy America…
As a parting word on who to trust and who to work with, let me repeat the words of the great American, General Robert E. Lee, to his youngest son. Robert E. Lee, Jr. was trying to run a farm to recover from the devastation of the Civil War and the elder Lee gave him sage advice. Young Robert was trying to obtain labor for his farm.
General Lee warned him against placing his confidence in the blacks.
“You will never prosper with the blacks, and it is abhorrent to a reflecting mind to be supporting and cherishing those who are plotting and working for your injury, and all of whose sympathies and associations are antagonistic to yours. I wish them no evil in the world – on the contrary, will do them every good in my power, and know that they are misled by those to whom they have given their confidence; but our material, social, and political interests are naturally with the whites.”
Though Lee´s comments were made to address a particular situation in the Reconstruction-era South, they contain a huge dose of wisdom for us today. Those on the other side are not our friends and never will be, and the renegade or foolish whites are a worse enemy than any black man will ever be.
God be with all of you on this dark journey into night.
Your fourth sentence definitely needs to be bookmarked for a lot of people at TBP
SS; Excellent post as usual. I grieve for my country, I grieve like I would for the death of a loved one. I can’t bring her back, I am now a subject living in occupied and hostile territory. Sadly, I am now like the people who lived during Chile’s Pinochet takeover, or Mugabe when his communist policies destroyed a prosperous country. We will soon know what life under a totalitarian regime feels like, especially if we are white.
I hope “Patriots” don’t expect the military to back them. When we bad a draft we had “citizen soldiers”. Now they are government employees.
Unless you are practicing opsec, you are promoting cowardice.
Such a heartbreaking memorial to the Holodomor. The people that shield the world from the horrors of the Bolsheviks will burn in hell.
I saw a brief report that pelosi wanted to ensure in the military army in dc that there were crew-served machine gun positions in place and at the ready.
Clearly shows what the Party of Tolerance has in store for the deplorables.
I suggest everyone review the history of the Cheka.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/after-the-capitol-riots-can-us-spy-agencies-stop-white-terror?ref=home
The Democrat Jacobins are working to dismantle the bourgeoise. They can’t stand Americans that think for themselves or are even moderately successful outside of government or the academy. Look at some of the so called rioters they have managed to round up using FBI and CIA facial recognition tech. You will see athletes, small business owners, teachers, military members and vets, the strength of the nation. No mention of the fact that these people were aghast that the America described in their high school civics texts had just been raped by the Democrat party.
Just replace ‘Democrat Jacobins’ with ‘Jews,’ and ‘ bourgeoise’ with ‘White people,’ and you’re pointing in the right direction.
The purpose for the First Amendment Freedom of Press and of Speech was to prevent government from punishing or restricting the exposure of lies of government. Assange and Snowden are each finding the current status of those clauses.
Wall Street used their crony Allen Dulles to establish the CIA to hide WS’s nefarious acts such as WS’s instigating WWI and WWII. The CIA has been responsible for covert actions [for WS] in the terms of Ike, JFK, RMN, RR, JEC, BC, drug wars, etc., along with world-wide actions to dominate nations. DOJ, FBI, State Department and other government departments//bureaucrats have been protected from public exposure or criminal actions.
Joe and Hunter blackmailed Ukraine government to ignore the extortion by Hunter. The use of government power for personal profit has now become WH standard procedure. The pace of Mafia actions by government is accelerating.
It should be obvious that “conspiracy theory” is applied to lies the government wants to hide and will soon become a crime [and continue to be de-platformed (hidden) by websites that have been created with government grants.]
“Mr. Biden has said he plans …”
Biden has plans, my ass. Biden plans to go take a dump, then forgets. That’s why they have him in Depends. All of this stuff was planned years ago, while Trump fiddled and faddled, allowing them to take him out, if he wasn’t busy taking himself out. Biden doesn’t even figure into any of this, now that he was used as a placeholder in a stolen election. His own side will get him out of the way very soon. They may even assassinate him and use his death to justify a more vicious cancelling of rights.
Several writers have published articles saying that the coup plotters have tried to move too fast and have overreached, but with the entire news/entertainment media lineup in the US preaching for them, it doesn’t seem possible that they could move too fast or reach too far.
After all, they have no opposition in Congress at all. I think that things are going to speed up and their reach will expand as well.