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

Bps1691

Veteran Member
I'm surprised there has been such little interest in this:


H.R.127 - Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

Introduced on Jan 4

(a) In General.—The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.

Isn't this something we've been predicting for decades?

Now it has been introduced in the demon controlled house it will pass. Unconstitutional or not it will pass the Senate when they change the filibuster rule in the next month or so. And after they pack the SCOTUS sometime in spring it will be declared constitutional.

It is coming and will be here before we know it.

Seems there should be at least some conversations about it doesn't it?
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Overlooked Biden executive order could have greatest harmful impact

'Game changing' move a 'break with 40 years of conservative policy'
Art Moore
By Art Moore
Published January 31, 2021 at 12:07pm

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris (White House photo)
Along with tax cuts, a foundation of the economic policy that led to a roaring economy before the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns was deregulation.

Applying common sense through a cost-benefit analysis – including consideration of long-term costs such as environmental impact – the Trump administration rule was to eliminate two regulations for every new regulation that was implemented.

Now, in an executive order that has been largely overlooked, President Biden not only is reversing the Trump policy, he's taking regulatory power a step further.

Titled "Modernizing Regulatory Review," the order shows that for the Biden administration, regulatory power is more than a means of protecting lives and maintaining an even playing field. It's one of the primary means to advance the far-left agenda enacted in other executive actions since Inauguration Day, which base policy on race, gender equality and climate change rather than on what has worked historically to the benefit of everyone, whether rich or poor.

The order isn't about "modernizing" regulations, contends the editorial board of Issue & Insights, it's "about unleashing the regulatory state with a ferocity never before seen in this country."

Released late in the evening of his first day in office, Jan. 20, the order signals Biden's intent to eliminate the cost-benefit analysis that, the editors point out, "for many decades has served as at least a modest brake on the ambitions of regulators."

Biden, instead, wants the review process to be "a tool to affirmatively promote regulations" and "to ensure swift and effective federal action" on everything from the pandemic to the economy, racial inequality and the "undeniable reality and accelerating threat of climate change."

'Game changing'

James Goodwin, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Progressive Reform, thinks the order is a really big deal.

"I realize what I'm about to say to you sounds absurd. It has the potential to be the most significant action Biden took on day one," he told the Huffington Post.

The Post affirmed that Biden's order is "game changing," possibly leading, according to analysts, to a "break with 40 years of conservative policy."

The Post said it "could unleash a wave of stronger regulations to reduce income inequality, fight climate change and protect public health."

Clyde Wayne Crews, a regulation expert at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, warned that Biden's order is "likely to do away with cost-benefit analysis by elevating unquantifiable aims as benefits and deny costs of regulation altogether," Issues & Insight pointed out.

In so doing, Crews said, it will "put weight on the scales of whether or not to regulate such that the answer will always be in the affirmative."

Lifelong politicians
The Insight & Issues board said one of Trump's biggest unheralded achievements was to begin "to rein in the regulatory state."

"A lifelong businessman, Trump understood – in a way lifelong politicians cannot – the avalanche of regulations that fall on a business and the enormous costs they impose. One of his very first actions was the two-for-one order," the board said.

Crews pointed out that Trump actually exceeded his two-for-one goal, with agencies eliminating 4.3 rules for every new one.

That deregulatory policy ended up saving households an average of $3,100 a year, according to the estimate of the Trump administration's Council of Economic Advisers.

While that figure may be debated, there's no doubt that Trump slowed the regulatory advance.

Today, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, regulations imposes $1.9 trillion in annual costs, which amounts to an enormous hidden tax on families.

"In fact, if our regulatory state were a country, it would be bigger than Canada's entire economy," the editorial board notes. "The idea that we are getting more than $1.9 trillion in health and safety benefits from these rules is laughable."

The board recalled that throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, it warned that Biden "was hiding his agenda from voters because it was far more extremist than he let on."

"Now that he's safely in the White House, he is taking the wrappings off," the board said. "We hate to say we told you so, but we told you so."

And so far, the Democratic Party's far-left base is pleased.

"I'm feeling extraordinarily encouraged," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the House sponsor of the Green New Deal. "And I think that the significance of President Biden’s executive orders communicates a lot."

In an interview on MSNBC’s "All In," the New York lawmaker said the orders Biden issued Wednesday on climate change, in particular, show "a good-faith openness and relationship" to the party's progressive activist base.

"One is that it really communicates that he meant what he said on the campaign trail, that he would make climate change a central priority of his administration, and that he considers it, not just a national security threat, but frankly, the global matter that it is," she said.

"But it also really signifies a good-faith openness and relationship to those activist communities that you had mentioned, these grassroots communities and organizations, on the ground workers, etc., scientists, saying, we are not going to be resistant to grassroots movements, but we are going to collaborate and work with grassroots movements all across the United States to make sure that we are creating as many jobs and as much justice as possible as we fight to save our planet."
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Governing Elites Are Destroying the Nation They're Supposed to Run
By J.B. Shurk

A friend of American Thinker, understandably upset about the unraveling of America around us, reached out with a heartfelt question: how did we as a society come to behave so acrimoniously toward one another?

The two words that stood out to me while turning this question over in my mind were "we" and "society." Who "we" are as Americans has changed radically over the last half-century, and during that time, the political sphere in America has eaten away and destroyed the independence of the civic sphere we traditionally call "society."

Consider these facts:
1. Before Ted Kennedy's 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, nine tenths of all new immigrants to America came from Europe; after the act's passage, nine tenths of new immigrants have come from Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.

2. Since the 1965 Act's passage, over sixty million new immigrants have arrived in the United States, and over a hundred million more are expected over the next half century.

3. In 1970, 4.7% of the American population was born outside of the United States; in 2017, 13.7% of the national population was born in a foreign country.
These are obviously transformative demographic shifts. In an open society unafraid of debate, we would weigh the benefits of these changes against the dangers they present to national cohesion and stability. Instead, and no doubt because Kennedy's immigration law has done more to stave off death for the Democratic Party than any other variable over the last half-century, America's political and business elites have weaponized censorship and political correctness to portray even the mentioning of unchecked immigration's harms as something taboo. So who "we" are as Americans continues to radically change, but any person reasonable enough to point that out is branded a xenophobe.

Let me add a fourth fact:

4. Eighty-four percent of Americans born between 1928 and 1945 identify as Christians, and 50% of them still attend religious services at least once a week. In contrast, less than half of millennial Americans today identify as Christian, and 64% rarely, if at all, attend any kind of religious service.

At the same time as "we" have been rewritten, the civic "society" has been weakened. Americans have traditionally distinguished the civil sphere from the political sphere. In this way, government is maintained to guard against man's worst impulses, but society is formed among to create benefits beyond each individual's limitations. And Americans have always had, until recently, numerous civic engagements and bonds that strengthened society while having nothing to do with politics. In simple parlance, we call this "community."

The generation of Americans who survived the Great Depression and WWII not only attended church and actively participated in community town halls, but also belonged to veterans' organizations; Kiwanis; Shriners; knitting and quilting groups; bowling and softball leagues; community improvement boards; and book, radio, and nature clubs. All of these civic institutions fostered social bonds and community that had little to nothing to do with government or party politics.

Post-WWII, however, Americans have steadily decreased both the number of groups to which they belong and their variety. Americans have become much less religious. The camaraderie of Scouts or shooting clubs has been replaced by the anonymity of the local gym. And as either a cause or effect (or both) of this decline, civic institutions have become increasingly political in nature. An environmental club is no longer concerned about protecting a local forest, but rather advocating for the Green New Deal. Online knitting sites that ostensibly have nothing to do with politics go out of their way to exclude Trump-supporters.

Whether Gramsci's "march through the institutions" has succeeded in conquering and assimilating civic organizations from the bottom up, or whether the Democrats' Marxist-socialism has succeeded from the top down in making everything personal in America overwhelmingly political, the end result has been the near destruction of civic society and the elevation of a Soviet-like state in its place that insists on intervening in social affairs and controlling personal relationships.

As part of this 1984 restructuring of America, language has lost meaning, and truth, as a virtue, is no longer pursued. Everything from religious doctrine to the underlying events of a police arrest is manipulated for political pursuits of power.

Conservatives are censored and fired from jobs for undefined "hate speech," while the political left increasingly resorts to organized violence to accomplish political objectives. And because freedom-minded people are increasingly not welcome, they are forced to live separately from the cultural and governing institutions of their own country.

Can America remain a unified country when her traditions and history are vilified and multiculturalism is glorified? Can a people remain civil toward one another when everything is regarded and treated as political in nature? The lessons of just the last century emphatically say "no."

When disparate groups of people are forced to live under one government, balkanization, conflict, and separation almost always result. Yet in the same time span that has seen the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia and no end to violence across the artificially drawn maps of the Middle East and Africa once controlled and later partitioned by European powers, the political elites of Europe and the United States have insisted on forcing drastically different cultures to coexist under single, ever-growing political systems within their own territorial realms.

This is willful blindness at an unconscionable level.

Likewise, one of the chief lessons of WWII was that totalitarian political systems that seek to control the minutiae of each individual's life not only deprive human beings of self-determination and freedom, but also permit national leaders to orchestrate great acts of collective barbarism and evil that would not be possible if individuals remained in control of their own moral judgments. Communism, Nazism, and fascism all demand that the individual sacrifice personal notions of right and wrong for the political determinations of the state, and anywhere and at any time in history when the state has demanded absolute obedience from its people, great and inhuman atrocities have occurred.

A rational observer of history would look at Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Stalin's Soviet Union and his subsequent post-WWII imprisonment of Central Europe, and Mao's China and rightly conclude that subsuming civic society and individual morality to the demands of the state necessarily leads to human tragedy. Instead of correctly condemning the evils of Big Government, however, the political elites of Europe and the United States have pulled a semantic switcheroo and absurdly insisted on stigmatizing and scapegoating the natural formation of nation-states as the real problem. German, Italian, Soviet, and Chinese forms of total population control are rhetorically condemned, while their supranational monster siblings are applauded and empowered in the forms of the E.U., the U.N., and other transnational governing bodies. In this way, the West defeated totalitarianism seventy-five years ago only to turn around and construct institutions that led right back to the expanding totalitarian governments we have today.

Once again, this has been willful blindness at an unconscionable level.

Since the end of WWII, Western governments have promised their populations wealth and security in exchange for knowingly or unknowingly consenting to mass immigration and globalist trading networks that have hollowed out domestic manufacturing and destroyed national wealth for all but an elite few.

In this destructive wake, cultural and civic bonds have been all but destroyed while the machinery of the political State has become ever more obtrusive.

Essentially, those who insist on governing us have spent decades shaking and shaking the world's largest can of carbonated Coke, and now they expect it somehow not to explode all around them.
Hat tip to L. Walters.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

The Globalist American Empire Declares All-Out War On the American People
February 1, 2021 (2h ago)



Millions of people around the world have been enraptured by the WallStreetBets saga. A few small online traders discovered that a hedge fund had massively overshorted video game retailer GameStop, and initiated a short squeeze that made a few ordinary investors millionaires while sending a Wall Street darling to the brink of bankruptcy. The response from the press, Wall Street, and even the Biden White House has been deranged. A few traders making money at the expense of a hedge fund has been treated as a national scandal.

The WallStreetBets crackdown, coming just one week after Joe Biden took office, shows the tactics the new regime plans to use to keep the masses in line. Although superficially a financial matter, WallStreetBets is actually being treated like a peasant uprising. Those in power, terrified and enraged at having their status threatened, are overreacting and throwing out all the rules in a flailing attempt to keep things under control.

The desperation has been so obvious that it was broadcast on TV to tens of millions of people. Leon Cooperman, who ought to be better-adjusted considering he is a billionaire, fumed on television about how beating a hedge fund was an “attack” on the rich.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1354862517902827521
.16 min

Of course, in real life, short sellers have always been vulnerable to so-called “bull raids.” GameStop’s rise isn’t the first short squeeze in history. In 2008, a short squeeze of Volkswagen temporarily turned it into the world’s most valuable company.

No, the offense here is that this time, a hedge fund was the victim of an aggressive financial play, rather than the perpetrator of it, and that the winners gloated as they did so. The supposed champions of the free market are outraged that the free market actually worked.

The meltdown produced grotesque outburts. Ordinary retail investors were compared with rioters storming the U.S. Capitol:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1354915156199944194
.40 min

Inevitably, there came wild allegations of Russian meddling.

1612238171636.png
Along with the outbursts came serious efforts to restrict the rights of individual people. RobinHood and other trading apps restricted users from buying stakes, not just in GameStop, but in other companies like AMC that were also being promoted on WallStreetBets. When users responded by barraging RobinHood’s app with negative reviews, Google scrubbed them:

1612238130847.png
Discord, meanwhile, banned WallStreetBets’s discussion page, implausibly claiming the ban was coincidental and due to “hate speech” and “spreading misinformation.”

1612238077719.png
Nobody is fooled. The WallStreetBets Discord had more than 200,000 members. The idea of collectively punishing a group larger than Baton Rouge, Louisiana because of offensive posts by a few users is ridiculous. The Discord was taken down for political reasons, which is what this is all about. WallStreetBets is an irreverent community where users call themselves “fags” and share Pepe memes.

It doesn’t matter if the community is actually right-wing (in reality, its users span the entire political spectrum). It refuses to pay homage to the ridiculous, narrow pieties of the modern left, so the moment it began achieving success, those in power targeted it.

