GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)

[marsh]

Indian Silicon Valley Democrat Ro Khanna Pushes For 'Brown' Reparations Against Interest of Whites

Democrat California Congressman Ro Khanna is subtly trying to widen the net for possible racial reparations in the United States of America. In a tweet, Khanna called for reparations for “black and brown” people, leaving us to wonder: what kinds of brown people does he want to give reparations...

nationalfile.com

Indian Silicon Valley Democrat Ro Khanna Pushes For ‘Brown’ Reparations Against Interest of Whites
What Qualifies As 'Brown'?

by PATRICK HOWLEY
June 29, 2021



Democrat California Congressman Ro Khanna is subtly trying to widen the net for possible racial reparations in the United States of America. In a tweet, Khanna called for reparations for “black and brown” people, leaving us to wonder: what kinds of brown people does he want to give reparations to? Is he talking about all Hispanics? How much would that cost? Is he including Indians like himself? Is he including Kamala Harris, who hails from a high-caste Brahmin family? Does Ro Khanna envision a future in which white plumbers in Nebraska pay reparations to elite Indian immigrants in Silicon Valley?

HERE IS RO KHANNA’S RACIALLY-CHARGED TWEET.
Ro Khanna tweeted, “When we talk about targeted reparations, we’re talking about providing Black and Brown communities the same opportunities to build generational wealth that white families have.” Fascinating! Ro Khanna comes from a politically-active Indian family. He is the son of immigrants from India including a chemical engineer father who was educated both in India and the United States. Khanna now represents tech-rich Silicon Valley, which is driving the push for Indian migration to the U.S. 77 percent of Indian people in the United States reportedly voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, according to polling. The publication Unherd ran a very revealing article headlined, “How Brahmins lead the fight against white privilege,” describing how elite Indians embrace “radical” leftist politics in America. Ro Khanna, it should be noted, infamously crossed paths with Fang Fang, the suspected Chinese spy paramour of Eric Swalwell. Fang Fang worked as a Ro Khanna campaign volunteer.

Kamala Harris comes from a high-caste Brahmin family from India on her mother’s side. The Brahmins are the highest caste in India’s Hindu system, reviled by many for their sense of racial superiority and the associated benefits they enjoy in Indian life. Kamala Harris’ uncle is listed as a top consultant to the government of India, and has worked for a group funded by India’s military. So what is Harris’ uncle’s expertise? He is an expert on nuclear weapons. Kamala’s uncle’s work for the Indian government could be considered a NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT to the United States of America.

Kamala Harris’ uncle Gopalan Balachandran is listed by the Journal of Defense Management as “a Consulting Fellow at the IDSA,” though the press has recently referred to him as a “former” consultant for the IDSA. The IDSA stands for “Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses” (IDSA), which is a think tank in New Delhi that is funded by the Indian Ministry of Defence.

China’s ambassador to India held a meeting at IDSA in New Delhi in June of this year to urgently discuss India-China relations. Balachandran’s 2013 archived IDSA bio lists him as a “Consulting Fellow at the IDSA.” The investigative blog Mining Awareness reported that Balachandran wrote for the IDSA as recently as 2019 and informally advised the think tank as recently as 2020.

Uncle Gopalan’s Journal of Defense Management bio also lists another example of direct employment by the Indian government, stating, “He is a Consultant both to the Americas Division of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs and to the Confederation of Indian Industry.” Uncle Gopalan has been active in the press on Kamala’s behalf, even talking to CNN on the phone.

Uncle Gopalan on behalf of IDSA discussed the “Current Negotiations on the Iranian Nuclear Issue” in 2013, which included Gopalan crediting Iran with making a positive action in at least one instance. The New Yorker reported: “Harris’s mother, Shyamala Gopalan, the Brahman daughter of a diplomat from Chennai, graduated from the University of Delhi at nineteen, and, avoiding an arranged marriage, went to Berkeley to study nutrition and endocrinology. There, she met another graduate student, Donald Harris, from Jamaica, who was pursuing a Ph.D. in economics. The student civil-rights movement, centered on the Berkeley campus, gave the two young immigrants a shared context. “They both identified as people of color and people who were oppressed by a white-male-dominated world,” Meena Harris, Kamala’s niece, told me. “Their fields were science and economics—there were not many Indian women or black men.”

They were married while still in graduate school, and Kamala was born in 1964; another daughter, Maya, came two years after that…Hindu customs and cosmology infused their lives. The name Kamala means lotus, and is another name for the goddess Lakshmi.” New Yorker passage ends

Harris was happy to acknowledge herself as the first potential Indian member of the United States Senate, back when she was running for Senate in California and 2016 and doing a Democrat convention interview with a network that caters to an Indian audience.

View: https://youtu.be/WWc-Zz97hr0
2:43 min

 

[marsh]

VIDEO: McCarthy Proudly Supports Removing American Statues, Artwork From Capitol, Says Democrats' Bill 'Should Go Further'

"I think the bill should go further," McCarthy proclaimed, insisting the statues and portraits of historical figures depict "Democrats"

nationalfile.com

VIDEO: McCarthy Proudly Supports Removing American Statues, Artwork From Capitol, Says Democrats’ Bill ‘Should Go Further’

"I think the bill should go further," McCarthy proclaimed, insisting the statues and portraits of historical figures depict "Democrats"

by GABRIEL KEANE

June 29, 2021



During a debate on the removal of statues and portraits from the U.S. Capitol that depict members of the Confederacy and other historical white male figures that enrage progressives, House minority leader and Frank Luntz’s roommate Kevin McCarthy announced that he supports far-left calls for the statues’ removal because they depict “Democrats.”

The greatest challenge ever to our Constitution was the Civil War,” McCarthy proclaimed. “Long and by far. The bill we’re voting on today, we voted before, and I supported it, and I support it now. But let me state a simple fact – all the statues being removed by this bill are statues of Democrats. Madame Speaker, as I heard the Speaker talk earlier about removing the four portraits of Speakers in the hall, the same answer goes for that as well. They were all Democrats.”

McCarthy continued the bizarre monologue, declaring, “What’s interesting is the statues that need to be removed were sent to the Capitol by states that were majority controlled by Democrats, sent to a House that had a majority controlled by Democrats, accepting of these statues. I think the bill should go further.”

Virginia Congressional candidate Jarome Bell slammed McCarthy comment’s on Tuesday, tweeting “Giving the Democrats a reason to tear down historical monuments will inevitably lead to the destruction of the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials and the Washington Monument. Anyway, the way your whiney ass was CRYING on Fox News on Jan 6th DQs you from leadership.”

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1409964690395049986

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1409964690395049986
1:34 min

In May, Fox News television host Tucker Carlson broke the news that McCarthy secretly rents a room from controversial neocon pollster Frank Luntz in Washington, D.C. at a “fair market price”:

“Over the weekend we got a call from a source who said that in fact, Frank Luntz and Kevin McCarthy are not simply friends, they’re roommates,” Carlson revealed. “Kevin McCarthy lives in Frank Luntz’s apartment in downtown Washington. That’s what we were told, and honestly we did not believe it. The top Republican in the House lives with a Google lobbyist? Come on, come on. Even by the sleazy and corrupt standards of politics in Washington, that did not seem possible, in fact it sounded like a joke.”

Carlson’s team then called McCarthy’s spokeswoman to inquire about the story, and were surprised to receive an affirmative response. The spokesperson admitted that “because of the pandemic, McCarthy has rented a room in Washington at a fair market price from Frank.”

“So actually the top Republican in the House does live with someone who lobbies for Google,” Carlson said. “Mystery solved. Not only are they friends, they’re roommates! So now you know why they listen to Frank Luntz but they don’t listen to you.”

McCarthy also made a strange comparison between the Confederacy and anti-white critical race theory during Tuesday’s House debate, without providing much of an explanation for the analogy.

 

[marsh]

US Firms are Aiding China

According to Rep. Nunes, many US firms, especially banks and the financiers at them, are aiding China and assisting its rise at the expense of the US! Read about that treason here!

genzconservative.com

June 29, 2021
US Firms are Aiding China



While China marshals every resource available to win its thousand year war of complete global domination, traitorous US firms, such as Nike and Honeywell, are falling over each other to aid the Red Chinese and resist the US’s efforts to reign in that evil empire. Instead of supporting their nation, they’re aiding China.
According to Rep. Devin Nunes of California, who recently began an investigation into the vulnerabilities created by China’s involvement in US businesses and China’s intentions on US soil, “China is executing a plan to undermine and co-opt U.S. business. Corporate America needs to understand that China is targeting them, often using lucrative access to Chinese markets as a means to acquire their technology and innovations, and even to force them to suppress their own employees’ freedom of speech on China issues.”

According to Just the News, which had a conversation with Rep. Nunes about this issue and reported on it, the most concerning part of Rep. Nunes’ preliminary report is that financiers and companies in the US are, instead of supporting their homeland, assisting China in its push “to replace the United States as the premier global power.”

Furthermore, according to the memo released by the investigatory committee:
“The Chinese government’s grip on business is a powerful platform for malign influence. Beijing’s control over Chinese industry and investment enables the acquisition, transfer, and theft of U.S. innovation, technology, and intellectual property.

Moreover, China employs a wide range of initiatives to influence and shape events and public opinion to undermine U.S. national and economic security. American business writ large is entangled in this effort, wittingly and unwittingly. The CCP seeks to manipulate American business and financial leaders to facilitate its strategic objectives. Specifically, it entices or coerces collaboration with U.S. entities to acquire intellectual property, technology, and assistance for China-based entities.”

And it’s not just manufacturing companies that are to blame. According to the same memo, financiers and their banks are helping fund China’s rise:

• “U.S. banks are placing billions of investment dollars in China, which is opening its $50 trillion financial market to foreign firms.
• China uses American investment managers and banks to gain opportunities for strategic investments in U.S. startups, innovative technologies, biosciences, and manufacturing.
• Chinese firms are exploiting U.S. financial markets to raise funds and enhance their international credibility.
• American financial firms are executing investments of Chinese-state originated funds based on CCP guidance on which business sectors, R&D, or specific businesses to target.
• Chinese firms use complex structures that obscure risks, state ties, and other corporate details, hindering U.S. government oversight and U.S. investors’ legal recourse in the event of fraud.”

American banks and companies, rather than support their nation, are helping the communist Chinese take over the world. They need to be held to account for doing so.

China is currently building a massive navy, carrying out a campaign of genocide against the Uighurs, and imposing an authoritarian system upon its citizens, much like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union in the 20th century.

We cannot continue treating it as a normal nation and hoping it “liberalizes.” That is the path to disaster. Instead, we need to take the threat seriously and treat China how we treated Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, or the USSR; that means there must be no trading with it, especially in sensitive technologies, and we must oppose it at every step.

Those companies or financiers that get in the way of that crucial competition with China, and especially the ones that are aiding China, must be treated as traitors; by helping the CCP, they are giving material comfort to an enemy that wants to destroy us. China delenda est!

 

[marsh]

Michigan Court Rules Hurting a Liberal’s Feelings Online Can Result in Terror Charges, Lawmakers and Activists Respond - Big League Politics

A press conference is scheduled for Wednesday.

bigleaguepolitics.com

Michigan Court Rules Hurting a Liberal’s Feelings Online Can Result in Terror Charges, Lawmakers and Activists Respond

Jun 29, 2021

The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that hurting a liberal’s feelings can be considered a terrorist threat and punishable by up to 20 years in prison, which has prompted a response from activists and lawmakers concerned about the grave implications this ruling may have on the 1st Amendment.

“Importantly, the issue is not whether defendant actually made a threat of terrorism, which would be a question for the trier of fact. Rather, the issue is whether, on these facts, defendant can be charged at all. The issue before us turns on whether a social media post made by defendant can constitute a ‘true threat,’” the court of appeals wrote in their ruling that puts all conservatives in the state at risk.

This appeals court ruling is pertaining to the case of 20-year-old Lucas Gerhard, a former Lake Superior State University student who was jailed for 83 days because a liberal classmate was triggered by a picture of a rifle he posted on social media.

The court of appeals ruled that it did not matter that the hyper-emotional leftist who went to authorities was not intended to receive the photo. This may give the green light for liberals to report social media posts to authorities and compel terrorism charges in the state.

Big League Politics has reported on the miscarriage of justice that has happened to Gerhard and how the state of Michigan continues to attempt to ruin this young man’s life:

“Lucas Gerhard, a 20-year-old student who was enrolled at Lake Superior State University (LSSU) in Sault Ste. Marie, Mich., has been charged with making terroristic threats and faces years in prison for posting a picture of a legally-obtained rifle on social media.

Gerhard posted a picture in Aug. 2019 of his new firearm to a private Snapchat group with classmates, claiming that his AR-15 rifle would “make the snowflakes melt” when he returned to campus. The reference meant that far-left students would be triggered by his possession of the rifle and it would literally melt snow, as the LSSU campus is located in Michigan’s upper peninsula renowned for its icy conditions.

“Taking this bad boy up. This ought to make the snowflakes melt a — and I mean snowflakes as in snow,” he wrote on social media, according to a transcript of the preliminary examination obtained by Big League Politics.

One classmate in the private group – who stated in court proceedings that she did not feel threatened by the post – showed the picture to a left-leaning female student, who copied the image on her phone before they filed a complaint to the district supervisor. It was then kicked up to campus public safety, who got Sault Ste. Marie police involved in the matter…

Lucas’ father Mark, who is a retired Marine colonel that has worked for many years in the federal government, told Big League Politics that he understands why the campus would take a possible threat so seriously. What he doesn’t understand is why prosecutors would continue pursuing such a case when it is abundantly clear that his son poses no threat to public safety. As the case develops, it is becoming clear that the intent is to make a statement and strip Lucas of his constitutional liberties forever.

The deputy public defender tasked with leading the prosecution referred to a Snapchat post during the preliminary hearing in which Lucas referred to Democrats on campus as his “enemies” in an attempt to paint him as a dangerous threat, showing how this case is about the 1st Amendment as much as it is the 2nd.“

As a result of this ruling, state representative John Reilly (R-Lake Orion) will be introducing legislation that will fix the law and make sure that no other conservatives can be railroaded and have their 1st Amendment rights violated in a similar manner as Gerhard.

Activist leaders in the state are urging people to gather on Wednesday, June 30 at 5pm at the Michigan Hall of Justice in Lansing for a press conference in favor of Reilly’s proposed bill and also to raise awareness for Gerhard’s continued legal battle.

“Last Friday, the Michigan Court of Appeals effectively revoked the First Amendment protection of every citizen of Michigan when it declared that your speech could be considered a criminal felony – based not upon the content of your speech, but on how anyone, including any left-wing lunatic, chooses to interpret it,” wrote Adam de Angeli of the Rescue Michigan Coalition.

“By judicial decree the Constitutional rights of all Michiganders are in serious danger,” said Rosanne Ponkowski, President of the Michigan Conservative Coalition. “Prosecutors can declare ‘open season’ on anybody whose speech they disagree with. This is unconstitutional, immoral, and extremely dangerous in today’s toxic political environment.”

“There was a time when our courts and political leaders would vigorously defend the right of free speech, including speech they disagree with,” she added. “It is time to stand up for the rights of every Michigander to speak.”

 

[marsh]

DOD Counter-Extremism Group Expert Warns of Protected Speech Crackdown

A conservative member of the Pentagon's Counter-Extremism Working Group is sounding an alarm on the Biden administration's efforts.

www.breitbart.com

Adviser to Pentagon Counter-Extremism Group Warns of Protected Speech Crackdown
1,405

FL-photography / iStock / Getty Images Plus
KRISTINA WONG29 Jun 20211,983

An adviser to the Pentagon’s Counter-Extremism Working Group (CEWG) is warning the Biden administration’s efforts to purge the military of “extremists” could violate individual First Amendment rights.

Mike Berry, general counsel for First Liberty Institute and Marine Corps reservist, first sounded the alarm in a recent op-ed that said the CEWG is looking to formulate a new definition of extremism that could include constitutionally protected speech. He wrote in the Washington Examiner on June 19:

Instead of monitoring external threats, the Pentagon is on a mission to identify and remove whomever it labels as extremists from America’s armed forces. Ironically, the CEWG has yet to define what it means by ‘extremism.’ Extremism is usually defined as the threat or use of violence to achieve an ideological agenda. But the Pentagon is now poised to expand upon that definition to include constitutionally protected speech. In other words, sticks and stones may break our bones, but words are the biggest threat.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin set up the Counter-Extremism Working Group (CEWG) in April after vowing to root out extremists and ordering the entire military force to spend a day discussing “extremism.” Since there is no Pentagon definition for “extremism,” Austin tasked the CEWG, led by Bishop Garrison, to come up with a definition and to define activities that would be considered “extremist.”

Berry, who is part of an outside group of experts appointed to help the CEWG, told Breitbart News in a recent phone interview some of the things the group discussed on a recent hour-long conference call were “eyebrow raising or alarming.” He said members of the advisory group are bound by “Chatham House rules” in where they can discuss what was said on the call, but not who said it.

Berry said he asked the CEWG how it intended to define “extremism” and the answer he got was something to the effect of: “We’re still working on that, we’ll probably take the existing definition and expand it.” Berry said that response was “problematic.”



“The existing definition — which has been around for years and has developed really through a law enforcement perspective — it seems to be pretty adequate,” he said. “It sufficiently captures what needs to be captured. And if they want to expand it, they’re really going to expand it to things that have been traditionally protected by the Constitution.”

As Breitbart News recently reported, a senior Biden administration official said on a background conference call with reporters that the Pentagon was working “quite hard” to come up with a definition that “ratchets up the protections but also respects expression and association protections.”

Berry said he was also alarmed by what sounds like a plan to monitor service members’ social media accounts for signs of extremism — which he feels crosses the line between defining extremism by one’s actions — which the Pentagon has said it would stick to — and defining extremism by one’s “thoughts or beliefs.”

“I just don’t know how you can reconcile the Constitution with trying to criminalize someone’s thoughts and beliefs,” he said. Berry added questions were raised about it and there was no adequate answer.

“When somebody asked how does DOD intend to reconcile the social media monitoring with First Amendment issues, the response was, ‘Yeah, we need to figure that out, it’s really complicated.’ So then why are you looking to do it when you haven’t even figured it out, the legality of it?” Berry said.

He said he does not know about any current effort to monitor social media posts and that the group just discussed future plans to do so.

The Intercept recently reported the Pentagon was considering using private contractors to monitor service members’ social media accounts to circumvent First Amendment concerns, but the Pentagon denied the report was true.

In addition, Berry said monitoring social media accounts sounds like an “intelligence collection type activity,” which is problematic since the Defense Department cannot conduct intelligence collection on U.S. citizens.

He revealed one hypothetical discussed on the call for how social media information could be used — if a service member was found to have an “88” tattoo — which could potentially stand for “Heil Hitler,” since “h” is the 8th letter of the alphabet, or refer to something benign, such as someone’s birth year.

Participants speculated that if the service member denied it was linked to white supremacy, social media could be used to “cross-reference” the claim. Berry said the notion that a service member would have to effectively prove his or her innocence was odd.

“The social media monitoring thing really reminds me of what China does with its social credit system,” he said.



Berry said he was also alarmed that a number of questions raised by some of the participants showed they had preconceived notions of who extremists were — namely, white people.

“They would phrase their questions such as, ‘Well, how is this working group going to eliminate white supremacists and white extremists from the military? Isn’t that why we’re really here?'” he said.

Berry said statistics did not show that extremism was a widespread issue in the military:

If you look at the data, over the last five years there have been 21 service members who have been separated for extremist activity.

Twenty-one over five years, and yet that’s what they want to focus on.

And you have the president saying that white supremacy is the No. 1 threat to national security when…I think we should be focusing our attention and our resources and our energy on China, Russia, Iran, North Korea. Those are quaint old-fashioned ideas now.

“We really need to focus on what unites us,” he said. “True extremists have no place in the military, but it’s fewer than one percent, according to the defense secretary.”

He said the group also discussed the need for more data collection and the creation of a reporting mechanism for extremism cases in the military.

Even for members of the advisory group, details of the inner workings of the CEWG are scarce. Berry said the members of the advisory group do not even know who is on the CEWG, other than Garrison.

Berry said he is not sure how he came to be appointed to the advisory group, and that he did not even know he had been appointed until a reporter called him to ask about it. He also said it seemed he was the only conservative in the advisory group, and one of few who had military experience. He also acknowledged in his recent op-ed that speaking out could result in his removal from the group.

But, he wrote, “I love my country too much not to sound the alarm. And if my love of America is what leads to my removal, then so be it, as long as my discharge papers state ‘discharged for love of country.'”

Asked what advice he would give service members given what he has heard so far, he said would tell them to “be on guard.”

“Watch your back,” he said.

 

[marsh]

An Open Letter to America’s Veterans and Veterans Organizations | Frontpage Mag

This letter is an urgent call for America’s 20 million military veterans and veterans organizations to actively speak out against the “forces” wanting to

www.frontpagemag.com

An Open Letter to America’s Veterans and Veterans Organizations
An urgent call.

Tue Jun 29, 2021
Paul Gardiner

This letter is an urgent call for America’s 20 million military veterans and veterans organizations to actively speak out against the “forces” wanting to change America into a Marxist, communist-like state. As explained below, this is a significant national security issue in which America’s veterans need to become very actively involved.

The “forces” are nothing less than domestic enemies of America’s cherished Constitution and individual liberties such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the Second Amendment. If the forces are left undefeated, future recruitments of young Americans into the nation’s Armed Forces will undoubtedly suffer, perhaps greatly suffer.

Today, the weapon of choice of the forces is Critical Race Theory (CRT). Simply stated, CRT is nothing more than a derivation of Marxist, communist ideology wherein a person’s race rather than a person’s class — i. e., working class versus managerial/owner class — is the basis for struggle and conflict. Rather than unite Americans of all races into a strong, vibrant nation, CRT strives to divide Americans and keep them divided into different racial groups in conflict with one another.

One of the most onerous situations today involves substantial numbers of America’s elementary/secondary school children and university students. These young people are being fed a steady diet of what amounts to communist propaganda and ideology couched in terms of CRT, cancel culture, and other anti-American ideologies. Teachers refusing to teach these “doctrines” to school children frequently lose their jobs or otherwise suffer some kind of retribution.

Irrespective of parental and teacher opposition, a growing number of America’s local school boards and administrators are mandating that CRT theory be taught to students. The CRT curriculum of some school districts extends even to kindergarten and first-grade students!

America’s military veterans swore a lifelong oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Hence, the domestic enemies described herein need to be called out and effectively defeated with the help of America’s 20 million veterans and numerous veterans organizations.

A very important and needed action for veterans and veterans organizations is to attend local school board meetings as a group of concerned veterans. As a show of force, their spokesperson would ask his/her fellow veterans to briefly stand (sitting together if possible).

The spokesperson would then explain how the teachings of CRT will undoubtedly have detrimental effects on future recruitment efforts for America’s Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard. Among other reasons, fewer young people will be willing to serve in the military (and put their lives at risk) for a nation that they have been indoctrinated to believe is overly racist; where oppressors (white people) are constantly oppressing the oppressed (black people/other minorities).

The spokesperson should say that such indoctrination must stop, and if it does not stop, then America has a significant national security issue.

It is truly time for America’s military veterans to once again serve their great nation and be instrumental in defending our treasured freedoms and liberty!

Paul S. Gardiner is a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, Vietnam veteran, and member of the American Legion. He is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Alabama, and the U.S. Army War College.

 

[marsh]

EXCLUSIVE: General who fired Space Force commander rebuked by judge for illegalities - Washington Examiner

The general who fired a Space Force commander for trying to rid the military of Marxism was himself castigated by a military judge in an unprecedented order for intentionally violating the constitutional rights of a serviceman.Last month, Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting of the U.S. Space Command...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

EXCLUSIVE: General who fired Space Force commander rebuked by judge for illegalities

by Tori Richards, Investigative Reporter |
| June 29, 2021 07:00 AM


The general who fired a Space Force commander for trying to rid the military of Marxism was himself castigated by a military judge in an unprecedented order for intentionally violating the constitutional rights of a serviceman.

Last month, Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting of the U.S. Space Command relieved Matthew Lohmeier of his duties overseeing missile defense based on a judgment that informing the public about Marxist ideology in the military was dangerous.

But beginning in 2018, while supervising a military prosecution, Whiting violated the due process and rights to a fair trial of an Air Force engineer on three counts of rape that could have resulted in a lifetime prison sentence, according to court documents.

“This court is left to conclude that the United States of America is neither committed to ensuring the accused gets a fair trial nor taking the steps necessary to provide the accused with the relevant discovery to mount his defense,” wrote Judge W. Shane Cohen in a 13-page opinion dated Aug. 22, 2019. "This court is left with few conclusions other than the United States of America is not serious about meeting its legal obligations even when the law demands it."


Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting
U.S. Air Force
Cohen, an esteemed judge who had the 9/11 case on his docket with accused architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, called Whiting out by his title as the person responsible for a situation in which “the government abdicated its obligations to the justice system.”

The judge went as far as saying that reasonable doubt existed regarding Technical Sgt. Keith Snyder's guilt in the case, which is the legal standard for a not guilty verdict.

"The outstanding evidence being sought by the defense is of central importance to mounting the accused’s affirmative defense, attacking the credibility of his three accusers, and demonstrating both his innocence and the reasonable doubt in the government’s case," Cohen wrote.

Judge W. Shane Cohen
U.S. Air Force

The charges against Snyder hinged on a spliced covert tape recording from his Florida home created by a woman he had dated, identified as CP in court documents.

The tape is illegal because Florida does not allow recordings without the consent of both parties. CP continuously tried to elicit a response that she was forced to have sex, while Snyder was clearly confused with the situation because they had a continuing sexual relationship, according to a review of the tape by the Washington Examiner.

Additional court evidence showed that CP and two other women were jealous that Snyder did not date them exclusively, and they colluded on social media to file rape reports with the military. The plot was spearheaded by CP, who became enraged after Snyder broke up with her. She went through his social media profiles and contacted dozens of women to vilify Snyder with claims of cheating and in the hope that his children would be taken away from him, evidence showed.

“Just found out he was sleeping with a woman named **** [and] a woman named **** and you during the same time frame,” CP texted to one woman who started their conversation with, “What do you want?”



This evidence was collected and submitted to the court by Snyder’s attorney, Aaron G. Meyer, who specializes in military cases. The prosecution refused to issue a subpoena to collect the discovery from the women, which led Cohen to take the unusual step of dismissing the case with prejudice — meaning it cannot be filed again.

Throughout the case, CP sent hundreds of texts to Snyder, often creating false identities and using burner phones to strike up new relationships. The messages sent from CP’s regular account were filled with hate and threats that alternated with begging to resume their relationship. In several texts, CP said she would be “laying landmines.” Finally, Snyder obtained a restraining order.

Tori Richards
“It was a politically motivated prosecution,” Meyer told the Washington Examiner. “There is absolutely no sexual assault crisis in the military. Now you have [generals] scared of their own shadows with political prosecutions on nonsense allegations that would never be filed in civilian court.”

The women would post accusations on social media that the military refused to protect them after the judge issued repeated orders requiring prosecutors to turn over the electronic evidence to the defense, Meyer said.

“It’s my belief that the military was concerned about these social media posts,” Meyer said.

Gen. Whiting signed off on many of the court documents forging ahead toward trial.

Both Meyer, who has done hundreds of military cases, and retired Army Brig. Gen. Don Bolduc say the judge’s order is unprecedented in its language and remedy.

“As a general officer, if I had received this unprecedented admonishment from a judge, I would expect that the trust of my superiors and my subordinates would be justly questioned,” Bolduc told the Washington Examiner. “All around, this is a case study in bad leadership as it pertains to military justice.”

Bolduc is currently running for the U.S. Senate in New Hampshire on a platform of returning the country to patriotism.

James Carafano, a fellow with the Heritage Foundation and a retired Army lieutenant colonel who oversaw many military criminal cases, said: “There is something wrong with our senior officer corps of the military. There is some of the most irresponsible behavior that I have ever seen. If you don’t have any evidence, but you do have exculpatory evidence, I would never bring a prosecution against this person.”

As for Lohmeier, Bolduc had strong opinions about Whiting’s choice to fire the commander rather than defend his actions to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. If Whiting had strong support for Lohmeier, it's likely that the commander would still have his job, Bolduc said.

“We got here because we have a bunch of admirals and generals who just aren’t doing their job. They aren’t protecting the military, their organization, and more importantly, they aren’t protecting their people,” Bolduc said. “They are allowing politics and this perverted version of diversity to be taught in the military.”

In this 2016 photo, U.S. Special Operations Commander Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc speaks to the media outside the U.S. Embassy in N'Djamena, Chad. Bolduc is a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in 2022.
Andrew Harnik/AP

Lohmeier was fired after going on a podcast last month to promote a bestselling book he wrote on Marxism in the military. In the interview, he criticized critical race theory training in civilian schools as un-American along with similar training he was forced to give subordinates.

After the podcast, Whiting relieved him of command, with a statement from Space Force citing a "loss of trust and confidence."

Lohmeier declined to comment on this article. He still has his rank and is assigned to the Space Force, but he no longer has “a leadership role,” the statement said.

Lt. Col. Mike Andrews, Space Operations Command spokesman, issued this response on behalf of Whiting:

"The United States military takes every allegation of sexual assault extremely seriously, and will always honor the desires of a victim regarding participation in a sexual assault investigation or prosecution. In addition, the Uniform Code of Military Justice ensures the defendant has the right to hear from his accuser.

"Prior to referring the charges in US v Snyder to a General Court-Martial, the charges were first considered at a preliminary hearing that heard evidence and witness testimony, and recommended referring charges to a general court-martial.

"Lt Gen Whiting’s role was serving as the convening authority for U.S. vs. Snyder; he referred the charges to a General Court-Martial. It was the role of the presiding military judge for that General Court-Martial, not the convening authority, to rule on the defense’s motion to dismiss the charges. The government did not seek to appeal the military judge’s ruling."

 

[marsh]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1409185402280316929

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1409185402280316929
.51 min

 

[marsh]

President Trump Releases Statement on Current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Milley, Calling for Milley to Resign | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

President Trump released a statement today addressing the recent comments by General Mark Milley, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and called for his resignation.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

President Trump Releases Statement on Current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Milley, Calling for Milley to Resign

By Joe Hoft
Published June 30, 2021 at 2:50pm

President Trump released a statement today addressing the recent comments by General Mark Milley, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and called for his resignation.

The President’s response in part addresses General Milley’s comments last week in response to Rep. Matt Gaetz supporting the Critical Race Theory.

Gen. Mark Milley’s greatest fear is upsetting the woke mob.

When Black Lives Matter rioters were threatening to destroy Washington, D.C., he practically begged me not to send in the military to stop the riots.

Milley later issued an embarrassing and groveling apology for walking at my side to St. John’s Church, which far-left rioters almost burned to the ground the day before. Instead of denouncing the rioters, he denounced himself—a humiliation for our Military. A year later even the Fake News had to admit that their Lafayette Square narrative was a giant lie. Milley, once again, looked like a fool.

Now, in yet another desperate ploy to impress the Radical Left and keep his job, Milley made-up a false story that he yelled at me in the Situation Room. This is totally Fake News. If he had displayed such disrespect for his Commander-in-Chief I would have fired him immediately.

To further ingratiate himself with Biden, progressive Media, and the Radical Left, Milley went to Congress and actually defended Critical Race Theory being shoved down the throats of our soldiers. This Marxist, racist anti-American propaganda has no place in our Military—I banned these training programs, now Biden and the Pentagon have resumed them. As soon as possible, Congress must defund this racist indoctrination.

Gen. Milley ought to resign, and be replaced with someone who is actually willing to defend our Military from the Leftist Radicals who hate our Country and our Flag.

Below is Milley supporting Critical Race Theory last week – what a disgrace:

 

[marsh]

Microsoft VP: Federal Targeting of Americans' Texts, Emails, Data 'Routine'

Federal law enforcement agencies secretly request the data of Microsoft customers thousands of times per year, according to the congressional testimony of Tom Burt, the company's VP for customer security and trust.

www.breitbart.com

Microsoft VP: Federal Targeting of Americans’ Texts, Emails, Data ‘Routine’

File Photo: Federal Bureau of Investigation
ALLUM BOKHARI30 Jun 202144

Federal law enforcement agencies secretly request the data of Microsoft customers thousands of times per year, according to the congressional testimony of Tom Burt, the company’s VP for customer security and trust.

According to Burt, these requests — kept secret from their target, by court order — include requests for emails, text messages, and other sensitive data. The executive the House Judiciary Committee that the company received between 2,400 to 3,500 such requests a year, or between seven and 10 per day.
Via Associated Press:

“Most shocking is just how routine secrecy orders have become when law enforcement targets an American’s email, text messages or other sensitive data stored in the cloud,” said Burt, describing the widespread clandestine surveillance as a major shift from historical norms.
…
Since then, Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, called for an end to the overuse of secret gag orders, arguing in a Washington Post opinion piece that “prosecutors too often are exploiting technology to abuse our fundamental freedoms.” Attorney General Merrick Garland, meanwhile, has said the Justice Department will abandon its practice of seizing reporter records and will formalize that stance soon.
…
Burt said that while the revelation that federal prosecutors had sought data about journalists and political figures was shocking to many Americans, the scope of surveillance is much broader. He criticized prosecutors for reflexively seeking secrecy through boilerplate requests that “enable law enforcement to just simply assert a conclusion that a secrecy order is necessary.”

AP’s full story.
The testimony about clandestine surveillance of Americans comes on the heels of explosive allegations from Tucker Carlson, whose Fox News show broke the record for the highest-rated program in cable news history in July 2020. Carlson recently alleged that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) was spying on him without his knowledge, based on a tip from an alleged whistleblower.