The similarities between WallStreetBets and the wider crackdown on conservatives after the Capitol riot are striking. In both cases, authorities flagrantly rewrote the rules on the fly to benefit themselves. In both cases, it’s clear these newly rewritten rules only selectively apply, and will never be used against those who enjoy favor with the powerful. America didn’t get a border wall because “walls don’t work,” but Congress will get a wall to protect itself.

Antifa is “just an idea,” but everybody even three degrees removed from the Capitol riots must be targeted as a would-be “insurrectionist.” With both WallStreetBets and the Capitol, the reaction is only partly about the event itself. It’s also about sending a message: What they can do to them they can do to you as well. If they get away with these stunts, they will use the same exploits again and again.

What’s their end goal? There likely isn’t one. The corrupt ruling class of the Globalist American Empire has become so flimsy and degraded that long-term planning is practically beyond it. Everything is emotional fragility, brittleness, and overreaction to immediate events. But even with no plan, the end result is easy to foresee: A society where nobody dares to speak or act, publicly or anonymously, without perfect ideological adherence. A country where the peasants are kept in line.

And we’re barely more than a week into the Biden Administration. Buckle up, things are going to get wild.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Michigan’s Tyrannical, Economy-Wrecking Governor Aids CNN In Vile Propaganda Campaign To Label Dissenters Of Democrat Party’s Radical Agenda, “Domestic Terrorists” [VIDEO]

By Patty McMurray
Published February 1, 2021 at 4:04pm

For years, with no evidence to back up their claims, CNN has attempted to brand Trump supporters as extremists who need to be dealt with.

100 Percent Fed Up reports- CNN host Alisyn Camerota asked Michigan’s even unpopular governor, Gretchen Whitmer, about “domestic terrorism” in America, asking her if she believes “in hindsight” the protests in Michigan were a “dry run” for the Capitol Hill riots on January 6th? Camerota was referring to a group of anti-lockdown protesters who legally walked into the states’ Capitol and chanted outside of the chambers where lawmakers were discussing the lockdown orders.

With a straight face, Michigan’s unhinged Democrat governor, whose tyrannical and unconstitutional lockdowns have devasted the lives of Michigan residents, responded by blaming President Trump for the protesters who were losing their jobs and businesses because of her irrational decisions. “It was encouraged by the former White House…the misinformation…the encouragement…the normalizing of this kind of domestic terrorism.” Hmmm…good to know that protests covered by our First Amendment are considered “domestic terrorism,” by the left.

Camerota continued to misrepresent Trump supporters who have protested across America over a number of issues, most of which are related to unconstitutional lockdown orders by overreaching Democrat governors.

Brushing tens of thousands of Americans with a broad brush, Camerota assured her small audience that just because “President Trump is gone,” it doesn’t mean “the extremists” have disappeared.

Watch:

CNN: Were The Michigan Protests Were A "Dry Run" For Capitol Riots?

Rumble video on website 3:20 min

Whitmer told Camerota that there has to be some sort of effort to hold these people “accountable,” as she completely made up some idiotic narrative that conversation within the Republican Party is “are you an insurrectionist, or are you not?” Whitmer, who marched with the violent Black Lives Matter movement at the height of the pandemic, was clearly working to define Republicans as terrorists, as she turned to the alleged plot by six men who, according to FBI reports plotted to kidnap Governor Whitmer from her vacation home in northern Michigan.

According to a report by The Federalist, a lawyer representing one of the accused men is suggesting the FBI agent set these men up, and that it was the FBI informant who hatched the idea to kidnap the governor.

The Federalist covered the October 13, 2020 trial of one of the six men accused of plotting to kidnap Governor Whitmer – Scott Graham, who is representing 26-year-old Kaleb Franks, argued in court there was no real plan to capture Whitmer. Instead, he said the accused were merely acting as “militia wannabees” who engaged in “big talk between crackpots,” according to the Detroit Free Press. In other words, Graham said, those charged in a plot to kidnap Whitmer were “people who talk a lot … but are never going to do anything.”

“Have you ever dealt with big talkers?” Graham asked an FBI Special Agent Richard Trask during cross-examination. “There’s kind of a military-wanna-be theme that runs between militias.”

Graham specifically asked Trask about his testimony that 13 militia members were planning to steal Whitmer from her vacation home and leave her in the middle of Lake Michigan or try the governor for treason in a nearby state. Trask, the paper reported, said he couldn’t offer a specific answer but that there were audio recordings of the members discussing their plans.

Graham argued in court that it was the FBI’s own informant involved with this group that was actively encouraging the others to engage in illegal activity.

“One of the most active leaders was your informant,” Graham charged.


Gary Springstead, who is representing 24-year-old Ty Garbin, also said the use of an informant raised suspicions that without FBI involvement the “plot” would never have gone anywhere.

“(I)t’s become an issue in certain cases where the informant pushes some of the information, and the court and the government and the defense attorneys have to be leery of that,” Springstead told reporters outside the courthouse. “Because their job is not to assess what the government informant wants them to do, it’s to assess the accused’s intent and what they actually planned on doing.”
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

‘Conservative’ Washington Examiner Compares Trump Supporters to al Qaeda

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published February 1, 2021 at 7:00pm

Supporters behind podium awaiting arrival of President Trump at rally in Erie, PA, October 20, photo by Kristinn Taylor

The supposedly-conservative Washington Examiner has published a shocking op-ed comparing Trump supporters to al Qaeda.

The shocking article, essentially calling for war against the American people, was written by former CIA officer Kevin Carroll.
1612241746527.png
OPINION:
We defeated al Qaeda and can do the same to the fascist thugs who attacked our democracy last month.
But only if we take similar hard measures against the enemy within.
How to fix our domestic terrorist problem
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) February 1, 2021
“We defeated al Qaeda and can do the same to the fascist thugs who attacked our democracy last month,” the Examiner tweeted.

The “fascist thugs” the article refers to are Trump supporters who protested and Republican lawmakers who have attempted to practice their Second Amendment right at the Capitol.

Of course, Carroll wrote nothing similar about the Black Lives Matter rioters who terrorized cities across the nation last year, leaving dozens dead.
“We saw five dead in the Jan. 6 attempted coup d’etat. We saw possible assassination plots against both former Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. We saw coercion designed to prevent certification of President Biden’s Electoral College victory. We now see the Capitol necessarily secured behind razor wire. But we also see some Republican members of Congress trying to sneak guns onto the House floor. One has even called for violence. It is time to confront these putschists,” the article states.
The former CIA officer goes on to outline five ways to deal with these big scary Republicans.

First, he writes, “bring the heaviest felony charges possible on as many participants in the insurrection as the Justice Department can identify and believes it can confidently convict. We ruthlessly hunted down foreign terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and must do the same to their domestic equivalents. Further prosecution is possible under the federal felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm statute.”

The second thing he is advocating for is “make fire and police departments that receive federal grants have their members sign commitments not to engage in acts to overthrow the government. Prosecute any who subsequently violate their oaths.”

The next thing he wants to see is for the government to set honey pot traps to go after people who vent online about politics.

“Do not worry about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Rather than ban extremist chatter through government censorship or private de-platforming, use radical chat rooms as honeypots, as FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces have done with violent, radicalized Islamists since 2001,” Carroll says.

Fourth, the deep state lunatic wants the government to ban militias.

“Use the supremacy of federal law to ban ‘militias’ beyond the National Guard. There is simply no longer any room for armed forces not answerable to the law,” he writes.

As his final step, Carroll writes that we must “add domestic terrorism as a predicate to the material support for terrorism statute, including its civil liability provisions. This will provide new means of successful prosecutions and gradually increased deterrence against domestic terrorists.”

With conservative “news outlets” like this, who needs enemies on the left?
Carroll served as senior counselor to the secretary of homeland security and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and as a CIA and Army officer in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

DC Public Schools Using Black Lives Matter Curriculum That Prioritizes ‘Disrupting the Nuclear Family’

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published February 1, 2021 at 4:55pm

DC Public Schools have announced that they will be using a race-based curriculum sent out by Black Lives Matter to teach students during Black History Month.


An email sent to parents refers to children as “communal children” and prioritizes “disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.”

According to a report from the Daily Wire, who obtained the email, the program calls for allowing everyone to “choose their own gender,” even children in elementary school.

The critical race theory-based curricula uses Black Lives Matter’s “13 Guiding Principles,” which the Wire reports pushes for “queer and transgender affirmation and ‘restorative justice,’ among other priorities. The guide calls for the dismantling of the ‘patriarchal practice’ of requiring mothers to parent their children while also participating in ‘justice work.'”
“We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another,” the guide reads. “Especially ‘our’ children.”
The Nationalist Review reported on this curriculum back in August, reporting that “schools in Massachusetts, Maryland, California, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina and many more have all signed onto the effort. Multiple teachers’ unions have signed onto the effort as well.”

The NR also notes that it directly pushes globalism.

“Globalism means that we are thinking about all the different people all over the world, and thinking about the ways to keep things fair everywhere,” their guide states.

The school district’s email also linked parents to Teaching Tolerance, which is a branch of the activist Southern Poverty Law Center network.

Dozens of people were killed and thousands of businesses were destroyed during Black Lives Matter’s violent riots in 2020.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Chris Salcedo Runs Montage of Democrats Threatening Violence Against Trump — But Trump Is Being “Impeached” for Calling for Peaceful Protest? (VIDEO)

By Jim Hoft
Published February 1, 2021 at 5:10pm

Democrats and their media are hoping to impeach private citizen Donald Trump next week for inciting a riot at the US Capitol on January 6th.

This will be quite a challenge for Democrats considering President Trump called for a peaceful protest and considering the violence was planned weeks in advance before President Trump’s speech.

Then again Democrats will have one of their own senators presiding over the proceedings because the Supreme Court wants nothing to do with it.

On Monday night Chris Salcedo on Newsmax ran a montage of radical Democrat after radical Democrat promoting violence against President Trump and his supporters.

Of course, the fake news media will never report this — especially since many of them made the final cut.

View: https://youtu.be/MaGuiup_CQc
2:54 min
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

“I Didn’t Declare War on the Establishment; It Declared War on Me” – Frank Miele Puts to Paper on What We All Are Thinking

By Joe Hoft
Published February 2, 2021 at 8:15am

In today’s America everything is upside down. American patriots are labeled ‘enemies of the state.’ Their accusers prove they are ‘enemies of the people.’

Published with permission from RealClearPolitics “Enemies of the State vs. Enemies of the People” Commentary by Frank Miele
I didn’t declare war on the establishment; it declared war on me.
It declared war on me when it supported energy policies that could enrich Saudi Arabia and Russia and would cost me more money at the gas pump or on my power bill.
It declared war on me when it told me my ideas weren’t worthy of debate and discussion or that they were even so dangerous they couldn’t be shared publicly.

It declared war on me when it used the police powers of the FBI and CIA to first spy on a presidential candidate and then worked to undermine the administration of that candidate after he was elected.

It declared war on me when it told me my religious beliefs did not deserve the protection of the First Amendment.

It declared war on me when it told me boys could compete against girls in high school sports and that they could shower together afterwards.

It declared war on me when it offered citizenship to illegal aliens and shipped American jobs to China.

It declared war on me when it mocked the usefulness of a wall on the Mexican border and simultaneously put up a razor-wire fence around the Capitol.

It declared war on me when it tried to defund the police so that millions of Americans would be left defenseless against mobs from antifa and Black Lives Matter.

It declared war on me when it said America was never great.

It declared war on me when it told my children they are not good enough because they are white.

It declared war on me when it said that defending the Constitution’s rules on federal elections is sedition.
It declared war on me when it told me that I was a domestic terrorist if I didn’t believe the government’s official pronouncements about elections, about free speech, and about right and wrong.

Let’s just say it plainly: The establishment declared war on me and on all conservative Americans when it decided that leftist orthodoxy was more important than the Constitution.

Don’t believe me? Fine, why should you believe a Trump supporter?
You’ve been indoctrinated by the national media, Big Tech oligarchs, the Democratic Party, and academic elites to believe without questioning that people like me can’t be trusted. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Listen instead to John Brennan, the former CIA director under President Obama, who speaks authoritatively for the Deep State:
He said on MSNBC that “the members of the Biden team who have been nominated or have been appointed, are now moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about what looks very similar to insurgency movements that we’ve seen overseas, where they germinate in different parts of the country and they gain strength and it brings together an unholy alliance frequently of religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.”
This “guilt by labeling” is the antithesis of fair play or justice. It is a convenient mechanism for the ruling class to herd people into identity clusters so that individual rights can be supplanted by group responsibility. If this reminds you of China’s Cultural Revolution, you are not wrong. The ruling class wants you to conform, confirm and comply. If you step outside the lines, be prepared to be shamed, silenced and ostracized.

A shocking example was provided Wednesday when Douglass Mackey of Delray Beach, Fla., was arrested for creating memes that allegedly misled voters in 2016 to think they could vote by texting instead of by actually going to the polls. This is the equivalent of arresting Sacha Baron Cohen for exposing the gullibility of the rich and famous. The FBI offered no evidence that Mackey actually convinced anyone not to vote, but even if it did, so what? Would you rather live in a country where the FBI is hunting down pranksters — four years after the supposed transgression — or a country where voters are expected to be able to recognize a joke when they see one?
But nothing can be taken for granted any more. The people — and even their representatives and senators — are considered enemies of the state because they hold opinions that don’t meet the standards of Joe Biden or (this is even scarier!) Jake Tapper.
No wonder the people are starting to rise up and rebel against the plutocracy. It’s not “We the Oligarchs” who are the source of power in the Constitution, but “We the People,” yet the ruling establishment has forgotten that. If people like Donald Trump and Douglass Mackey are deemed to be “enemies of the state,” then those who would suppress them and their freedoms must be considered “enemies of the people.”
A house divided against itself cannot long stand, but if there is to be a truce it will not come from submission, but from a recognition that all people are created equal, that they all have certain inalienable rights, and that among those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Those words were worth fighting for once. Are they worth fighting for today?

I don’t know, but I do know this: If Americans can’t have liberty, we can’t have America either — at least not one that is distinguishable from China. The time has come to make a choice.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Media Analyst Says Joe Biden Is Governing Like A Dictator By His Own Definition

By Mike LaChance
Published February 2, 2021 at 12:37am

Joe Biden has been president for barely two weeks and has already signed over 40 executive orders.

Back in October, he said that he couldn’t govern that way because doing that would make someone a dictator.

Now he is fine with it.

Media analyst Joe Concha just called Biden out for this.

He writes at The Hill:
By his own definition, Biden is already governing like a dictator
“I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus.”
Those are the words of Joe Biden. And, no, this isn’t a matter of unearthing a clip from the 1980s or ’90s in an attempt to play a game of gotcha on some antiquated flip-flop. That’s Democratic nominee Biden, less than three weeks before the 2020 presidential election, talking to ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos about the dangers of governing like a dictator.
In President Biden’s first week alone, he has signed 37 executive orders and actions as of Thursday. That’s 33 more than the guy he indirectly referred to as a dictator, in the form of predecessor Donald Trump. It’s 32 more than his old boss, Barack Obama, and 37 more than George W. Bush, who signed zero in his first week as president.
“With unity we can go do great things, important things,” Biden said during his inaugural address. “Unity is the path forward. We must meet this moment as the United States of America. We’ve never failed in America when we’ve acted together.”
See the October video below:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1354035368211984390
.29 min

This is just one example of many showing that the Democrats are pretty much everything they falsely accused Trump of being for four years.
And they think no one sees it.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Dictator Biden Signs Three Executive Orders Aimed at ‘Reforming US Immigration System’ – Refuses to Answer Questions From Reporters (VIDEO)

By Cristina Laila
Published February 2, 2021 at 5:41pm

Dictator Biden read from note cards and defended signing a record number of executive orders on Tuesday.

“There’s a lot of talk, with good reason, about the number of executive orders that I have signed. I’m not making new law. I’m eliminating bad policy,” Biden said prior to signing three more executive orders on Tuesday.

Biden has signed more than 40 executive orders and he has only been in office for 13 days.

The first executive order Biden signed today creates a task force to reunite families separated at the US-Mexico border.

The second executive order will “address the root causes of migration” – in other words another agency full of overpaid bureaucrats will provide more pathways for migrants looking for asylum status to get freebies in the US.

The third executive order promotes “immigrant integration and inclusion” and will create a task force on “new Americans.”

WATCH:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1356742281768939524
1:37 min

Joe Biden refused to answer questions from reporters after he signed the executive orders.

Biden’s handlers shooed away reporters as they shouted questions.

WATCH:
View: https://youtu.be/cHM5HYBeK-c
5:11 min
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

This is Odd: Joe Biden’s Signature on Latest Official Documents Is Raising Eyebrows

By Jim Hoft
Published February 2, 2021 at 10:33am

It’s common knowledge for anyone paying attention this past year that Joe Biden is suffering from mid-to-late stage dementia.

This explains why Democrats hid Joe in the basement all year while they schemed on ways to manufacture votes. It is also common knowledge that Jill Biden, his wife of over 40 years of marriage, is his constant companion and personal aide to help Joe out during times of confusion. This is typical with those spouses who are married to dementia patients.

But is Jill Biden more than her husband’s handler?

A Missouri pharmacist sent us this keen observation.
I am a pharmacist in Missouri. I read a few days ago that none of Biden’s Executive Orders have been posted to the Federal Register, so I looked, then, a few days ago. Those Executive Orders are showing up.
However, I believe I have accidentally discovered his signature may be a forgery. I just sat on this discovery, thinking someone else more important would notice it. I guess no one has yet.
Part of my job as a pharmacist is to watch for forged doctor signatures and I am pretty sure Joe’s are forged. I suspect that he is embarrassed by his shaky signature and had his wife sign for his signature stamp used for official business. As you can see on the attachment the last three signatures are identical, indicative of a stamp, and that’s fine as long as it is his signature. Maybe that’s easier to submit to the Federal Register. Otherwise, I believe it is illegal to have someone else sign for a signature stamp that binds a legal document. I have seen the signature of doctors get shaky at the end of their careers, but never change in a single year as Joe’s purportedly has done.
If you have contact with a handwriting expert, perhaps you can have that person take a look. But look at the attachment I created, all from the public domain. Clearly, Joe has an established signature, but the last three signatures I have on the document are from separate Executive Orders that can be found online at the Federal Register.
Clearly, in my opinion, they are not his signature. They look more like the signature of his wife, Jill, also on the attachment. Focus on the “B” in Biden. Perhaps an expert can offer a more definitive opinion.
Here is Joe Biden’s signature last year.



Here are more signatures by Joe Biden and Jill Biden.



And here are Joe Biden’s signatures from the last week.
Notice the “B” in the signature.
Is this Joe’s signature?


We are contacting the White House for comment.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

‘The schools are brainwashing your kids on Black Lies Matter’…

Posted by Kane on February 2, 2021 2:42 pm

View: https://youtu.be/Hse2WGJNRYs
4:34 min

Jason Rantz an hour ago on Fox News

Seattle Public Schools will spend this entire week promoting Black Lies Matter lessons to students. Teachers are encouraged to offer their opinions.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

How George Washington Responded To "Insurrectionists"

MONDAY, FEB 01, 2021 - 23:20
Authored by TJ Martinell via Tenth Amendment Center,

The recent protests and storming of the US Capitol building on Jan. 6 produced a hysterical reaction from both pundits and the federal government. This contrasts wildly with the response to an actual rebellion during the Republic’s early days.

The new federal government didn’t respond to the so-called Whiskey Rebellion with crackdowns on civil liberties to "prevent another rebellion" as many seem to want to do today. In 1794 Kentucky and Pennsylvania farmers took up arms in opposition to a federal whiskey excise tax. The Whiskey Rebellion concluded with President George Washington calling up the militia to suppress the rebels, who dispersed before any real fighting occurred.

Interpretations of the rebellion vary. Some view Washington’s decision as a vital move to preserve the then-fledgling federal government’s legitimacy after Shay’s Rebellion eight years prior had prompted the founders to replace the Articles of Confederation in favor of a stronger central government. However, others consider the rebels as patriots resisting an unjust tax on whiskey, which was frequently used as a means of exchange in frontier areas where coinage was scarce.

To be sure, Washington reacted initially in a manner utterly restrained compared to what we could expect today. Even after invoking the Militia Act of 1792 allowing him to call up state militiamen, he sent state officials to the rebels and tried to reach a peaceful resolution, without success.

However, a separate issue to look at is the aftermath of the rebellion. Roughly 150 men were arrested and tried for treason. Yet only two men were found guilty, and they were later pardoned by Washington himself.

In his seventh state of the union address Washington defended his decision:
For though I shall always think it a sacred duty to exercise with firmness and energy the constitutional powers with which I am vested, yet it appears to me no less consistent with the public good than it is with my personal feelings to mingle in the operations of Government every degree of moderation and tenderness which the national justice, dignity, and safety may permit.
As historian Carol Berkin noted in a 2017 lecture, "not a single person really ever served a jail term. Everybody was given amnesty. Nobody was cruelly beaten or destroyed. But the power, the authority of the federal government was upheld."

Perhaps Washington and other Founders holding office realized the appearance of hypocrisy for condemning men as traitors who acted as they had just a few decades earlier.
The Whiskey Rebellion occurred in western Pennsylvania in 1794. Via Shutterstock.
At the same time, it’s not so much what Washington and Congress did as what they didn’t do or even propose to do. Reading through diaries, letters, and correspondence from founders ranging from George Washington and Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Jefferson written during the rebellion, there is no instance I could find in which they advocated or suggested the civil rights restrictions such as firearms ownership or freedom of speech and assembly. There was no call for a permanent standing army. This is on top of the fact that nothing was actually proposed and then enacted.

In fact, Jefferson wrote sympathetically of the rebellion in a Dec. 28, 1794 letter to John Adams, calling the whiskey tax "an infernal one. The first error was to admit it by the Constitution."

He wrote further that hatred of the law in those states was "universal, and has now associated to it a detestation of the government; & that separation which perhaps was a very distant & problematical event, is now near, & certain, & determined in the mind of every man."

Not surprisingly, Jefferson would later repeal the excise tax when elected president.

Even federalists like Alexander Hamilton in ways sought to avoid violence that might have demonstrated the power of the new government, albeit he did advocate hanging some of the rebel leaders. In an Aug. 29, 1794 letter to Maryland Governor Thomas Lee, he wrote of avoiding "the necessity of using force now & at future periods" by keeping the militia deployed in good morale.

In all the correspondence Hamilton had with George Washington, not one advocated for the confiscation of firearms from the regions where the rebellion had occurred. Nor was there a call to restrict firearm ownership of any type among the general population to prevent similar rebellions in the future.

The federal government didn’t use the “crisis” as an excuse to enlarge itself, as some sought with the Alien and Sedition Act passed four years later
While Washington’s best opportunity to make himself a military dictator occurred just after the War of Independence ended with him still in charge of the continental army, the Whiskey Rebellion theoretically could have afforded him another chance – one that he likely never even contemplated.

The comparatively restrained response by Washington to the rebellion demonstrated that it is not necessary to take away liberties to maintain civil order or "keep us safe."

Writing in reaction to Shay’s Rebellion, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to James Madison saying rebellions were a "medicine necessary for the sound health of government" and that "honest republican governors" should be "so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much."

What many people fail to grasp is that rebellions and insurrections aren’t always found in physical confrontations
, and the "medicine necessary for the sound health of government" can be applied just as effectively through the nullification of unconstitutional federal acts. Incidentally, Jefferson referred to nullification as the "rightful remedy."

The histrionic and totalitarian rhetoric coming from the federal government today over a handful of people storming the US Capitol demonstrates how fragile its perceived legitimacy is today. It is a government that overreacts to minor incidents because deep down its members are terrified of any meaningful defiance or resistance to their rule.

They realize how easily D.C. tyranny could end if the American people were united in common opposition to unconstitutional actions in a manner that reduced their power, rather than give the largest government in the world the further pretext to expand it.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

McConnell Calls QAnon-Supporting Congresswoman "Cancer" On GOP, Says Cheney An "Important Leader"

MONDAY, FEB 01, 2021 - 20:40
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) drew a line in the sand on Monday between the GOP establishment (the big club you ain't in), and the populist QAnon movement - whose theories on elite pedophiles and a shadow government were deemed plausible by at least one-third of Americans in an October poll reported by Axios.

McConnell, who voted to go to war in Iraq based in part on a conspiracy theory and fabricated evidence misinformation from some guy, said on Monday - without actually saying her name - that freshman Georgia GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's embrace of "loony lies and conspiracy theories" is a "cancer for the Republican party."

"Somebody who’s suggested that perhaps no airplane hit the Pentagon on 9/11, that horrifying school shootings were pre-staged, and that the Clintons crashed JFK Jr.’s airplane is not living in reality," McConnell said in the "three-sentence statement" reported by The Hill.

Greene has come under fire in recent weeks for her past support of QAnon - a political sin which Democrats such as Scott Dworkin - a veteran of both Obama campaigns and a Biden super PAC senior adviser - are using to call for Greene's expulsion from Congress.

1612322307685.png
View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1355932155885592576
.39 min

Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats are also ganging up to oust Greene from her Committees.
Democrats are threatening to force a floor vote this week to oust the controversial Georgia Republican from the Education and Labor Committee and the Budget Committee if House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) does not remove her first.
McCarthy is set to meet with her in Washington as early as Tuesday. Some Republicans said they did not anticipate McCarthy booting her off the committees given that she has the backing of former President Trump, who still holds enormous sway within the GOP. -The Hill
And McConnell, who's apparently fine agitating millions of QAnon-believing Republican voters, thinks she's a cancer.

1612322423525.png

Greene responded to McConnell's comments in a Monday tweet, saying "The real cancer for the Republican Party is weak Republicans who only know how to lose gracefully," adding "This is why we are losing our country."

1612322483472.png

For which a Democrat compared her physical appearance to Miss Piggy. (Do as we say...)

1612322532441.png
And while McConnell spent Monday bashing one Republican lawmaker, he also gave GOP Rep. Liz Cheney a boost, telling CNN in a statement that she had "the courage" to vote to impeach former President Trump last month.

"Liz Cheney is a leader with deep convictions and the courage to act on them," he said, adding "She is an important leader in our party and in our nation. I am grateful for her service and look forward to continuing to work with her on the crucial issues facing our nation."

Another GOP lawmaker anonymously told The Hill of Greene: "It remains to be seen how big of an issue she is long-term. She's had a noisy entrance, but it's unclear what she will be viewed as and whether she will even be known in the public psyche in November 2022. She's had a tough transition to Congress. I'm not sure we need to go to the wall on this right now."

1612322625197.png

Greene said on Saturday that she had spoken with former President Trump, who is "100% loyal to the people and America first." She added that she won't back down or apologize, and will "always keep fighting for the people."