The NSA denied “targeting” Carlson in a statement yesterday, but did not deny the specific allegation that it has read his emails or text messages. White House press secretary Jen Psaki also failed to deny the allegation, instead claiming the NSA “focuses on foreign threats and individuals who are attempting to do us harm on foreign soil.”

 

[marsh]

The Tyranny of the Minority Is Just as Dangerous as the Tyranny of the Majority | Mises Institute

We should be quite skeptical when states impose the opinion of minority groups on the majority through special programs in schools and elsewhere. Such programs

mises.org

The Tyranny of the Minority Is Just as Dangerous as the Tyranny of the Majority

• 

10 HOURS AGOMichael Rectenwald

In a previous installment, I pointed out that in On Liberty, John Stuart Mill advocated for minority opinion to be specially “encouraged and countenanced,”1 and thus that Mill was not an absolute free market thinker where opinion is concerned. Mill suggested that minority opinion should not only be tolerated but requires special encouragement in order to gain a fair hearing. Such special encouragement would amount to the subsidization of opinion, most likely by the state. Thus, Mill did not argue for a free and fair “marketplace of ideas.”

It should be noted here that “the marketplace of ideas” is not only an analogy, where commodities are to markets what ideas are to the public square. The public square is also market in its own right, and not only metaphorically associated with the market. The expression “the marketplace of ideas” somewhat obscures rather than clarifying the situation of opinion.

Further, I argued that Mill’s advocacy for special treatment of minority opinion does not solve the problem of “social tyranny,” which Mill suggested is “more formidable than many kinds of political oppression.”2 Rather, when minority opinion is foisted on the majority through special sanctions or subsidies, “social tyranny” is actually increased rather than diminished. To the extent that a majority is unwillingly subjected to minority opinion, the majority is tyrannized.
This argument begs the question: What about the opinion of minorities? After all, the mere mention of minority opinion invokes minorities themselves. Don’t the opinions of minorities require special encouragement, special sanctions, especially when said opinions have to do with fair and equal treatment of minorities themselves? Doesn’t a free market in opinion, or an unfettered marketplace of ideas, drown out or otherwise suppress the opinions of minorities? Wouldn’t a free market in opinion thus serve to perpetuate discrimination, lack of recognition, or unfair treatment? Isn’t the state required to rectify the situation through special subsidies for opinion?

Leaving the nonremunerated voicing of opinion aside—that is, opinion expressed casually or even in public demonstrations—the question becomes whether in the actual marketplace of ideas, state subsidies are necessary for the opinions of minorities to get a fair hearing.

The question implies that state actors are specially qualified or motivated to subsidize minority opinion in order to rectify the unfair treatment of minorities—that the state is the most qualified entity for intervening in opinion to favor minorities. But it is easily demonstrated that the market provides more incentives to advocate for the fair treatment of minorities than does the state. Markets encourage legal equality among buyers and sellers. The state, meanwhile, has no monopoly on equal treatment—to say the least. Quite to the contrary, states have more incentives to discriminate against particular groups, as state prerogatives often depend on discrimination. Consider the treatment of the Japanese and Germans in America during World War II, or the treatment of Middle Easterners after 9/11. (Notice how discrimination against Middle Easterners morphed into the consternation about “Islamophobia” when the prerogatives of the state shifted from “the war on terror” under George W. Bush to the incorporation of Islamic immigrants into the electorate under Barack Obama.)

Thus, we should be quite skeptical when states impose the opinion of minorities on the majority through special programs in schools and elsewhere. Such programs likely involve “positive discrimination” against particular groups, consistent with state objectives.

In fact, discrimination is precisely what is involved in the teaching of critical race theory in schools, the military, the intelligence agencies, and in other government agencies today. Critical race theory is a minority opinion that even most blacks do not agree with. It is being foisted on the majority to establish discrimination against “whites,” in order to destroy a political contingent deemed inimical to the Democratic Party–run state. It is a means for marginalizing oppositional elements and driving others into the voting ranks of the Democratic Party by means of ideology. The state imposition of minority opinion does not serve minorities.

• 1.John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (Kitchener, ON: Batoche Books Limited, 2001), p. 45.
• 2.Mill, On Liberty, p. 9.

 

[marsh]

Why Is The U.S. Military Fighting Freedom Harder Than Foreign Threats?

Our military leaders should focus on fighting external threats at this crucial historical juncture, not fighting a domestic culture war.

thefederalist.com

Why Is The U.S. Military Fighting American Freedom Harder Than Foreign Threats?

Our military leaders should focus on fighting external threats at this crucial historical juncture, not fighting a domestic culture war.

By Helen Raleigh
JUNE 30, 2021

Corporate media and progressives found a new darling in Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after his congressional testimony last week. Anyone who dared to criticize him was blasted as either unpatriotic or demonstrating “white rage.”

Republicans have criticized the U.S. military for promoting books that advocate for racial divisions — for example, listing Ibram Kendi’s critical race theory gospel, “How to Be an Antiracist,” as reading for sailors in the U.S. Navy. During his testimony, Milley made it clear he didn’t see anything wrong with training the U.S. military in critical race theory.

Milley Defends Racist Indoctrination
“I’ve read Mao Zedong. I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin,” he argued. “That doesn’t make me a communist.” Many advocates of critical race theory’s racist teachings have made similar arguments about teaching it in K-12 schools, claiming it is just one of many ideas students are taught.

But the general’s own words quickly betrayed the notion that books about critical race theory are casual reading assignments simply for soldiers’ intellectual curiosity. Referencing the events at the U.S. Capitol in January, he stated: “I want to understand white rage. And I’m white.”

The phrase “white rage” is CRT newspeak, implying that “rage” has a color, and it is exclusively “white.” Emory University professor Carol Anderson coined the term in her 2016 book “White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide.” She sees “white rage” as “the operational function of white supremacy,” which is embedded in policies that actively “undermine African American achievement and advancement.”

The phrase reflects CRT advocates’ typical but misguided beliefs that the United States hasn’t made much progress in racial healing and racial equality, and that minorities are still hopelessly oppressed by the white majority in today’s America. Many scholars, including black scholars such as Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and Jason Riley, have refuted such beliefs vigorously.

Nevertheless, by using “white rage” in his testimony, Milley indicated he is on board with CRT’s teachings and beliefs. Furthermore, he demands American soldiers be indoctrinated with the same ideology.

“What is wrong,” Milley asked, with “having some situational understanding about the country for which we are here to defend?” This assumes that one can understand the United States by accepting accusations against its white citizens as expressions of “rage.” Of course, there is nothing wrong with American soldiers understanding our nation’s true history — not only its faults, but also the progress it has made.

Critical Race Theory Is Racist and Divisive
Our men and women in uniform should know this nation’s founding principles represent universal values. Although we are still far from realizing those founding principles, we have advanced further toward those ideals than any other country in the world. These principles and our efforts to achieve them are worth defending to the death.

However, indoctrinating the U.S. military with CRT will hurt both the recruitment of soldiers and the morale of our current troops. In the words of the Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo, CRT “isn’t an exercise in promoting racial sensitivity or understanding history. It’s a radical ideology that seeks to use race as a means of moral, social and political revolution.”

CRT divides people permanently into “oppressors” and “oppressed” categories based on skin color. Rather than promoting racial healing, it fosters racial divisions among Americans. It engenders hopelessness among minorities while instilling eternal guilt among white Americans. Rejecting America’s founding principles, CRT ignores the progress we’ve made and seeks to, as Rufo explains, “abolish capitalism and install a near-omnipotent federal bureaucracy with the power to nullify any law and silence political speech that isn’t ‘antiracist.’”

Here are some questions for Milley. How can American soldiers of different racial backgrounds fight side-by-side and entrust each other with their lives if their relationship is defined as oppressors and oppressed because of their skin color? How can you ask minority soldiers to defend this nation (and even make the ultimate sacrifice) if they have been told they are victims of this nation’s everlasting racism? Through the lens of CRT, America is not worth defending.

Why Is This Our Military’s Priority?
A final question for Milley: does the U.S. military have its priorities right? In the same week as Milley’s testimony, Sir Stuart Peach, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s most senior military officer, warned of communist China’s swift military modernization. He said in an interview: “It is quite shocking how quickly China has built ships, how much China has modernized its air force, [and] how much it has invested in cyber and other forms of information management, not least facial recognition.”

“What do you do if you’re a leader in China with a modernized powerful large force?” he asked rhetorically. “You deploy it, you move it around.”

Peach also raised concerns about Chinese espionage activities and influence campaigns on foreign soil. He pointed out that Beijing has built an “enormous” embassy with a large defense section populated by military generals in Brussels, NATO’s headquarters and the heart of the European Union. It is reasonable to assume Beijing has done something similar through its embassies in other strategic locations, probably in the United States.

The rise of communist China and its military present a formidable challenge to the United States and its western allies. China’s leader Xi Jinping has been very vocal about establishing a Sino-centric new world order, replacing the liberal order that the United States has led since World War II. To fulfill Xi’s “China dream,” China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has significantly increased investments in modern technology as well as military hardware.

For example, the PLA Navy had a 335-ship fleet as of 2019, about 55 percent larger than in 2005. Based on this expansion speed, the PLA Navy fleet is projected to have more than 450 ships and about 110 submarines by 2030.

At the same time, the U.S. Navy had 293 ships in 2019, an increase of just two in the last 15 years. The Biden administration’s defense budget further diminished any hope that the U.S. Navy would have a fleet of 355 ships anytime soon. National security experts are already warning the United States might lose a great-power competition to China if we don’t strengthen our national defense.

Our military leaders should focus on fighting external threats at this crucial historical juncture, not fighting a domestic culture war. It is especially unwise to indoctrinate soldiers with divisive ideologies. The wokeness of our military’s top brass will win kudos from leftist politicians and many domestic institutions, but will cause long-term damage to our troops’ morale and ability to protect this nation.

 

[marsh]

Our ‘Woke’ Pentagon Leaders Are Weakening America’s Defense

The U.S. military’s embrace of Critical Race Theory endangers all of us.

issuesinsights.com

Our ‘Woke’ Pentagon Leaders Are Weakening America’s Defense

I & I Editorial Board
June 30, 2021

Gen. Mark Milley. Source: U.S. Army Europe Images, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license (Creative Commons — Attribution 2.0 Generic — CC BY 2.0).

One of the most disturbing developments to emerge from the Biden administration has been the Defense Department’s sudden embrace of Marxist Critical Race Theory – so-called ‘Woke’ ideology. It’s a clear and present danger to our national security and should be halted immediately.

Even West Point, the Army’s elite university where tomorrow’s generals are educated, isn’t immune to the Woke disease. Soon-to-be Army second lieutenants are being indoctrinated with Marxist-based Woke ideology.

You can thank Commander in Chief Joe Biden and his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley for this. Milley, an Ivy League grad, has aggressively shifted the military toward the political left by compelling officers to push racist CRT ideas down conscripts’ and officers’ throats.

“The United States Military Academy is a university. And it is important that we train, and we understand – and I want to understand white rage. And I’m white, and I want to understand it,” Milley said in recent remarks before Congress. “So, what is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that? I want to find that out.”

He added: “I’ve read Mao Zedong. I’ve read – I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin – that doesn’t make me a communist.”

He’s right about that. But embracing their ideas and putting them into practice, and CRT is definitely Marxist, does make you a communist or a Marxist ― or, at the very least, a willing tool of the same.

“That (CRT) was started at Harvard Law School years ago,” Milley went on. “And it proposed that there were laws in the United States, antebellum laws prior to the Civil War, that led to a power differential with African-Americans, that were three-quarters of a human being, when this country was formed.”

In fact, Milley’s responses to the legitimate concerns by members of Congress over his defense of the extreme left course he has charted for the military have been both disingenuous and historically ignorant.

Take just one part of his argument: The “three-quarters of a human being” argument, intended to slag the founders of our nation as vile racists.

Sadly, slavery is as old as civilization itself. But as North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson recently reminded journalists, who are just as ignorant as Milley:

“The Three-fifths Compromise was put into our Constitution to limit the power of slaveholding states in this nation. The slaveholding states wanted to count their slaves as whole individuals for the purpose of having a population count that would give them control of our federal government. The Three-fifths Compromise prevented that.”

As for Milley’s comment about the CRT idea emerging from Harvard, as if that were a commendable thing, is laughable. More awful radical ideas have emerged from Harvard Law than perhaps from any other institution in America over the past 40 years.

And there’s a whole generation of military leaders who, apparently, embrace this dangerous thinking. So welcome to our new woke military. Gone is the old idea of advancement on merit and ability. Race and gender now count more. Who will want to serve in this military? Who’ll want to lead?

This didn’t happen overnight.

“Throughout world history, whatever comes next after a military purge is never good,” Ret. Gen. Paul Vallely wrote in 2014, after releasing a list of 197 high level military officials sacked by the Obama administration for their political beliefs. “If this continues, what is the U.S. military going to look like in a few years?”

With President Barack Obama’s vice president now commander in chief, maybe we’re finding out.

Biden wants to reduce real growth in the Defense budget, even as the U.S. Navy is fast being eclipsed by China’s ship-building binge, Russia is once again rattling sabers, the U.S.’ next generation F-35 joint-strike fighter is plagued with problems, the Navy has issues with dysfunctional and costly submarines, and just one in four young Americans now can qualify to serve in the military.

These are serious problems. “White supremacy” and inequality are not, except within the race-obsessed Democratic Party. Nor is global warming, which the Joint Chiefs called the “greatest threat” America faces, something the military should be worried about.

CRT is the most divisive, anti-American ideology since Cold War Communism. It not only shouldn’t be used as a template for training soldiers, it should be removed entirely from all public education curricula, except as an example of the awful failures of Marxism.

J.D. Vance, the author of the best-selling and critically acclaimed “Hillbilly Elegy,” said it simply and eloquently in two succinct but powerful tweets:

“I personally would like American generals to read less about ‘white rage’ (whatever that is) and more about ‘not losing wars.’ “

“What I find so enraging about the Joint Chiefs’ pandering on progressive wokeness is that they know damn well the geography and politics of who dies in American wars. The conservative Americans you trash are disproportionately bleeding for this country.”

Dead on. If our next war is fought not by patriotic Americans who love their county, but by angry people with deep racial grievances and guilty social justice warriors who think they live in an unjust dystopia, our nation and the world will be in big trouble. And don’t kid yourself. So will you.
— Written by the I&I Editorial Board
,

 

[marsh]

DHS Warns of White Supremacist-Connected Terrorism During Fourth of July Weekend - Admits There is No Specific Plot | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

DHS Chief Alejandro Mayorkas A new Department of Homeland Security bulletin is warning that “violent extremists might seek to exploit easing COVID-19 restrictions, increased access to mass gatherings, and possible changes in levels of violence during the summer months to conduct attacks against...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

DHS Warns of White Supremacist-Connected Terrorism During Fourth of July Weekend – Admits There is No Specific Plot

By Cristina Laila
Published June 30, 2021 at 5:55pm

DHS Chief Alejandro Mayorkas

A new Department of Homeland Security bulletin is warning that “violent extremists might seek to exploit easing COVID-19 restrictions, increased access to mass gatherings, and possible changes in levels of violence during the summer months to conduct attacks against a range of potential targets with little or no warning.”

The bulletin, obtained by ABC News, says there is no specific terrorist plot for the 4th of July, but noted that feds are seeing evidence of planning by radical white supremacists after monitoring online chatter.

ABC News reported:

Federal authorities are deeply concerned about the possibility of domestic terror and violence, including mass shootings, as the Fourth of July holiday approaches and the summer season gets fully underway.

“In recent weeks, domestic violent extremists (DVEs) motivated by various violent ideologies have continued to advocate violence and plan attacks,” the bulletin said. “As of 16 June, racially or ethnically motivated violent extremist-white supremacists (RMVE-WSs) were sharing downloadable links to a publication discussing targeting mass gatherings, critical infrastructure, and law enforcement officers.”

While no specific plot has been identified for Independence Day, the intelligence brief ominously notes that federal officials are seeing evidence of planning by radicals — particularly white supremacists and violence-prone people.

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is focused on the nexus between violence, and extremist ideologies,” the DHS said in a statement to ABC News. “DHS is enhancing its ability to prevent acts of domestic terrorism inspired by disinformation, conspiracy theories, and false narratives spread through social media and other online platforms. DHS is committed to sharing information with our partners to ensure the safety and security of all communities across the country.

We encourage the public to remain vigilant and to report any suspicious activity to local and state law enforcement, and the FBI.”

 

[marsh]

Navy Brass Forces Maintenance Unit to March with Gay US Flag on Mandatory Hike on the Highway -- PHOTOS | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

The Navy Command of Construction Battalion Maintenance Unit THREE ZERO THREE Mainbody forced all of its members on a gay pride hike last week.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Navy Brass Forces Maintenance Unit to March with Gay US Flag on Mandatory Hike on the Highway — PHOTOS

By Jim Hoft
Published June 30, 2021 at 8:02pm

The Navy Command of Construction Battalion Maintenance Unit THREE ZERO THREE Mainbody forced all of its members on a gay pride hike last week.