1612322667736.png1612322707744.png
1612322743044.png1612322780988.png
 
Last edited:

marsh

TB Fanatic

Fact Check: Democrats Launch Ads Falsely Accusing Republicans of Backing QAnon
30
WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 17: House Homeland Security Committee member Rep. Mike Garcia (D-CA) listens to testimony from FBI Director Christopher Wray during a hearing on 'worldwide threats to the homeland' in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill September 17, 2020 in Washington, DC. Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson …
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
SEAN MORAN2 Feb 202167

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) falsely attacked several House Republicans in a series of ads launched Tuesday, claiming that the House GOP members backed the QAnon conspiracy theory.

The DCCC, the campaign arm of the House Democrats, launched a half-million-dollar television and digital ad campaign accusing Republicans of “standing with Q and now with you.” This is the DCCC’s first ad buy of the 2022 congressional midterm cycle.

The ad buys feature footage of the January 6 D.C. riots.

The ads target Reps. Mike Garcia (R-CA), Young Kim (R-CA), Michelle Steel (R-CA), Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Don Bacon (R-NE), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Beth Van Duyne (R-TX), and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

This ad attacks Garcia:

View: https://youtu.be/RjjbkF7F9vM
.30 min

The ad claims the members’ two votes against former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment amounts to support for QAnon.

However, Garcia, Bacon Fitzpatrick, and McCarthy all voted last October to condemn QAnon.

Kim, Steel, Salazar, and Van Duyne were elected last November, so they did not have the opportunity to vote to condemn QAnon when the October vote arose.

The ads also call the members cowards for voting to “protect” Trump, even though Garcia is a decorated United States naval officer, Bacon served in the Air Force for nearly 30 years and retired as a brigadier general, and Fitzpatrick supported counterterrorism efforts and embedded with the U.S. Special Forces as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) spokesman Mike Berg told Breitbart News in a statement Tuesday the DCCC continues to spend money on “ineffective” ads while lying about Republicans and their military service.

“These ads will be as ineffective as the $345 million the DCCC lit on fire the last cycle,” Berg said. “But it’s still important to note that the DCCC is blatantly lying about members who have condemned QAnon, and that they are smearing multiple veterans to score political points.”
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Biden: America Has ‘Never Fully’ Lived Up to Its ‘Founding Principles’
5,717
President Joe Biden pauses as he speaks about the coronavirus, accompanied by Vice President Kamala Harris, in the State Dinning Room of the White House, Thursday, Jan. 21, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
AP Photo/Alex Brandon
JOEL B. POLLAK2 Feb 20214,794

President Joe Biden claimed Monday that the United States has “never” lived up to its founding principles.

“We’ve never fully lived up to the founding principles of this nation, but our Administration is committed to finishing the work left undone. It’s long past time to confront deep racial inequities and systemic racism and fulfill the promise of America for all,” Biden tweeted.

1612323358506.png

Last week, Biden made a nearly identical claim, during the signing of executive orders on racial equality: “We have never fully lived up to the founding principles of this nation, to state the obvious, that all people are created equal and have a right to be treated equally throughout their lives,” he said.

Biden had made the claim before, notably during the 2020 presidential campaign, when he used it as a line in his stump speech. His point appeared to be that the United States had embraced principles of equality in the Declaration of Independence, but that American society remained unequal, even after the achievements of the civil rights movement.

That refrain led to one of Biden’s most infamous flubs: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, all men and women are created by, go, you know, you know the thing!”

More ominously, Biden told an interviewer in October: “America was an idea.” He later tweeted:

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1319090595814670336
.26 min

Biden linked his latest criticism of the United States to his celebration of Black History Month.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

WATCH: CNN legal analyst doesn't understand the first amendment

Exceptions are made under some circumstances such as perjury, false statements to the government, and defamation, but lying is otherwise protected under the first amendment.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1356664695986421760
1:21 min

Trump claimed in his brief, which was 14 pages, that the impeachment proceeding is unconstitutional as Trump is no longer President and has returned to private life. He also argued that his speech given prior to the riot at Capitol Hill was covered by the first amendment, and that he could not be held accountable for his supporters storming Capitol Hill afterwards.

"Ya, those are wrong, and they're well-countered by the very long brief the House filed earlier today," said Jen Rodgers, a lecturer at Columbia University's law school. "I mean, you don't have a first amendment right to lie, you don't have a first amendment right to put people in danger, and he did both of those things."

It is unclear what Rodgers was referring to when she said that Trump was lying, but lying is, in fact, mostly covered by the first amendment. Exceptions are made under some circumstances such as perjury, false statements to the government, and defamation, but lying is otherwise protected under the first amendment.

Trump's insistence that impeachment of a former President is unconstitutional, however, may be legally dubious. A post-Civil War era Secretary of War, William Worth Belknap, was impeached, but not convicted, after exiting office in 1876.

The Senate hearing on Trump's impeachment is set to begin on Feb 9.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Who Are the True 'Domestic Terrorists'?
Pat Buchanan
Pat Buchanan

|Posted: Feb 02, 2021 12:01 AM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Who Are the True 'Domestic Terrorists'?

Source: AP Photo/Nick Wass, File

"Never allow a good crisis (to) go to waste. It's an opportunity to do the things you once thought were impossible."


Thus did chief of staff Rahm Emanuel advise Barack Obama on the financial crisis he inherited in 2009.

Following the Capitol riot by a mob of pro-Donald Trump protesters, the left took Rahm's counsel, seizing upon and exploiting the episode ever since to paint the right as America's safe harbor for "domestic terrorism."

According to leftist columnists and commentators, going back to the '60s, the real threat of domestic terrorism has always come from the right.

That is not, however, how some of us remember those days.

The most destructive acts of violence in the '60s were the urban race riots that began in Harlem in July 1964, when 15-year-old black youth James Powell was shot by a police lieutenant.

In 1965, Watts blew up, followed by Newark and Detroit in 1967.

In 1968, 100 U.S. cities exploded in racial violence after Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated in Memphis on April 4.

Anti-war riots followed the urban riots, beginning with an attack on the Pentagon in October 1967 and the occupation of Columbia University in 1968. That August, leftists ignited a riot at the Democratic Convention that nominated Hubert Humphrey in Chicago.

After President Richard Nixon took office in 1969, a mass anti-war protest in Washington, D.C., spun off a mob that trashed the Department of Justice. A riot at Kent State in May 1970 precipitated the killing of four students by the Ohio National Guard, and follow-on riots on scores of campuses that shut down higher education for the rest of that spring semester.

That same year, terrorists in a Greenwich Village townhouse blew themselves up with a 2,000-pound bomb they were making to massacre noncommissioned officers and their wives and girlfriends at a dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey. This was followed two months later by an explosion that blew up the mathematics building at the University of Wisconsin, killing a father of three.

As Nixon speechwriter Ray Price recorded in his memoir, between Jan. 1, 1969, and April 15, 1970, "More than 40,000 bombings, attempted bombings and bomb threats, were recorded in the United States.

"In the 1969-1970 school year there were 1782 demonstrations, 7561 arrests, 8 people killed, and 462 injured, (299 of those injured were police). There were 247 cases of campus arson and 282 attacks on ROTC facilities."

The criminals responsible for this carnage were leftists.

What about 2020, the year of mass protests that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May.

According to the London Daily Mail, with the riots, arson and looting that began in Minneapolis spreading to Portland, Seattle and 140 other cities, the National Guard was called out in 21 states, six people died, scores of police were injured and between $1 billion and $2 billion in property was damaged or destroyed.

According to insurance company figures, it was the costliest urban violence since the LA riot of 1992, when a Simi Valley jury acquitted the four cops involved in the beating of Rodney King.

Other forms of "domestic terrorism" are far more common but all too frequently ignored because we Americans have come to take them for granted.

As Heather Mac Donald wrote in The Wall Street Journal just days ago:

"The year 2020 likely saw the largest percentage increase in homicides in American history. Murder was up nearly 37% in a sample of 57 large and medium-sized cities. Based on preliminary estimates, at least 2,000 more Americans, most of them black, were killed in 2020 than in 2019.

"Dozens of children, overwhelmingly black, were killed in drive-by shootings. They were slain in their beds, living rooms and strollers. They were struck down at barbecues, in their yards, in malls, in their parents' cars, and at birthday parties. Fifty-five children were killed in Chicago in 2020, 17 in St. Louis, and 11 in Philadelphia."

While the riot was taking place at the Capitol, where a cop and four protesters lost their lives, less-noted lethal events were happening all over America in the first days of the new year. Writes Mac Donald:

"The anarchy of 2020 has continued into 2021. Shootings in South Los Angeles rose 742 percent in the first two weeks of the year. In Oakland, homicides were up 500% and shootings up 126 percent through Jan. 17. In New York, murders were up 42 percent and shooting victims up 15% through Jan. 17."

The truth: The vast majority of criminals who rob, rape, shoot and kill Americans in the tens of thousands each year, and the people who did almost all of the rioting, looting, arson and assaults on cops in 2020, never wore MAGA hats.

Pas d'ennemis a gauche. No enemies on the left. The enemy is always to be found on the right. And because reality contradicts this central tenet of liberal ideology, it cannot ever be conceded.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

The Government Is Treading On You

The Unthinkable Has Happened: The Government Is Treading on You and Every Other American

A rallying cry of conservatives and libertarians for many years has been “Don’t Tread on Me.” Immortalized by the Gadsden flag, a flag present at many Trump and Tea Party rallies, the saying is similar to Texas’s “Come and Take It” or the Spartans’ “Molon Labe (Come and Take Them). It is an expression of defiance against a tyrannical government. The Texans wouldn’t surrender to Santa Anna and his gang of thuggish soldiers, the Spartans wouldn’t surrender to Xerxes and his Immortals at Thermopylae, and we wouldn’t surrender to the tyrannical diktats of the socialist and tyrannical Obama Administration. Well, it was all for naught. The government is treading on you and few people seem to care.

Since Covid started, we’ve seen an explosion of tyranny in America, all under the guise of combating a disease little worse than the common flu for most people.

Fauci, the partisan hack in charge of combating the Chinese flu, lied and forced us to wear masks. Governors implemented tyrannical lockdown orders that forced Americans to stay in the home as their small businesses withered and corporatist Big Businesses prospered. Petty tyrants in local communities implemented ridiculous policies, most of which those hypocritical authoritarians refused to abide by themselves. The whole time, the media spewed lies and catch-phrases meant to control you.

And few people seem to care. It’s as if Americans can’t recognize tyranny, especially the sort of nanny-state tyranny that CS Lewis warned about, anymore. While there were, at first, anti-lockdown protests, those were quickly shut down and patriots gave up. People refused for their right to wear and do what they want. That is as sad as it is scary. Chances are, the government is treading on you and you haven’t done anything to fight back.

We need to wake up to the threat posed by the Covid tyrants. This isn’t about some disease from China. This is about freedom itself.

1612328904874.png

These Covid Tyrants are Treading on You

Read How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps. Read Fools, Frauds, and Firebrands. Read anything and everything you can about what the left wants. Listen to Charlie Kirk. Listen to Michael Knowles. Watch Tucker Carlson. Read, listen, or watch closely and find out for yourself what the left is up to.

Here’s a clue: it wants to control you. That’s what the left is always after. Not improving the life of the average person. Not making life easier. Not “economic justice,” whatever that means. No, the left has an anti-freedom agenda that it wants to implement and Covid was the best opportunity to do so.

Thanks to Covid, it’s now “anti-science” to cry foul when it becomes apparent that the government is treading on you. Don’t like wearing some dirty, ineffective mask that the government wants you to? That means you want to kill grandma.

Want to reopen your struggling small business now that Democrats are rioting or cheering in the streets? Why do you hate science? Think you should be free, as an American in control of his or her mental faculties, to do what you want when you want? You’re “literally Hitler.”

It’s absurd. They’re accusing us of doing the very things that they themselves are doing. But to them that doesn’t matter. They don’t care about being called hypocrites or enacting ridiculous policies. They don’t care who they hurt or what damage their policies do. None of that matters in the slightest to them.

No, all they want, all that they’re working toward, is using whatever little things that come up as a way to use the socialist Gestapo to gradually eliminate freedom.

Every mass shooting is an opportunity to them because it means a chance to push for gun control. Things like the Capitol Riot are viewed by them the same way as Hitler viewed the Reichstag Fire– as a way to implement a tyrannical agenda. Social media censorship isn’t a problem to them as a way to silence the opposition. Every little thing is about control and getting rid of liberty and individual rights, both of which they hate.

And now that the left is in control of the government once again, the government is treading on you and our only line of defense is the judiciary.

We need to start fighting back. We need to fight against the tyrannical Covid policies, against gun control, against censorship, against everything. Otherwise, liberty might be gone forever. When the government fears you, liberty exists. If you fear the government, tyranny exists. The government is treading on you. But, if you start (peacefully, of course) fighting back now the boot won’t remain on your neck forever.

By: Gen Z Conservative
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

How Should We Treat the Elites Who Clearly Hate Us?
iStockphoto
By JOHN ZMIRAK Published on February 2, 2021 • 35 Comments

John Zmirak
Half the people in America know that the other half pretty much hates them. This half (the upper half, with control of most of the wealth and virtually all the power) considers their neighbors who own guns, go to church, and voted for Donald Trump … hateful and dangerous. Atavistic and violent. Irrational and RACIST. (Even if they’re not white.) That’s the favorite hate-term, the trump card, the smear that’s meant to silence each critic.

Anti-racism (defined in a Marxist way almost unrelated to genuine prejudice, injustice or even race) has now replaced a vague Christianity as our nation’s civic religion. As we watch the Biden regime consolidate power, the Woke cult assumes the status of state religion, and not a tolerant one. The heresy trials started decades ago on college campuses. Then they spread to our media. And corporate board-rooms. The purge proved complete, so now the witch hunt will extend to the general population. It’s coming soon to an HR department near you.

The most obvious, powerful instance? Fake racism charges (along with COVID panic) served the Democrats beautifully in dismantling election security. As you read these words, Congress is bruiting a new law, HR 1, that will enshrine 2020-style ballot box stuffing in all federal elections, forever. If passed, that bill will mean the end of fair, free, honest votes in our lifetimes.

Building the Berlin Wall Around Us
So one-party rule would slide seamlessly into place. The Hive would mortar it in, alongside one-viewpoint news media. And heavily censored social media. And intolerant Woke education. And a corrupt, politicized secret police in the form of the FBI. The left has already cemented politicized hiring and HR policies all through the economy. But institutionalized ballot fraud, using Venezuelan methods to get Venezuelan results? That might prove the last, decisive brick in the Berlin Wall our enemies are building all around us.

Please, for the love of God, crush the temptation to flee the bullies’ blast range. Step forward and fight instead.

Too many of the “conservatives” we worked and donated to put into office refuse to oppose this. (Think of the election officials and state legislatures in Red states that caved in 2020.) The moment someone like Stacey Abrams or Ilhan Omar whips out the race card, timid, gaslit Republicans scurry back in their burrows.

Are they even curious as to whether they’ll be able to win re-election in future, rigged elections?

They don’t seem to care. They’ll do, literally anything, rather than face the inquisitors. Those people’s campaigns of vilification can leave ambitious Americans radioactive and unemployable. Or at least get them shunned at the country club, and scorned at their college reunions.

With leaders like these, no wonder we feel like the French in June of 1940.

We’ve Been Stripped of Our National Story
What explains this comprehensive surrender, even the rush on the part of some to collaborate? Without vision, the people perish. We’ve seen the traditional vision of what made America distinctive, great, and worth treasuring among nations, savaged and ridiculed. Our statues came down at the hands of Woke mobs while police stood by and did nothing. Our worldview now gets demonized as terrorist-adjacent “Christian Nationalism.”

How do we respond, then? We must clean off the distortions, and make the traditional American narrative clear and attractive again. Then draw people to defend it against the escalating aggressions and intolerance of the Left. We must give courage to the fainthearted, buck up the weary, and convert the young, while there is still time.

Please Support The Stream: Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day.

That’s why I embrace the term Christian Nationalist, rightly defined. (In fact, that’s the subject of my next book.) The term is a concise and clear description of our country’s public philosophy since its founding. That’s right, from George Washington up through Ronald Reagan, including Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Then came the explosion of corrosive Marxist cynicism in the late 1960s.

What the left means for evil, I believe God meant for good. Let’s claim Christian Nationalism and own it, and demand of our critics what system they prefer instead: Pagan Tribalism? Pantheist Imperialism? Utilitarian Hedonism? Or just Darwinian Nihilism, with a thin Woke, fake-Christian veneer?

Run Toward the Fire, Not Away From It
Like you (I bet), I’m often tempted to flinch, dodge, or hide from the struggle. That’s why I strive each day to do the very opposite. As Aristotle pointed out, if you’re in a vicious habit (or subject to fierce temptation) you’re like a stick bent too far one way. You need to apply extra force in the opposing direction just to get it straight.

Our goal, of course, is always the Golden Mean — the proper balance between opposing extremes, such as Wrath and Servility, Sloth and Fanaticism, and so on.

In this case, we want a colorblind legal system that serves no shade of tribalism.

And we reject absolutely un-American, atheist ideologies with long track records of genocide and tyranny.

Let’s say you see the powerful ganging up on the weak wielding some ideological stick. Don’t throw the victims under the bus or distance yourself from them. Instead, pick that hill to fight on.

Let’s say you see the powerful ganging up on the weak wielding some ideological stick. Don’t throw the victims under the bus or distance yourself from them. Instead, pick that hill to fight on. If “racism” is the charge being wielded promiscuously, demand the strictest scrutiny of such a serious charge. You’ll find that most of the time it’s entirely false or grossly distorted. Of course, should a case emerge where the charge is true, don’t defend the guilty. But fight the left’s efforts to use guilt by association, whip up a moral panic, or grab unjustified power using that pretext. And remember names like Nick Sandmann, Jussie Smollett, and Tawana Brawley.

Bullies Are Cowards, So Put a Good Scare Into Them
I’ve always hated bullies. I used to get beat up quite often as a kid for intervening when they abused other kids. That’s the reason I was one of the first writers to publicly defend Nick Sandmann, Kyle Rittenhouse, Mark Judge, and Mark and Patricia McCloskey. In grad school, I stood with Operation Rescue during its 1994 sit-ins in Baton Rouge. Supporting the abortionists were some half the English department faculty, including deans who could stymie my degree. One prof actually wielded a video camera, and slowly recorded our faces. I stopped him and made sure he knew how to spell my name correctly. The look on his face was … priceless. His colleagues steered well clear of me, until I collected my Ph.D. with honors, two years later.

When I see a crowd running in one direction, my instinct is to shove back in the other. The very fact that a mob is forming around someone is usually a sign that a witch hunt is under way.

I urge each one of you to adopt this anti-bullying principle in your everyday life and conduct. If you see a Kyle Rittenhouse, Jake Gardner — or lately, Josh Hawley, Sidney Powell, or Donald Trump — getting hauled up on dubious charges, or smeared by dishonest critics with blatant double standards?

Please, for the love of God, crush the temptation to flee the bullies’ blast range. Step forward and fight instead. It’s not just the right but the smart thing to do.

We face a rich, arrogant, entitled and intolerant bullying class in this country that will end by oppressing all of us. That is, unless their efforts get smacked down every time. Remember that bullies are cowards, and the only way to stop them is to refuse to pay their blackmail. And answer their phony moralism with the mockery these priests of Baal deserve.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

With Zero Moral Authority Left, The Globalist American Empire is Doomed to Fail at Home and Abroad
February 2, 2021 (14h ago)



The de-platforming of President of the United States from its digital communications infrastructure marked a dark inflection point in our nation’s history.

Indeed, the rulers of the corrupt Globalist American Empire (GAE) have consolidated power to such a degree that they have little need left for even the pretense that the United States is a free country. That America’s corrupt ruling class are not even bothering to pretend like America is a free society anymore not only has dramatic consequences domestically, it has equally important implications globally. Accordingly, foreign governments have taken notice of the American ruling class’ dramatic arrogation of power in the wake of the events of January 6th.

The Polish prime minister came out with a forceful condemnation of the American censorship regime, coupled with support of a law that would make it illegal for social media companies to censor unlawful speech:

Polish government officials have denounced the deactivation of Donald Trump’s social media accounts, and said a draft law being readied in Poland will make it illegal for tech companies to take similar actions there.

“Algorithms or the owners of corporate giants should not decide which views are right and which are not,” wrote the prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, on Facebook earlier this week, without directly mentioning Trump. “There can be no consent to censorship.”

Morawiecki indirectly compared social media companies taking decisions to remove accounts with Poland’s experience during the communist era.

“Censorship of free speech, which is the domain of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, is now returning in the form of a new, commercial mechanism to combat those who think differently,” he wrote. [The Guardian]
The President of Mexico issued a similarly strong statement condemning the American censorship regime:

“I don’t like anybody being censored or taking away from the the right to post a message on Twitter or Face(book). I don’t agree with that, I don’t accept that,” López Obrador said.

“How can you censor someone: ‘Let’s see, I, as the judge of the Holy Inquisition, will punish you because I think what you’re saying is harmful,’” López Obrador said in an extensive, unprompted discourse on the subject. “Where is the law, where is the regulation, what are the norms? This is an issue of government, this is not an issue for private companies.” [US News]
Even leaders who sparred with Trump have had a frigid reaction to the Big Tech-led purge of Donald Trump from American public life. Germany chancellor Angela Merkel’s difficulties with Trump created at least one viral photo, and her country is hardly a beacon of free speech compared to how America was just a few short years ago. But Merkel can clearly see the authoritarian blueprint that is being rolled out in the United States, and how quickly it can be taken worldwide.

So when the news broke of Trump’s Twitter ban, Merkel loudly objected.

“The chancellor sees the complete closing down of the account of an elected president as problematic,” Steffen Seibert, her chief spokesman, said at a regular news conference in Berlin. Rights like the freedom of speech “can be interfered with, but by law and within the framework defined by the legislature — not according to a corporate decision.”

The German leader’s stance is echoed by the French government. Junior Minister for European Union Affairs Clement Beaune said he was “shocked” to see a private company make such an important decision. “This should be decided by citizens, not by a CEO,” he told Bloomberg TV on Monday. “There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire earlier said that the state should be responsible for regulations, rather than “the digital oligarchy,” and called big tech “one of the threats” to democracy. [Bloomberg]
This wasn’t the first time America’s brand of exerting control bothered Merkel, who grew up in East Germany. As Glenn Greenwald recently noted, Merkel was also furious when Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing led to the revelation the NSA was spying on her phone calls:

1612330723357.png

Many more foreign leaders have followed-suit in condemnation of the American censorship regime, including leaders from Brazil, Finland, Russia, China, New Zealand, Australia, India, and more. Revolver published a comprehensive, up-to-date list here.

What are we to make of this? At first, this might seem like the height of hypocrisy, especially given some of the nations involved. The German Chancellor Merkel is after all hardly in a position to lecture anyone on free speech matters, given that speech that offends the government is actually illegal in Germany.

Perhaps the issue then isn’t censorship, but rather who is doing the censorship.

Several of the foreign leaders complained specifically that it was private Silicon Valley tech companies, rather than the state itself doing the censorship.
Recall the German statement:

Rights like the freedom of speech “can be interfered with, but by law and within the framework defined by the legislature — not according to a corporate decision.

and France’s similar statement
“There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.” Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire earlier said that the state should be responsible for regulations, rather than “the digital oligarchy,” and called big tech “one of the threats” to democracy
And so, on the one hand many international leaders seem to take issue with the fact that the deplatforming is being done by technically private companies rather than the government itself. The reality though is that, contrary to popular belief, Silicon Valley’s power does not represent some new and unprecedented threat to the power of the American state. Quite the contrary, Big Tech is essentially intertwined with and operates as an extension of the American state. The Atlantic put it best in a piece it ran on the loss of internet freedoms in America:

But the “extraordinary” measures we are seeing are not all that extraordinary. Powerful forces were pushing toward greater censorship and surveillance of digital networks long before the coronavirus jumped out of the wet markets in Wuhan, China, and they will continue to do so once the crisis passes. The practices that American tech platforms have undertaken during the pandemic represent not a break from prior developments, but an acceleration of them.

As surprising as it may sound, digital surveillance and speech control in the United States already show many similarities to what one finds in authoritarian states such as China. Constitutional and cultural differences mean that the private sector, rather than the federal and state governments, currently takes the lead in these practices, which further values and address threats different from those in China. But the trend toward greater surveillance and speech control here, and toward the growing involvement of government, is undeniable and likely inexorable. [The Atlantic]
Many American conservative commentators have incorrectly interpreted Big Tech’s exercise of power as an unhealthy usurpation of corporate power over the power of the state. Accordingly, some have called for the government to “reign in” the power of Big Tech. While there is some validity to it, this perspective largely makes the same mistake as the libertarian who assumes a sharp distinction between state power and private corporate power, defending the latter while working to limit the former. The truth of the matter is that at the highest levels, the state and the private sector are intimately intertwined and this is especially so when it comes to the Big Tech companies.

The de-platforming of the President of the United States doesn’t so much mark the triumph of private corporate power over state power, as it does a triumph of the America’s globalist ruling class over its subjects. Similarly, from an international point of view, foreign governments are less concerned with the formality that the American ruling class happens to outsource its censorship to the private sector, than they are with the overall arrogation of power by the American regime and what that might portend for their own sovereignty.

Indeed, sovereignty is the key here to understanding the international response to America’s now overt censorship regime. Germany and other foreign nations could care less about a principled protection of free speech. What they do care about, however, is the American state, acting through their Silicon Valley proxies, having the ability to de-platform foreign leaders to advance its own power and geopolitical objectives.

While Germany and most of Continental Europe has functioned more or less as a vassal state under the thumb of American influence, Germany in particular has started squirming, as it were, indicating its intention to carve out more genuine sovereignty for itself in the 21st Century. One concrete flashpoint for this development is the controversy over the Nordstream 2 energy pipeline. Germany and Russia are working on a pipeline that, if completed, would reduce the leverage of the United States to dictate its terms to Europe. The entire constellation of “color revolution” institutions of the American national security state, from the State Department, to the Atlantic Council, to NATO, to its propaganda arm the National Endowment for Democracy have been barking about this non-stop:

1612330804077.png
1612330846368.png

Part 1 of 2
 
Last edited:

marsh

TB Fanatic
Part 2 of 2

If the American ruling class is able to deplatform a sitting president of the United States in order to consolidate power, what is to prevent it from using its leverage over Silicon Valley to deplatform foreign leaders who don’t bend the knee on a wide range of issues? If Germany refuses to bend the knee to the American state, perhaps it would face a systematic deplatforming of its leaders in addition to financial sanctions imposed by the American regime in an effort to punish those involved in the production of the pipeline.

Another example European nations squirming for increased independence of action with respect to the United States is the recent economic agreement with China.

BRUSSELS — The European Union embarked on a trade deal with China believing that engagement with Beijing was the best way to alter its behavior and make it a committed stakeholder in the international system. But that was seven years ago.