According to a woman whose husband is active duty Navy the attendance on the hike was mandatory.

They all hiked while waving a rainbow-themed American Flag.



Construction Battalion Maintenance Unit THREE ZERO THREE Mainbody posted photos from the hike on its Facebook page.

But Facebook is censoring who can see the post.

And now they are deleting critical comments from the page.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

CJ Hopkins Exposes "The War On Reality"

WEDNESDAY, JUN 30, 2021 - 11:00 PM
Authored (somewhat satirically) by CJ Hopkins via The Consent Factory,

So, the War on Reality is going splendidly. Societies all across the world have been split into opposing, irreconcilable realities. Neighbors, friends, and even family members are bitterly divided into two hostile camps, each regarding the other as paranoid psychotics, delusional fanatics, dangerous idiots, and, in any event, as mortal enemies.



In the UK, Germany, and many other countries, and in numerous states throughout the US, a “state of emergency” remains in effect. An apocalyptic virus is on the loose.

Mutant variants are spreading like wildfire. Most of society is still shut down or subject to emergency health restrictions. People are still walking around in public with plastic face shields and medical-looking masks. The police are showing up at people’s homes to arrest them for “illegally gathering outdoors.” Any deviation from official reality is being censored by the Internet corporations.

Constitutional rights are still suspended. Entire populations are being coerced into being injected with experimental “vaccines.” Pseudo-medical segregation systems are being brought online. And so on … you’re familiar with the details.

Meanwhile, in Sweden, and a few other countries, and in various other states throughout the US, there is no apocalyptic pandemic.

People are just going about their lives as normal. OK, sure, there is a nasty virus going around, so people are taking common sense precautions, as people typically do for any nasty virus, but there is no “state of emergency” in effect, and no reason to radically transform society into a paranoid, pathologized-totalitarian dystopia.

This state of affairs, in which two contradictory, mutually-exclusive realities exist, is … well, it’s impossible, and so it cannot continue. Either there exists a devastating global pandemic that justifies a global “state of emergency,” the suspension of constitutional rights, and the other totalitarian “emergency measures” we have been subjected to since March of 2020 or there isn’t. It really is as simple as that.

Except that it isn’t as simple as that. It is easy to forget, given the last 16 months, that people have been bitterly divided, and inhabiting mutually-exclusive realities, and regarding people who don’t conform to their realities as enemies for the last five years. I’m not talking about political disagreements, or even socio-cultural differences. I’m talking about contradictory realities. Things that actually happened, or didn’t happen. Things that exist, or do not exist.

I’m not going rehash the whole War on Populism — I covered it extensively at the time — but that’s when the current global-capitalist War on Reality was officially launched. It wasn’t just the usual lies and propaganda. It was a full-scale ideological assault. By the end of it, people actually believed that (a) Donald Trump was a Russian agent, (b) that he was literally Hitler, and so was going to stage some sort of “coup,” declare himself American Führer, and launch the “Trumpian-White-Supremacist Fourth Reich,” and (c) that he had actually attempted this by sending a few hundred unarmed protesters — violent domestic extremist grandmothers, father-and-son kill squads, and bison hat loonies — to “storm the Capitol” and overthrow the government during the so-called “January 6 Insurrection.”

So, when GloboCap rolled out the “New Normal” reality, they weren’t exactly starting from scratch.

Millions of people — not just Americans, because the War on Populism was a global campaign — were already living in a new reality in which facts no longer mattered at all, where things that never happened officially happened, and other things that obviously happened never happened, not officially, or were “far-right extremist conspiracy theories,” “fake news,” or “disinformation,” or whatever, despite the fact that people knew that they weren’t.

But the goal of GloboCap’s War on Reality isn’t simply to deceive the masses and divide them into opposing camps. Rulers have been deceiving the masses and dividing them into opposing camps since the dawn of human civilization. This time, it’s a bit more complicated than that.

OK, bear with me now, because this gets kind of heady.

The War on Reality is not an attempt to replace reality with a fake reality.

Or it is that, but that is only one part of it. Its real goal is to render reality arbitrary, to strip it of its epistemological authority, to turn it into a “floating signifier,” a word that has no objective referent, which, of course, technically, it already is. You cannot take a picture of reality. It is a concept. It is not a physical object that exists somewhere in time and space.

But let’s leave that last point for a later discussion. This is not the time to get lost in semiotics. For most people, for most practical purposes, reality is … well, reality. It’s objective. Material. It actually exists. It exists independent of our beliefs. It isn’t just an arbitrary, empty signifier that doesn’t actually refer to anything, but which we use, strategically, to assert authority, or to impose ideology on society. If that were the case, there would be no reality. Nothing would be true, everything would be permitted … which is a bunch of postmodern Marxist nonsense.

But just imagine, for a moment, if that were the case … if what determined reality was actually just a question of power rather than facts. Imagine that reality was just a concept that we used to mark the current limits of our knowledge and ideological beliefs. Our doctors — oncologists and virologists, for example, but they could be any kind of doctors or scientists — would be not all that different from medieval alchemists, who totally believed in their reality at the time, as did the patients they were treating, but which we know now was not reality at all, because our reality is the real reality. I mean, it’s not as if people, five hundred years from now, are going to look back at our medical practices and scientific knowledge, and laugh, like we do at those medieval alchemists, right?

Sorry, I got a little off track there. I was trying to explain the ultimate purpose of this global-capitalist War on Reality, and I wandered off into an ontological swamp, which isn’t going to get us anywhere. So, let’s get back to imagining reality, not as what we all know it is (i.e., an actual, material thing that exists), but as a construct people use to validate certain officially-sanctioned beliefs and perceptions and invalidate other beliefs and perceptions, more or less like a system of morals, except instead of dividing things into to “good” and “evil,” it divides things into “real” and “fake.”

Now imagine that you were an immensely powerful, globally hegemonic ideological system, and you wanted to impose your ideology on as much of the entire world as possible, but you didn’t have an ideology per se, or any actual values at all, because exchange value was your only real value, and so your mission was to erase all ideologies, and values, and truths, and belief systems, and so on, and transform everything and everyone in existence into de facto commodities that you could manipulate any way you wanted, because they had no inherent value whatsoever, because their only real value was assigned by the market.

How would you go about doing that, erasing all existing values, religious, cultural, and social values, and rendering everything a valueless commodity?

Well, you wouldn’t want to destroy reality completely, because people wouldn’t stand for that. They would freak right out. Things would get ugly.

So, instead, you might want to go the other way, and generate a lot of contradictory realities, not just contradictory ideologies, but actual mutually-exclusive realities, which could not possibly simultaneously exist … which would still freak people out pretty badly.

Naturally, there would be one official reality that you would force everyone to rigidly conform to at any given moment in time, but you would change the official reality frequently, and force everyone to conform to the new one (and pretend that they’d never conformed to the old one), and then, once they had settled into that one, you would change the official reality again, until people’s brains just shut down completely, and they gave up trying to make sense of anything, and just tried to figure out what you wanted them to believe on any given day.

If you repeated that process long enough, eventually, nothing would mean anything anymore, because everything could potentially mean anything … at which point, you could basically tell people anything you wanted and they would go along with it, because what the hell difference would it make? A narcissistic billionaire ass-clown could be a Russian agent and literally Hitler. A half-assed riot could be an “insurrection.” Children could be born “systemically racist.” Men could menstruate. But wait … it’s gets better.

You could stage an apocalyptic global pandemic that only happened in certain countries, or in certain parts of certain countries, and that more or less mirrored natural mortality, and that didn’t drastically increase historical death rates, but was nonetheless totally apocalyptic.

Perfectly healthy people could become “medical cases.” You could count anyone who died of anything as having died of your apocalyptic virus. You could tell people in no uncertain terms that medical-looking masks will not protect them from viruses, and then turn around and tell them that they will, and then, later, publicly admit you were lying in order to manipulate them, and then deny you ever said that, and tell them to wear masks.

You could experimentally “vaccinate” millions of people whose risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from your apocalyptic virus was minuscule or non-existent, and kill tens or hundreds of thousands in the process, and the people whose brains you had methodically broken would thank you for murdering their friends and neighbors, and then rush out to their local discount drugstore to experimentally “vaccinate” their own kids and post pictures of it on the Internet.

At that point, you wouldn’t really have to worry about “populist uprisings,” or “terrorism,” or any other type of insurgent activity, because the vast majority of the global population would be scramble-headed automatons who were totally incapable of independent thought, and who had no idea what was real and what wasn’t, so just repeated whatever new script you fed them like customer-service representatives on Haldol.

It doesn’t get much better than that for globally hegemonic ideological systems!

OK, sorry, I think I got lost there again. I’m not sure what I was trying to say. I’ve been a little foggy lately. I’m not sleeping so well. It’s probably Long Covid. Or maybe it’s just that time of month. Whatever. It’s not like it matters anyway. Still, I think I’ll go down to my former local bookshop and get myself tested.
Have a nice day in … you know, reality!

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Bruce Abramson via RealClearPolitics.com,

Critical race theory has exploded into public consciousness. Millions of American parents are just coming to realize that our schools have become woke indoctrination centers preaching divisiveness, bigotry, discrimination, and disdain for American history. Most of them are wondering how we got here.



The answer is simple: Slowly. Incrementally. One step after another, over the course of decades. It’s hardly just K-12 education. An incentive system of “incremental outrageousness” has taken every aspect of American culture dangerously far from reality into the orgy of radical leftist hatred known as progressivism.

How did it happen without anyone noticing?
Turns out, we’ve reached the endgame of a strategy the radical left put in play in the 1960s: the long march through the institutions. The onslaught began in higher education—an institution particularly well suited for a takeover because it functions without external market signals. Success in academia hinges entirely on peer approval. Faculty members make all decisions concerning the hiring, firing, and promotion of junior colleagues, curriculum design, publication in prestigious journals, the appropriate paths for research, and the availability of public and private research funding.

The surest way to succeed as an academic is thus to flatter the senior folks charged with making decisions about your career. The best way to do that (within the bounds of legality and propriety) is to “build upon” their work—that is, by taking it one step further in the recommended direction. Senior academics select the direction. Junior academics bolster the prestige of their seniors whenever they make a new “scientific discovery” along the designated path. In one fell swoop these junior academics show how important past work has been and tie their own egos, prestige, and careers to those of their seniors.

This process calcifies conventional wisdom while divorcing each new “discovery” from everything other than the step that immediately preceded it. Each small step in the approved direction represents a small step away from the reality that originally grounded it.

Incremental outrageousness. Consider, for example, the well-grounded observation that it might be worthwhile to study history from the perspective of the peasants and/or the conquered rather than of royalty and/or the victorious.

Fast-forward a few decades and many incremental steps. Now, perspective implies sympathy; those who study the oppressed are compassionate, while those who study the oppressors are cruel. Fast-forward a few more decades. Critical theory reduces all human interactions into conflicts between oppressors and oppressed.

Finally, fast-forward to present. Today, “science has proved” that the nuclear family is a tool of oppression—hence the opposition of Black Lives Matter and its ideological allies—and that the biggest problem facing America is a white supremacism so pervasive that it can boast exactly zero organizations of any size or influence.

How did science prove such things? One day at a time, building incrementally upon the scientific frontier of the day before.

Outrageous? Absolutely. But the path from a grounded, reasonable observation to a hateful fantasy capable of undermining the republic was so methodical, so incremental, and so organic that few noticed it happening. Millions of individuals, over the course of decades, responded rationally to the incentives they faced. Prestigious “experts” told them what they had to do, say and join to succeed. Most young people arriving on campus or beginning work in the prestige professions complied; those who did not had short, unhappy experiences and limited career success.

Meanwhile, decent, colorblind, patriotic Americans trusted our nation’s institutions to police themselves. That trust was badly misplaced. The radical left hollowed out our institutions and took them over—first academia, then the media, then the civil service, K-12 education, the professional organizations, Silicon Valley, and Wall Street. In 2021, even corporate America is more interested in being woke than in maximizing profits.

Social media was the final blow. Social media made incremental outrageousness the dominant incentive system driving American society.

Viral posts invariably move one step beyond yesterday’s outrage—familiar enough to seem plausible, but still pushing forward in the approved direction.

The conventional wisdom dominating American culture is dangerously divorced from reality.

The organic nature of incremental outrageousness is responsible for today’s “social progressives”: The folks committed to progressivism despite having no understanding of progressive ideology. The folks who provide cover and support for anti-American radicals despite believing quite deeply that they’re supporting traditional American concepts of democracy, freedom, and equality. The folks we need to wake up if we’re to secure the support necessary to sustain the American republic.

Those of us committed to that republic must undertake a program of strategic education and commitment. Tools and techniques for waking them and changing their incentives are available and teachable. By all appearances, however, very few of our leaders or our fighters have mastered them. That’s going to have to change—soon—if we have any hope of restoring America.

No one said it was going to be easy.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Majority Of Voters Reject Teaching Children That America Is "Structurally Racist": Harvard Poll

WEDNESDAY, JUN 30, 2021 - 07:00 PM
Authored by GQ Pan via The Epoch Times,

About two-thirds of Americans believe that children should not be taught in school the claim that the United States is a “structurally racist” nation dominated by white supremacy, a new poll revealed.


The findings were published last week as part of an online survey (pdf) conducted by the Center for American Political Studies at Harvard University and The Harris Poll between June 15 and 17, among 2,006 registered voters. The survey asked participants whether they “believe that kids in elementary school should be taught that America is structurally racist and is dominated by white supremacy.”

In response, 61 percent of participants answered children “should not be taught this,” while the remaining 39 percent said children “should be taught that America is structurally racist.”

When it came to another question regarding the teaching of the First Amendment in schools, an overwhelming 81 percent of participants said elementary school students should learn about the First Amendment and the importance of free speech, compared to 19 percent who said they should not.

The results of the survey echoed those of an online poll conducted by Economist and YouGov poll between June 13 and 15, among 1,500 adult U.S. citizens. Participants were asked if they had “a good idea of what critical race theory (CRT) is,” to which 54 percent responded “yes,” 23 percent said “no,” and 23 percent said they are “not sure.”

Those who said they knew about CRT were then asked whether they have a “favorable or unfavorable” opinion of it. Of these participants, 58 percent said they at least have a “somewhat unfavorable” view of CRT, while 38 percent say they are in favor of the Marxism-rooted ideology, which deems the foundations of the American system to be inherently and irredeemably racist.

The idea that racism remains deeply embedded in America has been popularized over the past years by left-wing activists, politicians, media publications, and the New York Times’s 1619 Project.

The Pulitzer Prize-winning project consists of a collection of essays that argue, among many other controversial claims, that the primary reason for the American Revolution was to preserve slavery and that slavery was the source of American economic growth in the 19th century.

A K-12 curriculum based on the 1619 Project, developed by Pulitzer Center, has made its way into many public school districts across the nation, including Chicago, Illinois; Buffalo, New York; and Newark, New Jersey.

A new rule proposed in April by the Education Department also prioritizes funding U.S. history and civics programs that incorporate the 1619 Project and the works of prominent CRT advocate Ibram X. Kendi.

 

[marsh]

Chinese Media: 'Anglo-Saxons' DNA' Makes Them Genocidal

China's government-run Global Times propaganda outlet published a column declaring "Anglo-Saxons" genetically predisposed to genocide.

www.breitbart.com

Chinese Media: ‘Anglo-Saxons’ DNA’ Makes Them Genocidal
1,927

Getty Images / Stringer
FRANCES MARTEL29 Jun 2021880

China’s government-run Global Times propaganda outlet published an opinion column Tuesday declaring that “Anglo-Saxons” are genetically predisposed to genocide and that ethnic Anglo-Saxons “practice [the] law of the jungle.”

The Global Times regularly accuses the United States — and more recently began to accuse Canada — of genocide in response to global condemnation of China’s policy of imprisoning Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and other Muslim ethnic minority people in concentration camps. The Chinese Communist Party is believed to have imprisoned as many as 3 million people in 1,200 concentration camps since 2017. Camp survivors have testified publicly to experiencing or witnessing extreme forms of torture, including the use of electric devices in gang rape, the public rape of prisoners in front of hundreds of other inmates, the enslavement of prisoners, force sterilization, forced abortions, and infanticide. Beijing insists all concentration camp survivors are “actors” but does not deny the camps’ existence, branding them “vocational training” institutes, instead.

Multiple free states, including America, have branded the campaign to eradicate the Uyghur ethnic identity a “genocide.”

The Global Times and other regime-run newspaper often publish content claiming that free Western states cannot criticize the genocide of the Uyghur people because of abuses committed hundreds of years ago against indigenous Americans. The Global Times expanded that argument to include not just the American and Canadian governments, two of the most vocal in condemning the Uyghur genocide, but all “Anglo-Saxons.”

“With solid evidence of the Anglo-Saxon’s systematic genocide against indigenous people, the US and Canada idly sit on the land they seized and hypocritically show care for the world’s human rights,” the Global Times proclaimed. “They have no intention to sincerely address their own shameful record of genocide.”

The column is titled “Brutality Against Indigenous People Embedded in Anglo-Saxons’ DNA” and proclaims, “such brutality against indigenous people is embedded in the genes of the Anglo-Saxons.”

The Uyghur people are indigenous to East Turkestan, what China refers to as its Xinjiang province. Unlike the alleged crimes against indigenous people in the West, which the Global Times goes back to 1783 to condemn, significant evidence suggests the indigenous genocide in Xinjiang continues in 2021. While the newspaper does not mention the Uyghur genocide directly, it indicates that the declaration of the existence of genocidal DNA — a claim it does not corroborate with any science — is a direct response to justified outrage over the Xinjiang situation.

“The U.S. and Canada manipulate the human rights card on one hand, and turn a blind eye to the human rights stain on their own soil on the other, which is a manifestation of Western-style hypocrisy and double standards,” the propaganda outlet declares.

Apparently still referring to Anglo-Saxons, the Global Times concludes that “they practice law of the jungle [sic], and view the other countries with the same logic.”

The Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is typically defined as Germanic, English-speaking people, usually descending from the British isles. The Chinese government newspaper does not address the fact that a significant portion of Canada’s population, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, is both of French and Francophone descent.

The Global Times is, at press time, successfully promoting the article despite its overt racist content. The article lives on Twitter, where the propaganda outlet boasts 1.8 million followers.



“You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease,” Twitter’s conduct policy reads.

The Global Times also shared a link to the article, live at press time, on Facebook, where the newspaper boasts an even more significant 63 million “likes.”



“[W]e don’t allow hate speech on Facebook,” the site’s Community Standards page reads. “We define hate speech as a direct attack against people … on the basis of what we call protected characteristics: race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease.”

The Global Times attack on Canada follows an attempt by the Communist Party to use its position at the United Nations Human Rights Council to demand an investigation into Canada’s alleged abuses against indigenous people. Canada, in turn, has led the charge at the agency to investigate the Uyghur genocide.

Trudeau issued a personal apology on behalf of the Canadian government to the nation’s indigenous community in 2017 over the same alleged abuses and has vowed to invest public resources in fully uncovering the brutality of policies to assimilate indigenous people into European culture.

Addressing China’s barbs, Trudeau cited Canada’s attempts to publicly atone for its past, compared to China’s denial of its ongoing genocide against Muslim ethnic minorities.

“Where is China’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission? Where is their truth?

Where is the openness that Canada has always shown, and the responsibility that Canada has taken for the terrible mistakes of the past, and indeed, many of which continue into the present?” Trudeau asked in a press conference last week.

“China is not recognizing even that there is a problem. That is a pretty fundamental difference,” he added. “And that is why Canadians and people from around the world are speaking up for people like the Uyghurs who find themselves voiceless, faced with a government that will not recognize what’s happening to them.”

The Chinese Communist Party published a “white paper” last week exonerating itself of all accusations of human rights abuses, applauding itself for bringing China “national liberation” from the West.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

The Systemic Risk No One Sees

THURSDAY, JUL 01, 2021 - 04:40 PM
Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

The unraveling of social cohesion has consequences. Once social cohesion unravels, the nation unravels.


My recent posts have focused on the systemic financial risks created by Federal Reserve policies that have elevated moral hazard (risks can be taken without consequence) and speculation to levels so extreme that they threaten the stability of the entire financial system.



These risks are well known, though largely ignored in the current speculative frenzy.

But there is another systemic risk which few if any see: the collapse of social cohesion.

President Carter was prescient in his understanding that a nation's greatest strength is its social cohesion, a cohesion that America's unprecedented wealth / income / power inequalities has undermined. Consider this excerpt from his 1981 Farewell Address:

"Our common vision of a free and just society is our greatest source of cohesion at home and strength abroad, greater even than the bounty of our material blessings."

In other words, a nation's strength flows not just from its material wealth but from its social cohesion--a term for something that is intangible but very real, something that doesn't lend itself to quantification or tidy definitions.

Here is my definition:

Social cohesion is the glue binding the social order; it is the willingness of the citizenry to sacrifice individual gains for the common good.

Social cohesion is the result of the citizenry sharing a common purpose and identity and working toward the common good even at personal cost. Social cohesion arises from a national identity based on shared values and sacrifices.

To maintain social cohesion, opportunities to better their circumstances must be open to all (the social contract of social mobility) and sacrifices must be shared by the entire citizenry. If the privileged elites evade their share of sacrifice, social cohesion is lost and the entire social order unravels.

The glue binding the privileged elites to shared sacrifice is civic virtue, a moral code that demands elites devote a greater share of their own resources to the public good in exchange for their political and financial power.

Though no one dares confess this publicly, America is now a moral cesspool.

As a result, the moral legitimacy of the nation’s leadership has been lost. Every nook and cranny of institutionalized America is dominated by self-interest, and much of the economy is controlled by profiteering monopolies and cartels which wield far more political power than the citizenry.

Civic virtue has been lost. What remains is elite self-interest masquerading as civic virtue.

In his Farewell Address, President Carter explained that "The national interest is not always the sum of all our single or special interests. We are all Americans together, and we must not forget that the common good is our common interest and our individual responsibility."

Social cohesion, civic virtue and moral legitimacy are the foundation of every society, but they are especially important in composite states.

America is a composite state, composed of individuals holding a wide range of regional, ethnic, religious and class-based identities. The national identity is only one ingredient in a bubbling stew of local, state and regional identities, ethnic, cultural and religious identities, educational/alumni, professional and tradecraft identities, and elusive but consequential class-based identities.

Composite states are intrinsically trickier to rule, as there is no ethnic or cultural identity that unifies the populace. Lacking a national identity that supersedes all other identities, composite states must tread carefully to avoid fracturing into competing regional, ethnic or cultural identities.

Composite states must establish a purpose-based identity that is understood to demand shared sacrifice, especially in crisis. In the U.S., the national purpose has been redefined by the needs of the era, but never straying too far from these core unifying goals: defending the civil liberties of the citizenry from state interference, defending the nation from external aggressors, and serving the common good by limiting the power of special interests and privileged elites.

We've failed to limit the power of privileged elites, failed to demand greater sacrifices of the wealthy in exchange for power, and so the moral legitimacy of the regime has been lost. And with the ascendance of self-interest and the elite's abandonment of sacrifice, social cohesion has been lost.

This loss is reflected in the bitter partisanship, the increasingly Orwellian attempts to control the mainstream and social media narratives, the debauchery of "expertise" as dueling "experts" vie for control, the fraying of social discourse, the substitution of virtue-signaling for actual civic virtue, the institutionalization of white-collar crime (collusion, fraud, embezzlement, etc.), the increasing reliance on Bread and Circuses (stimulus, Universal Basic Income) as real opportunity dissipates, and the troubling rise in shootings, crime, random violence and plummeting marriage and birth rates.

The unraveling of social cohesion has consequences. Once social cohesion unravels, the nation unravels.



What's the solution? At the national level, all that has been lost will have to be restored: civic virtue, moral legitimacy, the social contract of opportunity, shared sacrifice that falls most heavily on the wealthiest and most powerful, and a renewed national purpose centered on serving the common good.

Is such a restoration of moral legitimacy and shared purpose even possible? No one knows. If history is any guide, such a renewal is only possible after the empire of rampant self-interest implodes.

So what do we do in the meantime? Nurture our own social cohesion by living purposefully and sharing sacrifices and bounties with those we trust and admire--those in the lifeboat we chose to join.

 

[marsh]

Black parents hate CRT…

Short clips from GOP War Room today — From Florida and Chandler, Arizona

citizenfreepress.com

Black parents hate CRT…
Posted by Kane on July 1, 2021 4:44 pm

View: https://youtu.be/0bImo3RddfA
1:04 min
Short clips from GOP War Room today — From Florida and Chandler, Arizona

View: https://youtu.be/Pz8MQHEc9N8
2:03 min

View: https://youtu.be/LK3NU7xU-hc
1:08 min

 

[marsh]

Facebook now issuing warnings to users about “becoming an extremist”

Facebook is now warning people that they may have read extremist content or is asking if someone they know is becoming an extremist. Kira Davis said a friend of hers starting getting it today, and …

therightscoop.com

Facebook now issuing warnings to users about “becoming an extremist”
JUL. 1, 2021 2:52 PM BY THE RIGHT SCOOP • 76 COMMENTS

Facebook is now warning people that they may have read extremist content or is asking if someone they know is becoming an extremist. Kira Davis said a friend of hers starting getting it today, and from the response, they aren’t alone:








Social media just ain’t what it used to be, which was a fun place to talk to friends and connect with people. Now they are run by fanatical leftists who are always targeting conservatives, one way or the other. And this is no different.
You know that by saying ‘extremists’, they aren’t talking about radical Muslims or Antifa. No, they are talking about ‘white extremists’ because that’s all they care about.

 

[marsh]

One of my political buds on Facebook posted that he had received these messages:

 

[marsh]

'Violation of First Amendment' - Judicial Watch YouTube Video Censored at Request of California Government Officials | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila

Tom Fitton The California Secretary of State’s office pressured YouTube to remove Judicial Watch’s videos on election integrity.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

‘Violation of First Amendment’ – Judicial Watch YouTube Video Censored at Request of California Government Officials

By Cristina Laila
Published July 1, 2021 at 4:08pm

Tom Fitton

The California Secretary of State’s office pressured YouTube to remove Judicial Watch’s videos on election integrity.

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch received 165 pages of new documents showing the California Secretary of State directly emailing YouTube to remove Tom Fitton’s videos on election integrity.

The video titled “ELECTION INTEGRITY CRISIS — Dirty Voter Rolls, Ballot Harvesting & Mail-in-Voting Risks!” was removed three days after California government officials made the request.

Judicial Watch had previously sued California over its dirty voter rolls and Los Angeles County agreed to remove 1.6 million inactive voters.

Judicial Watch reported:

In an email exchange beginning on September 24, 2020, Social Media Coordinator Akilah Jones of the California Secretary of State’s office contacts Civics-outreach@google.com and copies four Google employees with the subject line, “REPORT VIDEO: **ELECTION INTEGRITY CRISIS** Dirty Voter Rolls, Ballot Harvesting & Mail-in-Voting Risks!”

Jones’ email falsely characterizes Judicial Watch video in her email:

Hi YouTube Reporting Team,
I am reporting the following video because it misleads community members about elections or other civic processes and misrepresents the safety and security of mail-in ballots.
Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.
All the best, Akilah.

The next day, on September 25, 2020, Andrea Holtermann, a Google employee, replies to Jones:

Hi Akilah,
Thanks for reaching out. We will look into this and get back to you as soon as we can.
Best,

On September 27, 2020, Google/YouTube confirms it censored the video:

Hi Akilah,
Circling back on this. Thank you for raising this content to our attention, this has been removed from the platform for violating our policies. Please do not hesitate to reach out if there are any other questions or concerns you may have.
Best,

In an email exchange beginning on January 15, 2020, Sam Mahood, press secretary for the California Secretary of State’s office, forwards an email to Twitter Public Policy Department’s Kevin Kane asking that he review a tweet that Twitter support had determined to not be in violation of their terms of service. Mahood copies Deputy Secretary of State Paula Valle and Chief Counsel Steve Reyes on the email.

Kane agrees to a January 31 meeting with Reyes and Valle.

In an email dated November 13, 2020, Zeke Sandoval of SKDK (the consulting firm that advised both the California Secretary of State’s office and the Biden campaign) emails the Secretary of State’s office and their colleagues, flagging two popular tweets that criticized the California election process. The first from @DC_Draino states:

Audit every California ballot Election fraud is rampant nationwide and we all know California is one of the culprits Do it to protect the integrity of that state’s elections

The second from @WatchTheBreaks states:

Just did some research on California voting and unless I’m missing something, there isn’t a place I can see HOW my ballot was counted. I think that inability for me to check my Votes in the system (not just IF it was counted) is a big flaw, regardless of which side you are on.

Both accounts were later removed from Twitter.

“These new documents show the California Secretary of State directly conspired with Google to censor me and Judicial Watch in violation of our First Amendment rights,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This government censorship, also in conspiracy with the Biden campaign, is smoking gun evidence of election interference.”

You can support Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch by clicking here.

 

[marsh]

EXCLUSIVE: More Proof that Tech Giants Twitter, Facebook and YouTube Are Working with Democrat State Governments to Censor Conservatives | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

During the 2020 election cycle Dr.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

EXCLUSIVE: More Proof that Tech Giants Twitter, Facebook and YouTube Are Working with Democrat State Governments to Censor Conservatives

By Jim Hoft
Published July 1, 2021 at 6:32pm

During the 2020 election cycle Dr. Shiva Ayyarurai discovered that Twitter has built a special portal offered to certain governmental entities so that government officials can flag and delete content they dislike for any reason, as part of what they call “Twitter Partner Status.”

But there is now evidence that Twitter is not the only tech giant engaging in this type of coordinated behavior to silence, censor, and discriminate against conservative voices.

We have found similar privileges given to Democrat government entities by the operatives at YouTube and Facebook.

TWITTER–

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, the man who invented email, ran for US Senate in Massachusetts as a Republican and made allegations of voter fraud on Twitter.

These tweets were then deleted by the far-left tech giant. Later it was discovered that they were deleted at the direction of government employees of the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office.

Discovering this, Dr. Ayyadurai filed a federal lawsuit by himself, alleging that his federal civil rights were violated when the government silenced his political speech in order to affect an election.

Federal Judge Mark L. Wolf, a 1985 Reagan Appointee, set a hearing on pending motions for May 20, 2021 at 9:30AM EST. His court orders make it quite clear he is taking this case seriously and the court is highlighting several relevant cases that should give Twitter and its Big Tech bully buddies some pause.

By quoting these two cases, legal observers note, the judge is signaling that Twitter’s days of claiming it is a private company so as to avoid it’s clear oppression of conservative speech, banning scores of conservative journalists, and promotion of liberal views, may be coming to a close end:

Manhattan Cmty. Access Corp. v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921, 1928 (2019)
“A private entity can qualify as a state actor in a few limited circumstances-including, for example, … when the government compels the private entity to take a particular action…”
Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982)

“a State normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State”

This case could spell the end of CDA 230.
CDA 230 is the provision of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that gives internet and social media companies legal immunity from lawsuits due to the content they publish.

This provision in law gives companies like Facebook and Twitter a way to dismiss lawsuits, but it also gives them the ability to act with impunity so that their actions cannot be legally challenged. These companies have, according to their detractors, abused this immunity by suppressing dissident, and specifically conservative, views, viewpoints and journalism.

Because Dr. Ayyadurai did not argue about Twitter’s “Terms of Service” everything will instead hinge on the degree of interaction between Twitter and the state government of Massachusetts.

FACEBOOK–



Gateway Pundit readers may recall a recent story we did that shed light on hundreds, possibly thousands, of Oregon voters who mysteriously had their party changed, most from Republican to Non Affiliated, without their permission, consent or knowledge, effectively denying them the right to vote in their party’s primary and disqualifying them from being Precinct Committee Persons.

We later found out the State Of Oregon was working with Facebook to delete all mentions of this story.

Facebook gave The Gateway Pundit a strike for posting this story even though we had 32 statements from different Oregon Republican voters to back up our report.

Despite hundreds of people coming forward with similar stories about how they received a nonaffiliated ballot, and despite many screenshots from the Facebook group mentioned in our article, Facebook’s infamous “fact-checkers” deemed the story as “misinformation” at the request of the Oregon state government.

This is what people see when a link to the article comes up in their feed:

And here is the ‘strike’ notice The Gateway Pundit received from Facebook earlier today:

Lead Stories flagged The Gateway Pundit article and issued the strike as a “hoax alert.”

Lead stories author Alexis Tereszcuk did not contact any of the 30+ Oregon voters who said their party affiliation was changed.

Instead, Alexis spoke with the Oregon Secretary of State who denied there was any malfeasance.

She mentions that in her article at Lead Stories:

Alexis Tereszcuk, lists her bio as:

“Alexis Tereszcuk is a writer and fact checker at Lead Stories and an award-winning journalist who spent over a decade breaking hard news and celebrity scoop with RadarOnline and Us Weekly. As the Entertainment Editor, she investigated Hollywood stories and conducted interviews with A-list celebrities and reality stars. Alexis’ crime reporting earned her spots as a contributor on the Nancy Grace show, CNN, Fox News and Entertainment Tonight, among others.”

In her write up, Alexis went to the Oregon Secretary Of State for a statement who, rather than address the concerns of all of the disenfranchised voters, Oregon Secretary of State spokeswoman Andrea Chiapella blames the citizens for not responding to some postcard they were supposed to get that automatically registers people as nonaffiliated.