The timing — with a newly aggressive China seen as a rival to the United States and just weeks before Joseph R. Biden Jr. becomes president — has opened the European Union to questions and criticism, from analysts and particularly American officials, that perhaps the deal was a diplomatic and political error.

It was concluded in the midst of China’s crackdown on Hong Kong. and Xinjiang and accepts vague Chinese promises to stop the use of forced labor. It creates doubts about Europe’s willingness to heed Mr. Biden’s call to work with him on a joint strategy toward Beijing. And it has handed an important victory to China, where the deal was hailed as a great success for President Xi Jinping before the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party and confirmation of its power in the new world.

“For the trans-Atlantic relationship, it’s a slap in the face,” said Philippe Le Corre, a China scholar affiliated with Harvard’s Kennedy School and the Carnegie Endowment — especially after the Europeans in mid-November called on the incoming Biden administration to work with Europe on a joint approach to China.
“It’s damaged the trans-Atlantic relationship already,” Mr. Le Corre said, before Mr. Biden even takes office and whether or not it is ultimately ratified by the European Parliament.

But Thomas Wright of the Brookings Institution said that damage had been done by European officials’ describing the deal as part of their pursuit of “strategic autonomy,” a policy pushed by President Emmanuel Macron of France that annoys many American policymakers. [New York Times]
Put simply, European leaders (and others) interpreted the ruling class of America’s willingness to take the dramatic step of de-platforming the sitting President of the USA from its own digital communications infrastructure as a threat to their own ability to pursue “strategic autonomy” from the US Regime, whether it be on energy policy with Russia or economic policy with China. This is the appropriate framework in which to understand the international condemnation of the US Regime’s censorship crackdown on President Trump (and its own citizens).

American patriots reading this might think that while it was wrong for the corrupt ruling class of the United States to deplatform the President and censor its citizens, it might actually make sense to deplatform foreign leaders or at least use that as leverage in order to advance the geopolitical goals of the American state. Others might question a conception of patriotism that roots for the very same corrupt globalist American regime whose CIA, FBI, DOJ targeted democratically elected Trump from day one, and whose security state has effectively declared 70+ million Trump supporters as de-facto or potential “domestic terrorists.”

In any case, the United States is simply not in a position to use Silicon Valley to bully the rest of the world into submission in the same way it bullies its own citizens. The international condemnation of the American regime’s censorship of its citizens and deplatforming of the President is not a signal that, for instance, Europe is more willing to submit to the imperious demands of the American state. Quite the contrary, Silicon Valley’s arrogation of power on behalf of the American state is likely to reinforce Europe commitment to “strategic autonomy” in relation to the United States.

One can see a similar dynamic at work with the United States’ leveraging of the US dollar’s status as a reserve currency to advance its geopolitical objectives:

Ever since the dollar cemented its role as the world’s dominant currency in the 1950s, it has been clear that America’s position as the sole financial superpower gives it extraordinary influence over other countries’ economic destinies. But it is only under President Donald Trump that America has used its powers routinely and to their full extent, by engaging in financial warfare. The results have been awe-inspiring and shocking. They have in turn prompted other countries to seek to break free of American financial hegemony. [The Economist]
In other words, America’s supercharged censorship regime will only hurt its prestige and influence globally, by incentivizing existing trends toward increased autonomy and independence from American digital and financial infrastructure.
Twitter’s recent decisions to ban the accounts of the Chinese embassy and Iran’s Ayatollah Khameini is a fascinating development in its own right, but also a vindication of Germany and other foreign nations’ concerns about the de-platforming of then sitting President of the United States Donald Trump.

China’s Foreign Ministry said on Thursday that it was confused by the move and that it was the embassy’s responsibility to call out disinformation and clarify the truth.

The Chinese Embassy account, @ChineseEmbinUS, posted a tweet this month that said that Uighur women had been emancipated and were no longer “baby-making machines”, citing a study reported by state-backed newspaper China Daily.

The tweet was removed by Twitter and replaced by a label stating that it was no longer available. Although Twitter hides tweets that violate its policies, it requires account owners to manually delete such posts. The Chinese embassy’s account has not posted any new tweets since Jan. 9.

Twitter’s suspension of the embassy’s account came a day after the Trump administration, in its final hours, accused China of committing genocide in Xinjiang, a finding endorsed by the incoming Biden administration.

The Biden administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Twitter’s move.

Twitter is blocked in China but has been embraced by Chinese state media and diplomats, many of whom have taken to the platform to aggressively defend China’s positions in what has come to be known as “Wolf Warrior” diplomacy. [Reuters]
This move certainly is a point in favor of the view that, contrary to the “Beijing Biden” narrative embraced by many conservatives, Biden is more or less on board with the aggressive Neo-Cold War approach to China favored by the American national security complex. Furthermore, the China and Iran bans support the view that Big Tech operates more or less as an extension of the American national security state and exists to advance its objectives. Such a provocative and important claim deserve their own extensive treatment which would run outside the scope of this particular article.

It suffices for our purposes here to note that Twitter’s action against the Chinese and Iranian governments are instances of the American state using Silicon Valley to advance its geopolitical objectives. The deplatforming of America’s own sitting President by America’s ruling class was a particularly aggressive move that could signal that the American state would lean more on Silicon Valley deplatforming as an instrument of power domestically and geopolitically — hence the international backlash mentioned above.

America’s intensified censorship regime will end up damaging its global prestige and power in another, still more profound way. That is, it has substantially undermined if not entirely evaporated America’s “moral authority.” The significance of this cannot be overstated. By saying that America has relinquished its moral authority is not to say that America has always operated morally from an objective point of view. Rather, it means America has shed the ability to even selectively or cynically claim the moral high ground for geopolitical purposes.

The presumption of goodwill, which America routinely enjoyed during and after the Cold War as a champion of liberal democracy, has entirely evaporated.

We already see the effect of America’s newly upgraded censorship regime, coupled with its crackdown on pro-Trump demonstrators, on America’s ability to project propaganda in favor of Hong Kong’s protestors. After the crackdown, China’s state-run Global Times published a condemnation of American “digital hegemony” and called for tech companies to respect national sovereignty online. In other words, China signaled to the world that it supports letting governments handle their own populations, while America might use big tech to interfere at any time.

America’s crackdown also gave a greenlight for other regimes to behave in a similar manner. In Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni shut down the country’s social media before his election to a sixth consecutive term. Twitter tried to complain, but it only received mockery. The company’s credibility to advocate online “openness” is completely destroyed.

Most recently, we see this dynamic playing out in Washington’s bungled attempt to address the ascendancy of the military over US backed, so-called “democracy” forces in Myanmar

1612331059402.png
The more the American Regime clamps down on its citizens domestically, the less ability it has to weaponize its alleged “moral high-ground” to advance its interests abroad. While such a decline in “moral authority” would be a problem for any regime, it is uniquely and perhaps even existentially so for the United States. More than any other country in history, the United States leans on its alleged moral superiority as an instrument of power. Terms like “human rights,” “equality,” “fair elections,” and “freedom of speech” are not simply ideals to aspire to. They are weapons often cynically deployed against target regimes that have resources America want. A country like China is more transparently transactional in its dealings with other nations — they will promise infrastructure in exchange for being able to mine for precious minerals in the Congo, without pretending the mining deal has something to do with “women’s rights” or “gay rights” and so forth.

This difference plays out domestically as well. In China, people tend to defer to state authority so long as the state is performing competently. There is no psychological need for the Chinese to think of their nation in “moral terms” as a “free society” that respects “human rights.” For better or worse, things are different in America. Being a “free society” is just as must an essential part of American self-identity as being a “global superpower.” America’s decline from global superpower status and its transition from a nation that at least pretends to be a free society to a more transparent and overt totalitarianism are mutually reinforcing tendencies that could strain the very special preconditions for American patriotism as we know it.

Perhaps one of the most interesting challenges facing the American regime is how it can slow its geopolitical decline and maintain a viable form of patriotism, even as it transitions from a persuasion model of control that relies on at least a lip-service pretext to being a free-society to a coercion model that relies on pure force and intimidation, rather than the pretty lies that used to serve as at least public justifications for regime institutions and their behavior.

It is far from clear that the American regime can complete this transition without dire consequences with respect to its standing globally, and to its own citizens right here at home. Patriots of all stripes should not view this as a consolation prize, but as a great opportunity.
 
Last edited:

marsh

TB Fanatic

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis Launches Ambitious Crackdown on Big Tech
39,641
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA - OCTOBER 07: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announces that he wants to raise the minimum starting salary for teachers during a press conference held at Bayview Elementary School on October 07, 2019 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The Governor’s proposed 2020 budget recommendation will include a pay raise …
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
ALLUM BOKHARI2 Feb 20215,147

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) announced a major push to curb Big Tech’s political bias and censorship today, with measures including a ban on the censorship of political candidates and mandatory opt-outs of content filters for citizens of the Sunshine State.

In a 45-minute speech, the governor identified Big Tech companies as the leading threat to American democracy and freedom of expression today, and pledged that Florida Republicans would take action.

The new regulations announced by DeSantis include:
  • Mandatory opt-outs from big tech’s content filters, a solution to tech censorship first proposed by Breitbart News in 2018.
  • A private right of action for Floridian citizens against tech companies that violate this condition.
  • Fines of $100,000 per day levied on tech companies that suspend candidates for elected office in Florida from their platforms.
  • Daily fines for any tech company “that uses their content and user-related algorithms to suppress or prioritize the access of any content related to a political candidate or cause on the ballot.”
  • Greater transparency requirements.
  • Disclosure requirements enforced by Florida’s election authorities for tech companies that favor one candidate over another.
  • Power for the Florida attorney general to bring cases against tech companies that violate these conditions under the state’s Unfair and Deceptive Practices Act.
This is the widest and most aggressive range of regulatory and legislative solutions so far proposed by any U.S. state to tackle the problem of tech censorship.

At a press conference earlier today, DeSantis highlighted the importance of the issue.

“What began as a group of upstart companies from the west coast has since transformed into an industry of monopoly communications platforms that monitor, influence, and control the flow of information in our country and among our citizens, and they do this to an extent hitherto unimaginable,” said DeSantis.

“These platforms have changed from neutral platforms that provided Americans with the freedom to speak to enforcers of preferred narratives. Consequently, these platforms have played an increasingly decisive role in elections, and have negatively impacted Americans who dissent from orthodoxies favored by the Big Tech cartel.”

DeSantis accused the tech giants of “clear viewpoint discrimination,” highlighting the censorship of Donald Trump and the removal of Parler from the internet and Apple and Google-controlled app stores.

“The core issue here is this: are consumers going to have the choice to consume the information they choose, or are oligarchs in Silicon Valley going to make those choices for us? No group of people should exercise such power, especially not tech billionaires in Northern California.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
If it already isn't happening at large scale, expect the Biden Admin to do the equivalent of what Berlin is doing to Germany's AfD Party.......https://euobserver.com/opinion/150798

That level of surveillance and counter-political action will be something Herbert Hoover would be envious of....
 

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
I'm surprised there has been such little interest in this:


H.R.127 - Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

Introduced on Jan 4

(a) In General.—The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.

Isn't this something we've been predicting for decades?

Now it has been introduced in the demon controlled house it will pass. Unconstitutional or not it will pass the Senate when they change the filibuster rule in the next month or so. And after they pack the SCOTUS sometime in spring it will be declared constitutional.

It is coming and will be here before we know it.

Seems there should be at least some conversations about it doesn't it?

MAYBE BECAUSE THE TERMS OF THIS BILL HAVE NOT YET BEEN LISTED HERE???

(I heard them for the first time on AM 920 today)

Ҥ 932. Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms

“(a) In general.—The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.

“(b) Firearm registration system.—
“(1) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—Under the firearm registration system, the owner of a firearm shall transmit to the Bureau—
“(A) the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and


“(B) a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.

“(2) DEADLINE FOR SUPPLYING INFORMATION.—The transmission required by paragraph (1) shall be made—
“(A) in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of this section, within 3 months after the effective date of this section; or

“(B) in the case of a firearm acquired on or after the effective date, on the date the owner acquires the firearm.

“(3) DATABASE.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall establish and maintain a database of all firearms registered pursuant to this subsection.

“(B) ACCESS.—The Attorney General shall make the contents of the database accessible to all members of the public, all Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, and all State and local governments, as defined by the Bureau.


“(c) Licensing system.—
“(1) REQUIREMENTS.—
“(A) GENERAL LICENSE.—Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to possess a firearm and ammunition if the individual—
“(i) has attained 21 years of age;

“(ii) after applying for the license—
“(I) undergoes a criminal background check conducted by the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and the check does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the individual would violate subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law;

“(II) undergoes a psychological evaluation conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm; and

“(III) successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training; and

“(iii) demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d).



32. Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms.”.
(4) DEADLINE FOR ESTABLISHMENT.—Within 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prescribe final regulations to implement the amendments made by this subsection.

(b) Prohibitions; penalties.—
(1) PROHIBITIONS.—Section 922 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(aa) It shall be unlawful for a person to possess a firearm or ammunition, unless—
“(1) the person is carrying a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1); and


“(2) (A) in the case of a firearm owned by the person, the firearm is registered to the person under section 932(b); or
“(B) in the case of a firearm owned by another person—
“(i) the firearm is so registered to such other person; and

“(ii) such other person has notified the Attorney General that the firearm has been loaned to the person, and the possession is during the loan period specified in the notice.

“(bb) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to transfer a firearm or ammunition to a person who is not licensed under section 932(c)(1).
“(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell or give a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the sale or gift.