From the Lead Stories article:

Did Oregon change hundreds of Republican ballots to non-partisan, thus denying Republican voters the right to participate in the state’s primary? No, that’s not true: Oregon voters who received the non-partisan ballots because they never took the second step of declaring a party affiliation, a spokeswoman for the Oregon secretary of state told Lead Stories. The procedure would affect Democrats, as well as Republicans.

The story went viral after an article cited a group of people on Facebook claiming they did not receive a Republican ballot to vote in the May 19, 2020, primary and instead were given “non-partisan” ballots against their wishes. The Oregon secretary of state denied changing citizens’ party registration and told LeadStories.com that the claims that their party affiliation was changed against their wishes is “misinformation.”

Oregon secretary of state spokeswoman Andrea Chiapella denied that there was any malfeasance with regard to party registration being changed:

“Statements online that say that party has been changed against their wishes is misinformation and our Elections Director is trying to work with Facebook and Twitter to have it deemed as such and removed.”

That’s right. The government is now openly colluding with Facebook and Twitter to remove all mentions of this balloting scandal.

YouTube–
And now earlier today Judicial Watch announced that YouTUbe was working with Democrat officials in California to censor their content.



This is criminal behavior by the tech giants to limit free speech and political speech in the United States.

For years we assumed this was taking place. Now we have proof.

 

[marsh]

BREAKING: Facebook Pushing Users to Identify 'Extremists' - Mirroring Evil Fascists in Germany Decades Ago | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

is now asking Americans to let them know if anyone they know is an ‘extremist’ – Why are they mirroring the tactics of Nazi Germany?

www.thegatewaypundit.com

BREAKING: Facebook Pushing Users to Identify ‘Extremists’ – Mirroring Evil Fascists in Germany Decades Ago

By Joe Hoft
Published July 1, 2021 at 6:50pm

Facebook is now asking Americans to let them know if anyone they know is an ‘extremist’ – Why are they mirroring the tactics of Nazi Germany?
What the hell is this?

Facebook is now asking neighbors to turn in their own neighbor who believes in free speech or something they don’t like. All’s you have to do is label them an ‘extremist’. There are no rules to their definition. This could be anything. They will be the judge.








Facebook is now promoting the Communist method of turning in your neighbor if you think they are ‘extremist’.





Steal an election. Mandate masks. Mandate vaccines. Encourage turning in your neighbor for being extremist. What the hell could go wrong?

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Has The Military Lost Middle America?

THURSDAY, JUL 01, 2021 - 06:40 PM
Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

Traditionalist and conservative America once was the U.S. military's greatest defender.

Bipartisan conservatives in Congress ensured generous Pentagon budgets. When generals, active or retired, became controversial, conservative America usually could be counted on to stick with them.

Flyover country supported marquee officers such as Gen. Michael Hayden, Gen. James Mattis, Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, Gen. David Petraeus and a host of others when the media went after them for alleged unethical conduct, financial improprieties, spats with the Obama administration, or accusations of using undue force or hiding torture.

When Democrats railed in Congress about the "revolving door" of generals and admirals leaving the Pentagon to land lucrative board memberships with corporate defense contractors, Middle America, rightly or wrongly, mostly yawned.

Yet traditional America also assumed its military leaders were largely apolitical and stayed out of politics. Brilliant World War II commanders Curtis LeMay, Douglas MacArthur and George S. Patton did not fare well when they clumsily waded through the minefields of partisan national politics.

No longer.



The Pentagon's current and past top echelon is seen as politically weaponized -- and both careerist and opportunist. Generals and admirals are currently scanning enlistments for mythical white supremacists, in fear of left-wing pressure following the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. These military officials apparently have no commensurate concern about whether there are antifa-affiliated service members with records of past violence.

We are learning that much of what was reported about that unfortunate Capitol riot was untrue. There were no "armed" insurrectionists with guns, led by conspiracist kingpins. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick was not "murdered."

Medical examiner Francisco J. Diaz said the autopsy showed no evidence of internal or external injuries. The only violent death was that of an unarmed female military veteran who was shot by a mysteriously unnamed law enforcement officer while climbing through a window.

The tenure of highly decorated Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has proved a veritable train wreck of late.

Under pressure from the left, last summer he renounced a photo appearance with then-President Donald Trump as unduly politicizing his service.

OK, but every recent chairman of the Joint Chiefs has routinely appeared with the president in photo ops, if sometimes reluctantly.

Milley was timidly reacting to media claims that Trump sicced federal law enforcement on disruptive protesters with tear gas to ensure calm for his photo op. The inspector general of the Department of the Interior recently exposed such reporting as a fable.

Equally untrue were complaints from Milley and a host of retired officers about Trump tyrannically using federal troops to maintain civic order. Such action has happened repeatedly in our history. For example, Gen. Colin Powell, former head of the Joints Chiefs, commanded the troops sent into Los Angeles in 1992 to quell the rioting that followed the acquittal of L.A. police officers charged in the beating of Rodney King.

Neither Milley nor any of the previously vocal top brass objected to the Biden administration's militarization of Washington, D.C., after Jan. 6. There was not a word about miles of barbed wire and fencing. There was utter silence about the omnipresence of thousands of armed troops throughout the city. Such mobilization was the very scenario they had said would pose an existential threat to democracy.

Gen. Milley was incoherent and paradoxical when pressed about critical race theory -- the belief that racial bias has been encoded in society -- during congressional testimony last week. He bragged that he had read insurrectionary texts by Karl Marx and Mao Zedong to acquaint his open mind with supposed enemies -- as if his inquisitive approach to those subversive authors was analogous to the teaching of critical race theory in the military.

Our top officers reveal inconsistent views on recommended readings, ideological indoctrination and the use of federal troops during domestic crises. They are selective and partisan in their shrill criticism of particular presidents. Some blast political opponents with inflammatory comparisons to Nazis and fascists.

The military's alienation of Middle America could not happen at a worse time.

China, Russia, Iran and North Korea watch in glee at our self-created discord, which threatens to tear apart the most lethal military in the world.

The military is not yet a revolutionary people's army overseen by commissars. But it is getting there with politicized agendas that split the country in half and abandon the military's traditional role of unifying in common purpose to defend America.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Joint Chiefs Chairman Ignores Evidence Showing Critical Race Theory Harms Unit Cohesion

THURSDAY, JUL 01, 2021 - 10:20 PM
Authored by John Rossomando via The Epoch Times,

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley dismissed concerns about neo-Marxist critical race theory. He feigned outrage at accusations the military was becoming “woke.” His cavalier response showed that at best he’s ignorant, and at worst he doesn’t care.



Critical race theory stems from a school of thought among post-Russian Revolution Marxist intellectuals who were disturbed by the fact communist revolution didn’t sweep Europe as Marx predicted. Orthodox Marxists deny that critical race theory is Marxist because it derives from a revisionist strain of thought. The revisionists reimagined Marxist theory to focus on who has power in society and who doesn’t instead of the class struggle between the working class and the capitalists found in Karl Marx’s writings.

Critical race theory’s reliance on Marxist dualism of the oppressor versus the oppressed intends to produce strife and chaos.

Unsurprisingly, a 2012 Harvard Business Review article noted, “Diversity training doesn’t extinguish prejudice. It promotes it.”

Other social-science research finds that diversity training is ineffective at reaching positive outcomes.

Milley clearly never read these reports.

“I’ve read Mao Tse Tung. I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin. That doesn’t make me a communist,” Milley said.

“So what is wrong with understanding, having some situational understanding about the country for which we are here to defend?”

Milley acknowledged critical race theory’s roots in critical legal studies at Harvard University back in the 1980s. It bears the strong influence of neo-Marxist theorist Frantz Fanon and Communist Party USA member W.E.B. DuBois, winner of the Lenin Peace Prize from the Soviet Union.

“And I personally find it offensive that we are accusing the United States military, our general officers, our commissioned, non-commissioned officers of being, quote, woke or something else, because we’re studying some theories that are out there. That was started at Harvard Law School years ago,” Milley continued.

He claimed that he wanted to understand the “White Rage” behind the assault on the Capitol on Jan. 6. The general’s liberal-sounding rhetoric masks the real problem. The concept of “White Rage,” developed by Emory University professor Carol Anderson, is an aspect of critical race theory itself.

Anderson promotes black powerlessness and blames whites for every contemporary problem of black America. She insinuates that questioning the critical race theorists’ dogmas itself is racist in her book “White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide.”

“The trigger for white rage, inevitably, is black advancement,” Anderson theorizes, thus setting up a strawman argument that suggests that all white Americans oppose prosperity for blacks and that it threatens them.

Her book cherry-picks points about white Americans following the Civil War. It avoids discussion of how people such as General and later President Ulysses S. Grant and the U.S. Army fought to protect freed blacks from racist violence. She also glosses over how Republicans tried to protect black civil rights from racist oppression immediately following the Civil War (pdf), focusing instead on President Andrew Johnson’s racism. Doing so is needed to portray America as totally evil. Such omissions show that Anderson’s “White Rage” is propaganda, not scholarship.

Are Grant’s exploits on behalf of black Americans discussed, or the role of the U.S. military during Reconstruction protecting black lives (pdf) talked about in the Defense Department’s seminars?

Milley’s discussion of his having read Mao, Marx, and Lenin was a red herring about the question at hand.

Namely, are U.S. servicemembers being indoctrinated in ideas developed by contemporary acolytes of Karl Marx? Marxist thought is particularly destructive because it’s predicated on dialectical thinking that promotes conflict to bring about a new society.

Milley’s dismissal set up a strawman argument because critical race theory is not a dispassionate examination of the history of slavery, Jim Crow, or even the problems black Americans currently face in American society. And by all reports, this critical race theory is being taught as fact rather than as a dispassionate assessment of the sectarian opinions of neo-Marxist scholars without presenting contrary ideas for debate. They aim to discredit the United States, its Constitution, and the same institutions that members of the military swear an oath to protect.

“What Gen. Milley was responding to was an exchange that I had had during my time of question-and-answer with Secretary Austin, where I raised the point of a series of courses and seminars that’s being taught at West Point, which was brought to my attention by very upset and disturbed cadets, their families, soldiers,” Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla.) told Hugh Hewitt on his podcast on June 24.

“One of the seminars, Hugh, was titled, ‘Dealing With Your Whiteness and White Rage,’ which apparently over 100 cadets attended; ‘Critical Race Theory: An Introduction’—the textbook is part of the curriculum.”

This was one of several incidents that have appeared since Joe Biden became president.

Members of Congress have repeatedly raised questions about the Navy’s recommendation of neo-Marxist ideologue Ibram X. Kendi’s book “How to Be an Antiracist,” which seeks to remedy past discrimination against blacks with “future discrimination” against whites. Kendi blames capitalism for the lack of an equality of outcome among black Americans. Kendi’s thesis falls apart after you look at how Afro-Cubans live in communist Cuba compared with Cubans of Spanish descent, the former suffering discrimination despite living under socialism.

Like Anderson, Kendi cherry-picks his information and gets facts, such as data about black poverty in the Reagan era and other topics that are more nuanced than he claims, wrong.

American capitalism has spawned more innovations and technological achievements than any in the preceding millennia of human history, including the technology that you’re reading this article on. Poor Americans of all colors have a higher standard of living here than they do in any socialist country, including China.

Adm. Michael Gilday similarly defended critical race theory and Kendi’s disinformation.

“Sir, initially you mentioned critical race theory: I’m not a theorist; I’m the Chief of Naval Operations,” Gilday told Congress.
“What I can tell you is, factually, based on a substantial amount of time talking to sailors in the fleet, there’s racism in the Navy, just like there’s racism in our country. And the way we’re going to get after it is to be honest about it, not to sweep it under the rug, and to talk about it—and that’s what we’re doing. And that’s one of the reasons that book is on the list.”

Winning wars requires unit cohesion and a common mission. It seems that Gen. Milley, Adm. Gilday, and the Pentagon’s civilian leadership are determined to compromise unit cohesion at the time when threats from Russia and China are increasing and that cohesion is needed the most. If they examined the social science, they would realize their activities only cause harm.

 

[marsh]

WATCH: Tucker Carlson reveals how much spying the NSA does on American citizens

The Fox News host also interviewed Glenn Greenwald, who broke the original story of the NSA’s mass surveillance program under the Obama administration.

thepostmillennial.com

WATCH: Tucker Carlson reveals how much spying the NSA does on American citizens

The Fox News host also interviewed Glenn Greenwald, who broke the original story of the NSA's mass surveillance program under the Obama administration.

Ari HoffmanSeattle, WA
June 30, 2021 11:41 PM4 Mins Reading

Privacy and free speech are under attack. Take back your internet freedom with Surfshark.

Tucker Carlson on Wednesday night continued the coverage on his Fox News primetime show of the alleged spying a whistleblower claimed the NSA had done of the host. Carlson dedicated much of the episode to the topic and was joined by Glenn Greenwald, who broke the original story of the NSA's mass surveillance program under the Obama administration.

Rumble video on website 6:30 min

"A couple of days ago, we told you that the national security agency had read our emails and was effectively threatening us with them. Leaking them it's not a statement you would make lightly. No one wants to go on TV and say, the government is spying on American citizens."

Carlson played a 2006 interview of then Senator Joe Biden in which he spoke about the dangers of US intelligence agencies surveilling Americans. Biden said, "The real question here is what do they do with this information that they collect that does not have anything to do with Al-Qaeda. And we're going to trust the President and the Vice President of the United States that they're doing the right thing. Don't count me in on that."

Carlson continued, "So now Joe Biden is in charge of the national security apparatus and his administration has turned it on Americans, who he has redefined as combatants, domestic terrorists, white supremacists. Where does this go from here? We think we know, and we're deeply concerned about it. We know the NSA is collecting data from American citizens, spying on them. They have a heart attack if you call it spying, that's exactly what it is. Let's stop using BS language. It's spying."

The Fox News host showed a senior Microsoft executive in the house judiciary committee meeting Wednesday stating that most Americans would be stunned if they knew how often the federal government used secret orders to collect information on them, not just from Microsoft, but also from Facebook, Apple, Google, Twitter, and others.

Carlson then called for an investigation into what exactly is going on and cited Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz who called for that Wednesday in the house, specifically because of Carlson’s allegations.

Carlson continued, "They gather the information and they threaten you with it. Information is power. The more they have, the more power they have over you.

And if they don't like your politics, it's a problem.” He also noted that the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, Republican of California has called for that investigation by the House Intelligence Committee."

The Fox News host then interviewed Glenn Greenwald who broke the original story of the NSA's mass surveillance program under the Obama administration.

Carlson stated, "So, your position on this has remained consistent for more than a decade American citizens, unless they pose some obvious national security threat, imminent national screen threats, shouldn't be targeted by their own government." He then asked Greenwald, "Why is that not the position of everyone in general?"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1410406565836898307

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1410406565836898307
6:39 min

Greenwald answered, "When I did the reporting with Edward Snowden in 2013 and 2014, liberals loved that reporting so much that they gave us every award that they had to offer…my work with Edward Snowden was given an Oscar…

They couldn't lavish enough prizes and praise on us. And now here we are after the Trump years. And we know that the Democratic party and journalism in general has aligned. The CIA, the NSA and the FBI has aligned and merged with the security state. And so, in response to the report that you did, you would think other journalists just out of self-interest, even if they dislike your ideology and you would say, we want to know whether the NSA is abusing their powers in order to spy on you… and instead they mocked it. They said that, 'oh, he has to be paranoid in order to think this.'"

Greenwald then addressed the NSA’s statement to Carlson about the alleged spying. "They took the NSA statement that I have seen over and over Tucker, over the last eight years, that is designed to mislead the public. They use their carefully constructed words to say, Tucker Carlson is not an intelligence target of the NSA, which may be true. But what that leaves out is that there are so many other ways that they have to spy on the communications of American citizens without making you a target, without getting a warrant. They have huge authorities that really haven't been reigned in since 2013 and 2014."

Greenwald added, "I'm glad to hear Kevin McCarthy, other GOP leaders calling for an investigation, but the reality is that in bipartisan Washington, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have been joining with the likes of Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell to expand the NSA, to kill any attempts to reform it. So, these are kind of empty words."

Carlson agreed with the journalist that Mitch McConnell is a hundred percent on board with what they do. And then said, "I got a number of calls and texts today, one from Politico, asking me, well, who are you emailing? You would never claim your emails are being read by the government unless you could prove it again.

You just sound like a crazy person. We can prove it. It happened, but now the line is, well, you must've been emailing the wrong people. I was under the impression as a journalist and an American citizen."

The Fox News host then asked Greenwald, "I have the right to email anybody I want. Is that not the standard any longer?"

Greenwald answered, "Tucker, ponder the authoritarianism needed for them to say that. Think about the premise there. They're saying that if you talk to somebody that the NSA has decided should be spied upon, it means that that person, even though they've been charged with no crime and convicted. Thing is up to no good. They're like a terrorist or a threat and you yourself are also.

"The whole point of the reporting that we did is that the NSA spies on millions and millions of people, indiscriminately, if you're a journalist, it's almost impossible not to talk to a targeted the NSA. They target everybody constantly all the time. That's why they're this huge sprawling agency. But the authoritarianism that is pervading journalism says if you're talking to somebody, the NSA, doesn't like, you're a bad person."

 

[marsh]

Our ‘Woke’ Pentagon Leaders Are Weakening America’s Defense

The U.S. military’s embrace of Critical Race Theory endangers all of us.

issuesinsights.com

Our ‘Woke’ Pentagon Leaders Are Weakening America’s Defense

I & I Editorial Board
June 30, 2021

Gen. Mark Milley. Source: U.S. Army Europe Images, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license (Creative Commons — Attribution 2.0 Generic — CC BY 2.0).

One of the most disturbing developments to emerge from the Biden administration has been the Defense Department’s sudden embrace of Marxist Critical Race Theory – so-called ‘Woke’ ideology. It’s a clear and present danger to our national security and should be halted immediately.

Even West Point, the Army’s elite university where tomorrow’s generals are educated, isn’t immune to the Woke disease. Soon-to-be Army second lieutenants are being indoctrinated with Marxist-based Woke ideology.

You can thank Commander in Chief Joe Biden and his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley for this. Milley, an Ivy League grad, has aggressively shifted the military toward the political left by compelling officers to push racist CRT ideas down conscripts’ and officers’ throats.

“The United States Military Academy is a university. And it is important that we train, and we understand – and I want to understand white rage. And I’m white, and I want to understand it,” Milley said in recent remarks before Congress. “So, what is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that? I want to find that out.”

He added: “I’ve read Mao Zedong. I’ve read – I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin – that doesn’t make me a communist.”

He’s right about that. But embracing their ideas and putting them into practice, and CRT is definitely Marxist, does make you a communist or a Marxist ― or, at the very least, a willing tool of the same.

“That (CRT) was started at Harvard Law School years ago,” Milley went on. “And it proposed that there were laws in the United States, antebellum laws prior to the Civil War, that led to a power differential with African-Americans, that were three-quarters of a human being, when this country was formed.”

In fact, Milley’s responses to the legitimate concerns by members of Congress over his defense of the extreme left course he has charted for the military have been both disingenuous and historically ignorant.

Take just one part of his argument: The “three-quarters of a human being” argument, intended to slag the founders of our nation as vile racists.

Sadly, slavery is as old as civilization itself. But as North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson recently reminded journalists, who are just as ignorant as Milley:

“The Three-fifths Compromise was put into our Constitution to limit the power of slaveholding states in this nation. The slaveholding states wanted to count their slaves as whole individuals for the purpose of having a population count that would give them control of our federal government. The Three-fifths Compromise prevented that.”

As for Milley’s comment about the CRT idea emerging from Harvard, as if that were a commendable thing, is laughable. More awful radical ideas have emerged from Harvard Law than perhaps from any other institution in America over the past 40 years.

And there’s a whole generation of military leaders who, apparently, embrace this dangerous thinking. So welcome to our new woke military. Gone is the old idea of advancement on merit and ability. Race and gender now count more. Who will want to serve in this military? Who’ll want to lead?

This didn’t happen overnight.

“Throughout world history, whatever comes next after a military purge is never good,” Ret. Gen. Paul Vallely wrote in 2014, after releasing a list of 197 high level military officials sacked by the Obama administration for their political beliefs. “If this continues, what is the U.S. military going to look like in a few years?”

With President Barack Obama’s vice president now commander in chief, maybe we’re finding out.

Biden wants to reduce real growth in the Defense budget, even as the U.S. Navy is fast being eclipsed by China’s ship-building binge, Russia is once again rattling sabers, the U.S.’ next generation F-35 joint-strike fighter is plagued with problems, the Navy has issues with dysfunctional and costly submarines, and just one in four young Americans now can qualify to serve in the military.

These are serious problems. “White supremacy” and inequality are not, except within the race-obsessed Democratic Party. Nor is global warming, which the Joint Chiefs called the “greatest threat” America faces, something the military should be worried about.

CRT is the most divisive, anti-American ideology since Cold War Communism. It not only shouldn’t be used as a template for training soldiers, it should be removed entirely from all public education curricula, except as an example of the awful failures of Marxism.

J.D. Vance, the author of the best-selling and critically acclaimed “Hillbilly Elegy,” said it simply and eloquently in two succinct but powerful tweets:

“I personally would like American generals to read less about ‘white rage’ (whatever that is) and more about ‘not losing wars.’ “

“What I find so enraging about the Joint Chiefs’ pandering on progressive wokeness is that they know damn well the geography and politics of who dies in American wars. The conservative Americans you trash are disproportionately bleeding for this country.”

Dead on. If our next war is fought not by patriotic Americans who love their county, but by angry people with deep racial grievances and guilty social justice warriors who think they live in an unjust dystopia, our nation and the world will be in big trouble. And don’t kid yourself. So will you.

 

[Hognutz]

 

[Hognutz]

 

[marsh]

The Iron Pentagon: The Nexus of Control, Corruption, and Suppression - This Is How Mass Dissention Is Created | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft

Guest post by Bob Bishop In 1981, Gordon Adams published the ‘The Iron Triangle: The Politics of Defense Contracting.’ The article described the iron triangle as a policy-making relationship between congress, the federal bureaucracy, and interest groups working together to consolidate power and...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

The Iron Pentagon: The Nexus of Control, Corruption, and Suppression – How Mass Involuntary Dissentients Are Created.

By Joe Hoft
Published July 2, 2021 at 2:33pm

Guest post by Bob Bishop

In 1981, Gordon Adams published the ‘The Iron Triangle: The Politics of Defense Contracting.’

The article described the iron triangle as a policy-making relationship between congress, the federal bureaucracy, and interest groups working together to consolidate power and expand their political influence.

Forty years later, America’s political landscape has become more multifaceted due to the internet, globalization, and financialization. The iron triangle no longer addresses the network intricacies and the implications to society.

The Iron Pentagon

Updating the iron triangle for the current political landscape expands it into a multi-dimensional pentagon. The Iron Pentagon nodes are the Federal Government, Non-Profits, Federal Reserve and Wall Street, Big Tech, and Mainstream Media. These colluding entities erode personal freedom, personal property, real property, and intellectual property rights that are the four pillars of modern Western society. The Iron Pentagon entraps the populace stripping their agency and transferring their wealth.

Federal Government
Executive Orders ride roughshod over Congresses Constitutional authority and our civil liberties. President Biden, the usurper, has signed 50 executive orders setting a record pace. For example, Biden binding America to the Paris Climate Accord skipping Congressional approval as a treaty. The Heritage Foundation estimated “an aggregate GDP loss of over $2.5 trillion – all for a few tenths of a degree Celsius in abated warming.” America is sliding into an autocracy.

The DOJ, FBI, CIA, and IRS report to the Executive Branch are an unelected shadow government. A modern Praetorian Guard who are covert and act in concert to protect the elite politicians and their partisan supporters. For example, through civil litigation records, the Stasi agencies were aware about Hunter Biden’s Rosemont Seneca foreign bribery scandal as late as 2018. Money funneled to attorneys protected recipients’ identities using client-attorney privilege. The FBI also had Hunter’s laptop from Hell left unclaimed at a computer repair shop in 2019.

Consider how the government increases in size and power. Congress uses large and complex Omnibus bills for appropriations, regulations, and law to bypass hearings and debates. The majority party uses lobbyists (influence peddlers) to assist in drafting, and the legislation is available for at least 72 hours before a vote. Titles are ambiguous to obscure the content from the public, i.e., $2 trillion Cares Act (880 pages).

The National Security State consists of the CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, the Defense Department, and the corporate military-industrial complex that exercises substantial political and economic power. The Security State conducts domestic mass surveillance while ignoring waves of unwelcomed immigrants swarming over the border.

Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has declared a culture war by a Soviet-style military purge using a fictitious claim of white supremacist extremists and requiring Marxist critical race theory indoctrination. The unchecked Security State will eventually be a more significant threat than foreign adversaries.

Nonprofits
There are more than 1.75 million nonprofit organizations with assets estimated to exceed $4 trillion. This number includes public charities, private foundations, and other types of nonprofit organizations. The odds of a nonprofit not being audited by the IRS is 99.9%. The trivial audit rate is due to the lack of IRS compliance efforts to enforce the tax code, creating a haven for fraud and graft.

A growing number of nonprofits are political, special interest, and activists groups, charities in name only (CHINOs), promoting destructive ideologies.

The poster child is George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, an annual operating budget of $1.2 billion that advocates wealth redistribution, climate change, social justice, illegal alien amnesty, and open borders.

America has the world’s largest number of Think Tanks totaling 2,203. Think Tanks are pernicious nonprofits that wield outsize clout. Even though we need policy professionals, Think Tanks have a deserved image problem due to policymakers and lobbyists who sell access and influence. Foreign governments and corporations fund think tanks to exercise influence over U.S. foreign policy.

Nonprofits failing to organize and operate under the IRS code are ideal apolitical targets for Biden’s IRS audit expansion that could generate substantial tax revenues through asset confiscation while reducing the charitable deductions.

Federal Reserve & Wall Street
The private Federal Reserve policy of the past 12 years of zero interest rates, money-printing, and monetary stimulus is theft and counterfeiting. Investment returns on low-risk savings and bonds are near zero while lowering the cost of speculation with limitless liquidly for Wall Street and corporations that hyper-inflated assets benefitting the top 1%. The bottom 90% of wage earners continue to lose ground due to inflation and rely on debt to maintain their lifestyle.

Welcome to the era of central bank feudalism.

The Federal Reserve monetized over $8 trillion in government debt with no end in sight. U.S. Federal debt is projected to reach $50 trillion by 2025. The government printing press creates a Soviet command-economy that picks winners (unions and partisans) and losers (middle class). Imagine Solyndra Solar’s malfeasance on steroids.

Big Tech
Big Tech totalitarian monopolies dominate society by defining hate speech, producing biased fact-checking, creating a cancel culture, and rigging search engines. They use prejudice algorithms that downgrade honest and worthy content while amplifying rage, i.e., George Floyd and BLM. They are mind plantations cultivating group think that produce enormous anti-social consequences.

Mainstream Media
The News networks are an oligopoly of six networks (News Corp, Comcast, Disney, Time Warner, CBS, Viacom) and three news wires (AP, Reuters, and Bloomberg). The MSM echoes consensus talking points selling narrative and fake news, i.e., Trump is xenophobic. They float op-ed trial balloons for policymakers to test public opinion.

Take, for example, the notorious sex trafficking case of Jeffrey Epstein of young girls sexually abused for decades. He accumulated a fortune of over $500 million without an occupation and hobnobbed politicians and celebrities. The MSM failed despite obvious evidence that suppressed the story to protect the wealthy and powerful elite.

It’s advocacy journalism rejecting objectivity.

Involuntary Dissent
The government and its affiliates are lawless entities, making the truth treasonous.

Citizens have lost faith in American leadership and governance.

Questioning the elite sociopaths’ and kleptocrats’ philosophies, motives, and actions may make you an involuntary dissentient.

Bob Bishop is a retired corporate CPA

 

[marsh]

Hartford Courant Likens Parents Objecting to Critical Race Theory to ‘KKK’

Hartford Courant editors wrote parents opposed to teaching that America is a racist country are “beginning to sound a lot like the KKK.”

www.breitbart.com

Hartford Courant Likens Parents Objecting to Critical Race Theory to ‘KKK’

CDC/Pexels
DR. SUSAN BERRY2 Jul 2021127

Parents objecting to their children being taught that America is a racist country are “beginning to sound a lot like the KKK,” the editors at the Hartford Courant wrote Thursday.

The editorial focused on a recent packed school board meeting in Guilford, Connecticut, during which parents and students condemned the teaching of principles associated with Critical Race Theory, a Marxist ideology that embraces the concept that all American institutions are systemically racist, with whites as oppressors and blacks as victims.

The Courant editors wrote:

How long is it going to be before those saying that white children are being taught to hate their race realize they are joining a movement that is beginning to sound a lot like the KKK and other groups that have twisted the promise of America into a self-serving message of hate?
…
A pamphlet for the event, sponsored by a group calling itself “No Left Turn in Education Connecticut,” says that Critical Race Theory is a an “evil, divisive, Marxist anti-American ideology that calls for dismantling and replacing all of our cherished American institutions …”

“This sounds like dog whistle language for racism,” the editors stated, describing the parents advocating for their children at school as having “jumped on a fast-moving bandwagon that paints any mention of diversity or equity as part of a plot to insinuate ‘Critical Race Theory’ into the culture.”

For the leftist media, all roads must eventually lead to Donald Trump.

“It’s the same fear Donald Trump has been trafficking in for years and the same fear that has been mined time and time again to turn neighbor against neighbor,” the Courant editors claimed regarding the parents. “It’s a fear that has been used to justify violence.”

The editorial is published now that parents in “blue” Connecticut have become increasingly aware of what their children are being taught.

Todd Feinburg, afternoon host of The Todd Feinburg Show on WTIC, Connecticut’s dominant conservative talk station, covered the Courant’s editorial on his show.

“At the same time that Democrats feel compelled to shore up minority votes with political pandering, they are scared of the damage that their support for critical race theory may cause with mainstream voters,” he wrote to Breitbart News in an email. “This is reflected I think in the knee jerk but poorly constructed editorial in the Courant.”

The Courant is not the first by any means to attack grassroots parent groups. Two weeks ago NBC News published a hit piece as well – and it drew a barrage of criticism:

“NBC News is really upset that parents are fighting back against critical race theory,” wrote writer Libby Emmons at Postmillennial. “What’s really happening here is that the forms of grassroots civic action that have bolstered leftist causes for years upon years are now being taken up by conservatives, and the left doesn’t like it one bit.”

As Fox 61 News observed, Guilford’s superintendent, Dr. Paul Freeman, is using the latest strategy by school officials to deal with fired-up parents – that is, deny he is teaching the words, “Critical Race Theory,” while teaching its concepts:

Dr. Paul Freeman says it is inaccurate that this is being taught in schools. In a statement, he said in part:

“We are working in Guilford Schools to be more equitable in our practice, to embrace diverse texts in our classrooms, to diversify our teaching ranks, to address difficult historical events honestly and openly, and to ensure that all children feel heard in their schools.”

A similar statement was made by Jeff Porter, superintendent of the Cumberland-North Yarmouth, Maine, school district.

Breitbart News reported:

Porter denied his district uses Critical Race Theory (CRT). However, following the death of George Floyd, the district sent a letter to the community, expressing its “solidarity with Black Movement leaders” and detailing its decision to work with Community Change Inc. (CCI), a Boston-based company that self-describes on Twitter as “a non-profit that challenges systemic racism with a special focus on white people.”

“Can’t dismantle white supremacy without dismantling capitalism,” CCI states.

More black leaders are speaking out against the teaching of Critical Race Theory ideology.

Kendall Qualls, a former candidate for Congress in 2020, is leading a black school choice and anti-woke culture movement, starting in Minnesota and spreading nationally, that aims to challenge the narrative that America is a systemically racist nation.

TakeCharge says its objective is “inspire and educate black and other minority communities of their full rights and privileges as Americans granted to them by the Constitution.”

The organization seeks to move black individuals “to take charge of their own lives, the lives of their children and not to rely on government and politicians for redemption and prosperity.”

“We do not apologize for embracing America or its history,” TakeCharge asserts.

“We believe that a well-grounded knowledge of American and world history strengthens our diverse country.”

The group denounces “the idea that the country is guilty of systemic racism and white privilege” and “abhor the concept of identity politics and the promotion of victimhood in minority communities.”

“Having been involved on the front lines of American politics, I have learned that progressives are masters in the martial arts of political spin,” Qualls told Breitbart News regarding the Courant’s editorial. “When they have been accused of infraction, a mortal sin or a social wrong, they move and speak effortlessly and toss the accusations back to their opponents.”

“In most cases,” Qualls added, the left has been “quite successful.”

“Just look at the sitting Governor ‘black face’ of Virginia and the accused sexual harassment Governor of New York,” he observed.

“There are many prominent black Americans, including myself, voicing strong opposition to Critical Race Theory,” Qualls continued. “If judging a person by their skin color was wrong during Martin Luther King, Jr.’s speech in the 1960s, it is wrong today. Just because the cannon of their racist rhetoric is pointed toward a different group of people, it doesn’t make it right.”

 

[marsh]

Media Matters: Andrew Breitbart's Attack on Critical Race Theory 'Appears to be Working'

Media Matters complained Thursday that Andrew Breitbart's 2012 attack on Critical Race Theory "appears to be working," nine years later.

www.breitbart.com

Media Matters: Andrew Breitbart’s Attack on Critical Race Theory ‘Appears to be Working’
1,011

Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images
JOEL B. POLLAK2 Jul 2021489

Media Matters for America, a George Soros-funded organization that attempts to censor conservative media, complained Thursday that Andrew Breitbart’s original 2012 attack on Critical Race Theory “appears to be working,” nine years later.