“(3) It shall be unlawful for a person to loan a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the loan, including the identity of such other person and the period for which the loan is made.

“(4) It shall be unlawful for a person holding a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1) to transfer a firearm to an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.

“(cc) A person who possesses a firearm or to whom a license is issued under section 932(c)(1) shall have in effect an insurance policy issued under section 932(d).”.

(2) PENALTIES.—Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(aa) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both.

“(9) (A) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(1) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $75,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 15 years, or both.
“(B) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(2) shall be fined not less than $30,000 and not more than $50,000, imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years, or both.

“(C) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(3) shall be fined not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000.

“(D) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(4) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both, except that if the transferee of the firearm possess or uses the firearm during or in relation to a crime, an unintentional shooting, or suicide, the transferor shall be fined not less than $100,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 25 years and not more than 40 years, or both.

“(10) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(cc) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 20 years, or both.”
.

(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
(A) ELIMINATION OF PROHIBITION ON ESTABLISHMENT OF CENTRALIZED FIREARM REGISTRATION SYSTEM.—Section 926(a) of such title is amended by striking the 2nd sentence.

(B) APPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL AND MILITARY FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION.—Section 925(a) of such title is amended in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by inserting “and except for section 932,” after the 2nd comma.

(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this subsection shall take effect on the date final regulations are prescribed under subsection (a)(4).
SEC. 3. Prohibition on possession of certain ammunition.


(a) In general.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 2 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(dd) (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.
“(2) (A) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
 

Bps1691

Veteran Member
MAYBE BECAUSE THE TERMS OF THIS BILL HAVE NOT YET BEEN LISTED HERE???

(I heard them for the first time on AM 920 today)

Ҥ 932. Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms

“(a) In general.—The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.

“(b) Firearm registration system.—
“(1) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—Under the firearm registration system, the owner of a firearm shall transmit to the Bureau—
“(A) the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and


“(B) a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.

“(2) DEADLINE FOR SUPPLYING INFORMATION.—The transmission required by paragraph (1) shall be made—
“(A) in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of this section, within 3 months after the effective date of this section; or

“(B) in the case of a firearm acquired on or after the effective date, on the date the owner acquires the firearm.

“(3) DATABASE.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall establish and maintain a database of all firearms registered pursuant to this subsection.

“(B) ACCESS.—The Attorney General shall make the contents of the database accessible to all members of the public, all Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, and all State and local governments, as defined by the Bureau.


“(c) Licensing system.—
“(1) REQUIREMENTS.—
“(A) GENERAL LICENSE.—Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to possess a firearm and ammunition if the individual—
“(i) has attained 21 years of age;

“(ii) after applying for the license—
“(I) undergoes a criminal background check conducted by the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and the check does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the individual would violate subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law;

“(II) undergoes a psychological evaluation conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm; and

“(III) successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training; and

“(iii) demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d).



32. Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms.”.
(4) DEADLINE FOR ESTABLISHMENT.—Within 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prescribe final regulations to implement the amendments made by this subsection.

(b) Prohibitions; penalties.—
(1) PROHIBITIONS.—Section 922 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(aa) It shall be unlawful for a person to possess a firearm or ammunition, unless—
“(1) the person is carrying a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1); and


“(2) (A) in the case of a firearm owned by the person, the firearm is registered to the person under section 932(b); or
“(B) in the case of a firearm owned by another person—
“(i) the firearm is so registered to such other person; and

“(ii) such other person has notified the Attorney General that the firearm has been loaned to the person, and the possession is during the loan period specified in the notice.

“(bb) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to transfer a firearm or ammunition to a person who is not licensed under section 932(c)(1).
“(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell or give a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the sale or gift.

“(3) It shall be unlawful for a person to loan a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the loan, including the identity of such other person and the period for which the loan is made.

“(4) It shall be unlawful for a person holding a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1) to transfer a firearm to an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.

“(cc) A person who possesses a firearm or to whom a license is issued under section 932(c)(1) shall have in effect an insurance policy issued under section 932(d).”.

(2) PENALTIES.—Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(aa) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both.

“(9) (A) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(1) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $75,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 15 years, or both.
“(B) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(2) shall be fined not less than $30,000 and not more than $50,000, imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years, or both.

“(C) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(3) shall be fined not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000.

“(D) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(4) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both, except that if the transferee of the firearm possess or uses the firearm during or in relation to a crime, an unintentional shooting, or suicide, the transferor shall be fined not less than $100,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 25 years and not more than 40 years, or both.

“(10) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(cc) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 20 years, or both.”
.

(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
(A) ELIMINATION OF PROHIBITION ON ESTABLISHMENT OF CENTRALIZED FIREARM REGISTRATION SYSTEM.—Section 926(a) of such title is amended by striking the 2nd sentence.

(B) APPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL AND MILITARY FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION.—Section 925(a) of such title is amended in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by inserting “and except for section 932,” after the 2nd comma.

(4) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this subsection shall take effect on the date final regulations are prescribed under subsection (a)(4).
SEC. 3. Prohibition on possession of certain ammunition.


(a) In general.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 2 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(dd) (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.
“(2) (A) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Here's the entire thing in PDF format. After reading it, it sure seems like what we've been predicting for several decades.

I am still surprised that so little conversation has occurred on this piece of sh*t -- demon-crats are trying to remove the 2nd for real!!!!

 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Former CIA Counter-Insurgency Officer Urges US Government to Use War Tactics Against Domestic Extremists Like Those Who Stormed US Capitol

By Jim Hoft
Published February 3, 2021 at 10:01am
Drone Bombs for US Patriots–


Robert Grenier, who served as the CIA’s station chief for Pakistan and Afghanistan in 2001, wants the US government to use war tactics like those used in Afghanistan and Iraq against domestic extremists like those who stormed the US Capitol on January 6th.

Of course, these same experts see nothing wrong with Black Lives Matter destroying $2 billion worth of property and thousands of livelihoods back in 2020.

Black Lives Matter-Antifa mobs have caused over one billion dollars in damages in cities across America since May. In Minneapolis alone Black Lives Matter mobs damaged or destroyed over 1,500 businesses or buildings.

Over 700 police officers were injured in the BLM riots — and that was back in June!

NPR reported:
When it comes to domestic extremists such as those who stormed the Capitol, a longtime CIA officer argues that the U.S. should treat them as an insurgency.
That means using counterinsurgency tactics — similar in some ways to those used in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Robert Grenier served as the CIA’s station chief for Pakistan and Afghanistan in 2001. He went on to become the CIA’s Iraq mission manager and then director of the CIA Counterterrorism Center from 2004 to 2006.
“We may be witnessing the dawn of a sustained wave of violent insurgency within our own country, perpetrated by our own countrymen,” Grenier wrote in The New York Times last week. And without national action, he argues, “extremists who seek a social apocalypse … are capable of producing endemic political violence of a sort not seen in this country since Reconstruction.”
Glenn Greenwald responded to the expanding tyranny.
1612373808907.png
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

WATCH: Newsmax Brings My Pillow Founder Mike Lindell Back on After Hostile Segment Where Anchor Stormed Off Set

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published February 3, 2021 at 10:51am

Newsmax brought My Pillow founder Mike Lindell back on air, following a contentious interview where a previous host stormed off the set.


On Tuesday, Newsmax host Bob Sellers had Lindell on his show “American Agenda” to talk about big tech censorship — then ended up censoring him as well.

As Lindell began to explain why he was silenced on social media — his belief that the election was rigged and that Dominion Voting Machines played a role in it — Sellers promptly jumped in to read a prepared statement about how Newsmax accepts the election results.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1356719881564086272
2:05 min

The wild interview prompted a significant amount of backlash against Sellers for his behavior — which was really no different than what they were attempting to criticize Twitter for.

Following the failed segment, Newsmax anchor Rob Schmitt brought him back on for another discussion about cancel culture.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1356810753869819905
4:33 min
BREAKING: MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell returns to talk about ‘cancel culture,’ his relationship with Newsmax, Trump on trial and more. @SchmittNYC https://t.co/VlT7z8drtO pic.twitter.com/gwQiSBnIn8
— Newsmax (@newsmax) February 3, 2021
It is highly likely that they are attempting to avoid a lawsuit, which Dominion has been handing out left and right, but many have noted that censoring their guests leaves them little room to critique censorship by others.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

H.R. 127: A New Bill In Congress Would Literally End Your 2nd Amendment Rights Permanently

WEDNESDAY, FEB 03, 2021 - 0:00
Authored by Michael Snyder via End of The American Dream blog,
If a new bill that has been introduced in Congress eventually becomes law, the 2nd Amendment will still be in the U.S. Constitution, but for all practical purposes the rights that it is supposed to guarantee will be dead and gone.

H.R. 127 was submitted on January 4th, and if you have not read it yet you can find the full text right here. It contains a lot of technical language, and so in this article I am going to try to break down what it means very simply. Now that the Democrats control the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, there is going to be a major push to ram through some form of gun control legislation. If it is not this bill, it will be another one, so we need to be diligent.


One of the biggest things that H.R. 127 would do is that it would create a national firearms registration system that would literally be accessible by anyone
HR 127 establishes a federal firearms registration system that will be accessible by federal, state, and local governments, including the military – even the GENERAL PUBLIC! The system will track the make, model, and serial number of all firearms, their owners, the dates they were acquired, and where they are being stored.
So if your neighbor, a co-worker, or someone that just wanted to rob your home wanted to know how you were armed, all they would have to do would be to look it up in the firearms registration system.

This bill would also apply retroactively.

Within three months, you would have to report to the government where you bought all of your guns, when they were purchased, and where they are currently being stored.

Needless to say, if the government knows where all of your guns are being stored, it would make it that much easier to grab them from you at some future date.

H.R. 127 would also require all gun owners to be federally licensed.

That would mean that owning a gun would no longer be a right. Instead, it would be reduced to a “privilege” that the government could take away at any time.

According to the bill, the licensing procedure would include “a psychological evaluation”
The licensing requirement mandates that the license applicant undergoes a criminal background check, and then submits to a psychological evaluation to determine whether the person is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm. Successful licensees must show they have an insurance policy which will cost $800.
I know a lot of guys out there that would definitely not want to go through any sort of a “psychological evaluation” by a government-approved psychologist.

And it wouldn’t just be you that would get interviewed.

According to the bill, spouses and other family members would be interviewed as well
For the psychological evaluation, a licensed psychologist will interview individuals’ spouses and at least two other family members or associates to “further determine the state of the mental emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.” Licenses will be denied to individuals hospitalized for issues such as depressive episodes; no duration for license disability is specified, and it does not matter whether the individual sought help voluntarily.
The goal, of course, is to make owning guns as difficult as possible.
Democrats figure that if they can put up as many barriers to gun ownership as possible, a lot less people will end up owning them.

Thirdly, this bill would also greatly restrict the type of ammunition that you can own
Finally, HR 127 also criminalizes the possession of “large-capacity magazines” (those carrying greater than 10 rounds) and “ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.”
I know that all of this sounds utterly ridiculous, but the restrictions in this bill actually sound very, very similar to what Joe Biden has been publicly proposing
During the 2020 campaign, Joe Biden promised a long list of gun control regulations. There is a reason that Michael Bloomberg spent $125 million helping Biden in Florida and something over $600 million nationally in the general election.
The agenda includes: classifying many semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 bullets as Class 3 weapons (which can require nine months or more for approval and a $200 fee), national gun licensing, “red flag” laws that let judges take away people’s guns without a hearing, background checks on the private transfer of guns, and bans on some semi-automatic firearms that happen to look like military weapons.
Gun control is very high on the list of things that Joe Biden wants to get accomplished during the next four years.

So like I said, if it isn’t this bill, it will be another one that is similar.

They are coming for your 2nd Amendment, and they aren’t going to stop until they get what they want.

Meanwhile, this is all happening at a time when murder rates all across America are going through the roof
“Homicide rates were higher during every month of 2020 relative to rates from the previous year,” the report states, calling the 30 percent surge “a large and troubling increase that has no modern precedent.”
We have never seen major city murder rates jump by an average of 30 percent in a single year.

Things are getting really crazy out there, and many believe that 2021 will be even worse.

For almost a year, there has been civil unrest in our cities on an almost nightly basis. As I write this, civil unrest has erupted in Rochester, New York. We live at a time when rioting, looting, arson and vandalism have become commonplace, and the senseless violence that we have witnessed so far is just the leading edge of the storm.

Millions of Americans can see what is happening to our society and they are quite concerned. 2020 was a record year for gun sales in the United States, and dealers have reported that demand is extremely strong so far in 2021 as well.

The Democrats do not like this one bit, and they are going to do their very best to put a stop to it.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Red States Pushing Back on Biden’s Executive Orders
By Stu Cvrk | Feb 02, 2021 4:00 PM ET

(AP Photo/David Zalubowski, File)
In an unprecedented flurry of authoritarian activity for a new president, the Hologram has signed 43 executive orders in his first dozen days in office. This from someone who as a candidate claimed that “Trump was a dictator” in signing various executive orders, as noted here:
“I’ve got to get the votes,” said then-candidate Biden.
“I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus,” said Biden.
Yet, it is abundantly clear that Biden is essentially ruling by diktat in reversing dozens of Trump policies – from canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline to enabling “transgenders” in the armed forces to opening the border (and ceasing construction of the wall) to rejoining the Paris Climate Accords. Others being contemplated could involve curbing Second Amendment rights, a return to the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, new politically-oriented domestic terrorism laws, and curbing First Amendment rights including protected political speech on social media.