Media Matters’ Spencer Silva notes that today’s backlash against Critical Race Theory in communities all across America began with Breitbart News drawing attention to the doctrine, then a “little known academic study of systemic racism.”

Critical Race Theory is a doctrine that claims all the political, social, and economic institutions of the United States are inherently racist because they were developed during a time when black people could be owned as slaves.

According to Critical Race Theory, capitalism itself is racist, because black people could once be held as private property. Events like Emancipation and the Civil Rights movement merely obscure the persistence of white supremacy, the theory holds.

Before his untimely death in 2012, Breitbart News founder Andrew Breitbart had linked then-President Barack Obama with Harvard Law School professor Derrick Bell, one of the founders of Critical Race Theory, whom Obama admired.

Silva recalls: “As Joel Pollak, then-editor-in-chief of Breitbart News, would tell CNN’s Soledad O’Brien, ‘Derrick Bell is the Jeremiah Wright of academia. He passed away last year, but during his lifetime, he developed a theory called critical race theory which holds that the civil rights movement was a sham and that white supremacy is the order and it must be overthrown.'”

Silva then embedded (part of) an infamous, and viral, CNN panel discussion on the topic: 5:37 min video clip on website

(The full segment is available here.) 13:18 min video on this website Critical Race Theory Fight | Soledad O'Brien | Joel Pollak

Silva claims that the “smear attempt” — i.e. to vet a president whose background had been largely ignored by the media — failed. But now, he says, “[r]ight-wing media and activists, as well as their peers at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute, seem to know exactly what they are doing because they have dusted off the same playbook from 2012.”

He concludes: “Nearly a decade later, Breitbart News’ failed smear of critical race theory is back — and this time it appears to be working.”

Read Silva’s full article here. In 2012, Breitbart tried to use "critical race theory" to take down Obama. It failed miserably.

 

[marsh]

[COMMENT: Saying the quiet part out loud]

The US Military Actually Just Released This Video Of A Trans Lieutenant Colonel To Prove How WOKE We Will Be When America Is Invaded
NewsPoliticsWTF1 day ago
Video on website 50 min

The US Military Actually Just Released This Video Of A Trans Lieutenant Colonel To Prove How WOKE We Will Be When America Is Invaded
Lieutenant Colonel Bree Fram, is an active duty astronautical engineer in the US Air Force.

The WOKE brass in the US military thought Fram's story of transition was so amazing, they decided to put out a short video to the public to let all the other future soldiers with gender dysphoria know, they have a place in the US military.

If you notice, since Biden took over and occupied the White House, not a single video showing a wounded warrior or soldier who performed acts of extreme heroics on the battlefield has been featured in a video. No, nowadays, we get trans Lieutenant Colonels or women of color or declarations of bigger flight suits for pregnant service women.

 

[marsh]

Claire McCaskill hits a new low…

McCaskill will celebrate July 4th by locking herself in a room and watching videos “We’re going to start a new family tradition in my family; on the Fourth of July and every Fourth of …

citizenfreepress.com

Claire McCaskill hits a new low…
Posted by Kane on July 2, 2021 1:35 pm

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHGI2XvYkxc&feature=emb_rel_end
.21 min

McCaskill will celebrate July 4th by locking herself in a room and watching videos

“We’re going to start a new family tradition in my family; on the Fourth of July and every Fourth of July going forward, we’re going to watch video of the Capitol riots.”

‘Capitol riots were worse than Benghazi’…

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1410923088691306496

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1410923088691306496
2:00 min

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1410963637691371522

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1410963637691371522
.22 min

 

[marsh]

[COMMENT: Anyone else wonder whether the tear apart of the American cultural fabric is being accompanied by a gradual harmonization" with the CCP system to make integration easier?]

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Ken Buck Demands Answers On Facebook’s ‘Censorship Of Legitimate Content’

Rep. Ken Buck is demanding that Mark Zuckerberg explain censorship of content related to the COVID-19 lab-leak theory while allowing human trafficking posts.

dailycaller.com

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Ken Buck Demands Answers On Facebook’s ‘Censorship Of Legitimate Content’

(Photo by Patrick Semansky-Pool/Getty Images)

MICHAEL GINSBERG AND HENRY RODGERSCONTRIBUTOR
July 02, 20214:04 PM ET

Republican Colorado Rep. Ken Buck is demanding that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg explain the social media giant’s censorship of content related to the COVID-19 lab-leak theory.

“Facebook has had the embarrassing position of having to defend its censorship of legitimate content,” Buck wrote in a Thursday letter, obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller. Buck referenced the alleged racism of the lab-leak theory, as well as a report claiming that Facebook and Instagram, are primary methods of online sex trafficking.

Facebook “remove content that facilitates or coordinates the exploitation of humans, including human trafficking,” which it defines “as the business of depriving someone of liberty for profit.” In some cases, content seeps through the moderator’s cracks, and on other occasions, content is removed that doesn’t violate Facebook’s standards.

“Much of the content Facebook censored under the pretense of combating misinformation about COVID-19 was related to the theory that the virus could have leaked out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Facebook quickly eradicated this theory from the public discourse amidst criticism—including from the propaganda arm of the Chinese Communist Party—that the theory was racist,” Buck wrote.]

Zuckerberg emailed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) director, Dr. Anthony Fauci, on several occasions about Facebook content related to COVID-19. During the pandemic, Facebook labeled content associated with the lab-leak theory “misinformation,” but no longer does so.

The letter also notes Facebook’s decision to ban reporting based on Hunter Biden’s laptop, calling the company’s concern leading to “unconditional erasure of reports that were damaging to then-candidate Joe Biden regarding his son, Hunter Biden … unfounded.”

Buck calls the “misalignment of values” that causes Facebook to “polic[e] speech that is Constitutionally protected” while “fail[ing] to effectively screen illegal and exploitive content … deeply disconcerting.”

A report from The Human Trafficking Institute found that “59 percent of online victim recruitment in active sex trafficking cases occurred on Facebook.”
Facebook did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment.

Zuckerberg testified to the House Energy and Commerce Committee that he supports amendments to Section 230, the law that regulates internet content publishers and producers. Zuckerberg’s preferred regulations would require larger platforms, like Facebook, to “have systems in place for identifying unlawful content and removing it. Platforms should not be held liable if a particular piece of content evades its detection.”

Buck slammed the proposal, saying it “would codify the status quo and fail to address the issues that are pervasive across Facebook.”

A critic of big tech companies, Buck called for the federal government to break up Facebook after its Oversight Board ruled that former President Donald Trump would remain suspended from the platform for two years. He frequently takes aim at Apple’s use of slave labor in China.

Read the letter here:
Buck Zuckerberg Letter by Michael Ginsberg
Scribd doc on website

 

[marsh]

Did You Miss The Joint Chiefs Chairman Labeling Trump Voters Terrorists?

Gen. Mark Milley’s testimony can only be true if he counts as domestic enemies the thousands of conservatives who attended the president’s rally.

thefederalist.com

Did You Miss The Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff Labeling Trump Voters Enemies Of The State?

Gen. Mark Milley’s testimony can only be true if he counts as domestic enemies the thousands of Donald Trump supporters and conservatives who attended the president’s rally.

By John Lucas
JULY 2, 2021

For years, I admired Gen. Mark Milley and defended him in conversations when others attacked him as being too political. No more. The breaking point was Milley’s recent testimony before Congress. Others have pointed out much of what was wrong with his testimony. But the worst part has gone unnoticed and unremarked.

It was not his statement that “thousands of people” assaulted the U.S. Capitol building. Nor was it his fabrication of “white rage” as the cause for the January 6 riot at the capitol. It was not even his false equivalency of officers who have studied Mao Zedong in order to understand their enemies with the current exhortations to read unabashed race-baiters and other charlatans, not to understand our enemies, but because many in the government, including in the military, are promoting their propaganda.

No, the most dangerous aspect of this testimony by the highest-ranking officer in the U.S. military was validating the use of military personnel and lethal military force against political opponents of the administration. Is that a stretch, you may ask? No, if we take Milley at his word, it is the inevitable conclusion that follows from his testimony. Here is why.

The oath of office to which Milley and every officer in the U.S. military swears upon his or her commissioning is a solemn oath to defend “the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Military officers take that oath very seriously. It is not something that Milley or any other officer parrots and then forgets.

It is not an idle, aspirational goal. It is the foundation for all that they will be charged to do throughout their careers. It is the bedrock of their commitment.

Combat officers put their very lives at risk to honor and fulfill that oath. So when Milley identified the “thousands” he claims attacked the capitol as insurrectionists who were trying to “overturn the Constitution of the United States of America,” that was one of the most serious charges he could make.

“So, what is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? What caused that?”

he said in his testimony on June 23. If they want to “overturn” the Constitution, they are the “domestic enemies” against whom Milley and the rest of the military are obligated by their oaths to defend.

As we all know, the military is not a police force. The purpose for its existence is to defend the Constitution with the lethal force of arms.

Milley’s testimony alleging there were “thousands” of such people assaulting the capitol building can only be true if, in addition to the several hundred unarmed people who actually entered the capitol building, he counts the thousands of Donald Trump supporters and conservatives who attended the president’s rally and then marched to the vicinity of the capitol.

It certainly is fair to assume that most of them were supporters of the president and were strongly suspicious of the election results and the courts’ and Democrats’ refusals to consider the merits or the extent of the claims of fraud.

Thus, they clearly were political opponents of the Democrat ticket, seeking to avoid certification of the election results. Right or wrong, they have a lot of company who earnestly believe their concerns are well-grounded and merit a full investigation.

But by giving his carefully planned testimony claiming these demonstrators were trying to “overturn the Constitution,” Milley was labelling them as domestic enemies against whom his oath of office justified the employment of military force.

Milley did not attempt to qualify his endorsement of the potential use of military force against the administration’s political opponents by limiting it to situations where there was great violence or destruction of property, armed mobs running amok, murders of police officers and others, burning of federal buildings, or other serious threats. Nor has he, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, or anyone else in the administration defined exactly who these “domestic enemies” are, even though they have launched an offensive to root them out.

Instead, supporters of former President Trump and, indeed, all conservatives are routinely lumped together under various vague and undefined but highly negative labels, such as white supremacists, white nationalists, fascists, and now, citizens gripped with something called “white rage.” The variety of people arbitrarily thrown into one of these categories also indicates the “domestic enemies” are simply anyone with whom the government disagrees or who opposes the Biden-Harris administration.

Milley may object, claiming that he was not justifying the use of military force against these political opponents of President Biden. He may claim that this logical result of his words was not his intent.

But I give him the benefit of a presumption that any time a man of his experience and stature testifies before the Congress of the United States, he chooses his words carefully, understands and intends their consequences, probably has them vetted by his staff, and does not “shoot from the hip.” His were the words that labeled the thousands of pro-Trump demonstrators as those who would “overturn the Constitution of the United States of America.”

Notwithstanding their hysterical opposition last summer to the idea that President Trump might have sought to use the military to quell the real riots that were killing people and tearing cities apart, President Biden and the other Democrats now understand that if they choose to use military force against their perceived domestic enemies, they have the green light from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

John Lucas is a practicing attorney in Tennessee who has successfully argued before the U. S. Supreme Court. Before entering law school at the University of Texas, he served in the Army Special Forces as an enlisted man and then graduated from the U. S. Military Academy at West Point in 1969. He is an Army Ranger and fought in Vietnam as an infantry platoon leader. He is married with four children.

 

[marsh]

New Data Could Help Explain the Recent Rise in Violent Behavior

“This is not going away,” Soo Jeong Youn, a research psychologist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, told NBC News. “These long-term effects are not going away.”

fee.org

Did Pandemic Policy Make Americans More Aggressive?

Data from the CDC show a sharp increase in the number of Americans experiencing symptoms of anxiety and depression. Are many breaking under the stress?

Thursday, July 1, 2021

Hannah Cox

The worst part of COVID may be behind us, but that doesn’t mean we’re driving off into the sunset—at least not without a lot of baggage.

Psychologists are reportedly paying close attention to the impact the pandemic made on the country’s mental health, and they’re noticing that many individuals are showing signs of chronic stress.

According to Marie-Christine Nizzi, a postdoctoral researcher at Dartmouth College and the Brain Institute at Chapman University, when individuals are in a dangerous or stressful situation for prolonged periods of time, their body’s responses to it change from those of acute stress to what medical professionals call chronic stress. Over time this can take a significant mental toll that presents many adverse side effects. As Nizzi puts it, “as the (individual’s) stress becomes chronic, their ability to cope with all of the changes is starting to be overwhelmed.”

Nizzi studies trauma, which can be caused by chronic stress, and has been collecting data on the mental state of Americans throughout the pandemic. She and others in the psychology field say that the prolonged trauma of living under pandemic stress could have long-term effects on some individuals, leading to undesirable behavior changes in society.

Numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention enforce the scope of the problem. They found that 42 percent of Americans reported experiencing symptoms of anxiety and depression over the last year, an 11 percent increase from pre-pandemic times.

What Is Trauma?
It makes sense that the widespread uncertainty, lack of social activity, and loss of life surrounding us for the past year would leave mental scars. And we know that the scars of trauma can lead to aggression and, at times, violence.

“Based on our review of the literature,” wrote clinical psychologists Daniel J Neller and John Matthew Fabian in a 2007 study, “we believe trauma likely contributes to violence via direct avenues (e.g., social learning, physiological abnormalities), as well as indirect avenues (e.g., increased likelihood of substance use, personality disorder, etc.).”

That certainly does not mean that everyone who experiences trauma will become violent, it just means they’re at a heightened risk of it because trauma has the ability to change our brain’s physiological processes.

In the groundbreaking book, The Body Keeps the Score, psychiatrist and researcher Bessel A. van der Kolk puts it this way, “We have learned that trauma is not just an event that took place sometime in the past; it is also the imprint left by that experience on mind, brain, and body.”

He continued:

“This imprint has ongoing consequences for how the human organism manages to survive in the present. Trauma results in a fundamental reorganization of the way the mind and brain manage perceptions. It changes not only how we think and what we think about, but also our very capacity to think.”

Furthermore, in a workshop at the Forum on Global Violence Prevention, Dr. Charles Zeanah, Jr. who is the Mary Peters Sellars-Polchow Chair of Psychiatry at Tulane University, told the audience that “adverse experiences will have a negative impact on brain development and that threats, abuse, and violence lead to an excessive activation of fear circuitry and stress response systems, which will then compromise normal brain development.”

When we experience prolonged danger, rather real or perceived, certain areas of the brain become hyperactive while suppressing other components, creating an imbalance. This can cause the amygdala to enlarge and enhance a person’s flight or fight response—placing them in a state of anxiety. When the amygdala is hyperactive, people may have a lower tolerance for stress and harder time controlling their emotions.

Is This the Cause of Recent Crime Spikes?
You’d have to be living under a rock to not know that crime is up practically everywhere in the US. According to one report, hate crimes against Asians increased 150 percent last year. Since the coronavirus originated from China, many suspect this increase is due to individuals blaming Asians as a whole for the pandemic.

Intimate partner violence has also skyrocketed, leading some to refer to it as “a pandemic within a pandemic.” Domestic incidents increased 25 percent in Argentina, 33 percent in Singapore, 50 percent in Brazil, 18 percent in San Antonio, 22 percent in Portland….the list goes on. People have found themselves in close quarters with few outlets throughout the pandemic, meaning victims have little to no escape from abuse.

And then there are the airline fights. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) told NBC News that flight crews have been dealing with an elevated number of incidents in the air. According to their data, a normal year might see 100-150 disruptive people reported on plans. But by the beginning of 2021, that number was already over 1,300, despite fewer passengers in the sky.

And let's, of course, not forget the infamous Capitol Riot on January 6.
There are of course many underlying causes of crime: economic uncertainty, a lack of social opportunities that can keep teens off the streets and out of trouble, and feelings of hopelessness that can lead to people feeling like they have nothing to lose. But certainly there is reason to think that the mental impact of our world being shut down and the extreme stress so many of us incurred as a result has contributed to short fuses and aggressive behaviors by some.

The Seen and the Unseen
The economist Frederic Bastiat said, “In the economic sphere, an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen. There is only one difference between a good economist and a bad one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those which must be foreseen.”

Those who pushed for lockdowns and school closures believed they were pushing actions that would keep people safe from a virus. They were wrong about that, but their intentions were genuine. But from the very beginning, those people were warned by good economists and students of economics of the unseen consequences these actions would bring.

Some of these consequences were predictable and predicted, like inflation, unemployment, and children falling behind in school. Others, like a spike in aggressive behavior, may take longer to see or may not be identified as the consequence of government actions like it should be.

As Soo Jeong Youn, a research psychologist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, told NBC News, “This is not going away...These long-term effects are not going away.”

As is so often the case, the government makes the mess and we’re left picking up the broken pieces.