Many Americans are greatly concerned by the increasing suppression of constitutional rights, as publicly trumpeted by Biden apparatchiks and supporters in the legacy media. Big Tech leftists have already “canceled” the social media upstart Parler and suspended thousands of social media accounts of conservatives and Trump supporters. Some Biden supporters, including this PBS lawyer (!) – have even clamored for “reeducation camps” for Trump supporters.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg, as the Left are emboldened in these actions because the Biden Administration is entirely sympathetic. How does the secret Democrat-led Senate ethics panel going after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) for challenging Biden’s Electoral College “win” (as reported here) comport with the Democrats’ pursuit of “unity”? The goal is THEIR definition of unity, which involves suppression of all dissension at all costs. Because their definition decidedly does NOT mean consensus or compromising with Republicans. Always remember that their word definitions are not commonly understood definitions but rather are twisted to service their political objectives!

Back to Biden’s EOs. First of all, executive orders are NOT laws but rather are “pseudo laws,” as explained by the American Bar Association here:
An executive order is a signed, written, and published directive from the President of the United States that manages operations of the federal government. They are numbered consecutively, so executive orders may be referenced by their assigned number, or their topic.
Executive orders are not legislation; they require no approval from Congress, and Congress cannot simply overturn them. Congress may pass legislation that might make it difficult, or even impossible, to carry out the order, such as removing funding. Only a sitting U.S. President may overturn an existing executive order by issuing another executive order to that effect.
[However,] … executive orders … have the force of law, much like regulations issued by federal agencies, so they are codified under Title 3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Because EOs have “the force of law” similar to federal rules generated by the administrative state, some Red States have begun to push back. In Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed a lawsuit to stop implementation of an executive order that directs a halt to all deportations of illegal aliens during Biden’s first 100 days as president:

According to Paxton, the freeze violates the Constitution and is a violation of federal immigration and administrative law as well as an agreement between the State of Texas and the Department of Homeland Security.

And a federal judge subsequently blocked implementation of that executive order, as reported here. Hurrah for a little Republican lawfare for a change after four years of Democrat filings before friendly leftist judges to thwart President Trump’s actions!

But that is not all of the push back that is underway. In South Dakota, a state representative introduced a bill that would enable the state attorney general to review and reject presidential executive orders that violate the Constitution:
The bill takes a broad view, stating that no executive order may be implemented “that restricts a person’s rights.”
The proposed bill would also allow the attorney general to block implementation of any order deemed unconstitutional if the order refers to:
Excellent! Protection of constitutional rights is vital to the preservation of our constitutional Republic. The Biden administration policy objectives that curtail constitutional rights of Americans must be halted and reversed. Executive orders are ruling by diktat, not by consensus. It is the responsibility of the US Congress to write laws, not the Executive Branch. Executive orders are another manifestation of the administrative state – in this case by the Office of the President, bypassing Congress to implement policy through “pseudo law.” The practice has gotten out of hand and needs to be curtailed. More states need to pursue what South Dakota is doing.

The end.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Vanity Fair Says White Supremacy is Not About Being white Anymore
Article shares that it's about being conservative and Christian, too.
by Jared Dyson
February 3, 2021

White supremacy, racism, conservative, Trump supporters, Proud Boys,

Charlotte, NC — In a recent article, one Vanity Fair writer decided to address white supremacy and how it is no longer about just being white. Tarisai Ngangura wrote the piece that appeared online on Tuesday where she tied conservatives, white supremacists, Trump supporters, the Proud Boys, and Christians all in one group together.

The point of the article was trying to say that far-right extremism has made itself attractive to people of color. The writer was saying that it becomes a challenge to combat white supremacy when so many people of color have flocked to right-wing “extremism” as a means to stay close to power.

The underlying message of the article is the issue, however. Time and again those on the right have denounced white supremacy. Even Proud Boys leader, Enrique Tarrio, has denounced white supremacy. From politicians, activist groups, and even everyday Americans, each and everyone one of them has said racism has no place in society.

That simply is not good enough for the Left. This is not about white supremacy at all. It’s about how you can tie anyone on the right to some form of extremism to further divide the nation.

Throughout her ridiculous article, Ngangura builds the case against the group Proud Boys. She tries to justify the stance of minorities in the group as accepting the fact that the system is rigged to benefit Whites. She even quotes one researcher that said these minorities have simply decided that proximity to power is better than no power at all.

Perhaps they should give some thought that these people of color are simply tired of the lies and mistreatment of the Left. Perhaps they should consider that they are finally seeing that conservatives, who fought for their freedom from the beginning, are actually giving them a chance for success.

Ngangura tries to tie anyone and everyone on the right into an image of white supremacy. In the article, those who support President Donald Trump are mentioned. Christianity is mentioned as a breeding ground for extreme right-wing ideology. In other words, if you are against the Left’s agenda, you are an extremist.

One of the most ridiculous lines in the entire article referred to the idea of meritocracy. In the statement, Ngangura writes, “At its core, the prosperity doctrine of white supremacy is a function of the American idea of meritocracy—that success comes to those who work hard enough. Anyone can buy into that, regardless of whether the system truly works for them.”

So to suggest that working hard will help you achieve success is white supremacy. The underlying message is that whites in America have things given to them, while anyone else has to work for it. How ridiculous and asinine.

Of course, what would we expect from a writer who has claimed that American exceptionalism is going to be the death of everyone.

How can anyone make the argument that belief in small government, the sanctity of life, low taxes, and a God who loves everyone is racist? How is it even possible to consider that you should be handed everything in life for free based on the color of your skin? That, in its very suggestion, is racist.

Racism is not defined by a political ideology or a faith. Do I believe that racism may still exist in our country? Absolutely, but it is nothing like it was 50 years ago. Even Clarence Henderson, a civil rights hero and activist, recently said that racism today is nothing like what he experienced in his youth.

White supremacy is not built in the foundations of our country. Systemic racism and white supremacy is not found in law enforcement, widespread in Christianity, or even in Trump supporters. Racism and white supremacy in America today is mostly found among left-wing radical ideologists like Ngangura herself.
The Biden Administration Puts Corruption on Display
Joe Biden’s Press Secretary is taking heat. Not for dodging press conferences or even for holding them. No, she is apparently screening questions before they are asked. In a direct attack on the free press, the Biden administration again proves they have no interest in the Constitution as they directly attack the American people.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

Rush Limbaugh Sends Dire Warning After GOP Plans To Get Rid Of The “MAGA” Movement
Emily Smith3 days ago



Rush Limbaugh spent a portion of his program on Friday discussing what he believes is more treachery by the GOP establishment as it seeks to ‘cleanse’ the party of Trumpism — which most realistic analysts believe, at this point, would be political suicide.

And that’s precisely the point, the conservative talk king noted.

Limbaugh, who has long since been known for his keen intellect and ability to see through the political chaff, said that the GOP elites won’t have a problem at all becoming the minority party for the foreseeable future if it means the end of the MAGA movement — much like the RINO elite opposed the conservative populism of the Tea Party movement a decade ago.

“The endgame is the destruction of the entire MAGA movement, even if it means the Republican Party is adrift in the wilderness for 30 years. ‘We’re gonna get rid of MAGA, it’s gonna have nothing to do with the Republican Party going forward.’ That’s the battle within the Republican Party. The Republican Party has its own establishment types.

They have members that are as pro-deep state as Democrats are,” he said in response to a caller who asked how it was possible for the No. 3 Republican in the House, Wyoming’s Liz Cheney, to support impeaching former President Trump earlier this month.

Limbaugh, whose rise to the top of conservative radio began at the end of Ronald Reagan’s two terms, said the RINO establishment cleansed the party of ‘Reaganism’ after he left office in 1988 and his VP, George H. W. Bush, was elected.

“The Republican Party immediately began to eliminate anything that Reagan had to do with anything in terms of policy,” he said. “George H. W. Bush ran for election claiming to be Reagan’s third term. And he got elected on that. But he started raising taxes.

He did everything the opposite of what Reagan did, started making deals with the Democrats. And the reason was that the Republican establishment back then had no use for conservatives, no use for us, no use for conservatism.”

Now, though, after four years of Trump’s wild policy success — policies the GOP RINO class always claimed to support (when they knew they couldn’t get their polices enacted) — it’ll be worse than when Reagan left.

“The hatred for Trump among Washington establishment types, be they Republican or Democrat, is so virulent, it is so powerful, it’s so all-consuming that it takes precedence over everything else,” he explained. “It’s a sign of Trump’s effectiveness. It’s an example of how good he was, how effective he was.

They’re scared to death of him still after he has retreated and is now holding court at Mar-a-Lago, they’re still scared to death of him.

That’s why they want to impeach him. That’s why they want to run around claiming he can never run for office again. Everything they’re doing to Trump is unconstitutional, but they don’t care. If they can pull it off, they’ll pull it off.”

He then reminded listeners that 75 million people voted for Trump last election.
“That’s a political party right there, my man. That is a political party. And it’s got to be dealt with. If you are part of the Washington establishment, the 75 million that voted for MAGA, that voted for Trump, we can’t have that.

So not only do you have to take out Trump, you have to destroy his agenda at the same time. You can’t let somebody else pick up the mantle,” he said.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

New York Times Demands Biden Create a “Reality Czar” To Preside Over Centralized Corporatist Ministry of Truth
By Ulysses S. Tennyson | Feb 3, 2021

It used to be that the newspapers like the New York Times would get everything wrong one day, and then do meager corrections the next day to atone, which Christopher Hitchens explains brilliantly. Now, they intentionally write atrocious trash all day every day with the purpose of destroying America.

What Saul Alynski taught every progressive is that they must first create a crisis–real or imagined–and then solve that crisis.

The establishment swamp on the left and right has done just that in creating a ‘reality crisis.’ In this crisis, people have difficulty determining what is real and what is fake. This is because media continually bombards them with false news that is blended with real news, unscientific data blended with truth, and one-sided perspectives that completely ignore facts on the other sides of issues.

Not only does this destroy any sense of balance in society, but it makes people who do find outlets to get a balanced view of reality seem crazy to these brainwashed masses. These brainwashed automatons, dubbed NPCs, are unable to accept any outside truths because they have been trained for too long that their faith in failed institutions is actually an absolute fact. And they have also been trained that all other information is suspect or false.

The New York Times Headquarters, Midtown Manhattan, NYC

Now, after creating this reality crisis, the fascist corporatist establishment is openly defining the solution to the problem it created.

The New York Times has proposed that Banana Republic Biden create a “Reality Czar.”

Yes, they really are out to get you for your thoughts. It is as though they want to prove my Banana Republic epithet is true at any cost. This is literally what all totalitarians end up doing, like those in Banana Republics.

Don’t worry, the New York Times has solution to solve evolve the problem:
Mr. Roose begins by insisting–despite mountains of convincing evidence and a fantastically comprehensive and obvious Chinese Communist party coverup in conjunction with the Chinese puppet WHO and world leaders–that the Covid19 virus did not originate in a lab, much less a Chinese one:

“Hoaxes, lies and collective delusions aren’t new, but the extent to which millions of Americans have embraced them may be. Thirty percent of Republicans have a favorable view of QAnon, according to a recent YouGov poll. According to other polls, more than 70 percent of Republicans believe Mr. Trump legitimately won the election, and 40 percent of Americans — including plenty of Democrats — believe the baseless theory that Covid-19 was manufactured in a Chinese lab.”

Mr. Roose, like most progressives, then usurps the language of reality in order to stab reality in the back:

“How do you unite a country in which millions of people have chosen to create their own version of reality?” he says, as if completely oblivious to the fact that it is him who is brainwashed–or perhaps intentionally doing the brainwashing.

Once he tricks his reader with this truth that has falsely applied, he must use his readers to attack his enemies.

One way that progressives like Roose do this is by attacking the people who were at the capitol on January 6th 2021 (not necessarily the handful of rioters, but all the 1 or 2 million people from Trump’s speech as well), who just so happen to be their political opponents. In banana republics, political opponents are weeded out and destroyed using shaming and corrupt military forces.

During the Biden Administration, political opponents have conveniently labelled all as “domestic terrorists” and “the enemy within” that must be weeded out and destroyed with an unending military occupied force and an unconstitutional and baseless DHS warrant.

Yeah…

Does this send an existential terror through your body yet? It should.

After a year of unending leftist Black Lives Matter and Antifa riots on progressive cities around the country that caused dozens of explicit deaths, thousands of implicit ones due to the enormous unprecedented crime spikes, billions in damages, incitement by progressive leaders around the country, and complete destruction of small businesses and societal fabric, the New York Times wants you to believe that a few dozen people who committed comparably trivial violence at an inexplicably unsecured capitol building for a few hours on one day at the Capitol on January 6th is the real existential threat to America.

Does that make any logical sense to a critically thinking person on any side of the isle?

Roose is not just delusional. One might consider him a traitor to his country, seeking to brainwash the American masses against their own interests and against America using his powerful platform at the NYT. But, we won’t hold our breath waiting for the DHS memo about this leftist clown being a terrorist.

Instead, we will continue to hear single-orifice skin-suits like him vomit out totalitarian verbal diarrhea like this:

“Appoint a ‘reality czar.’

Several experts I spoke with recommended that the Biden administration put together a cross-agency task force to tackle disinformation and domestic extremism, which would be led by something like a “reality czar.””


Experts? Experts in what? Authoritarianism? Global Technocratic Oligarchies?

All that is required for these NPC’s to believe somebody is if they hate president Trump. They are trained like Pavlov’s dog to a dinner bell. But, Roose isn’t done yet:

This task force could also meet regularly with tech platforms, and push for structural changes that could help those companies tackle their own extremism and misinformation problems. (For example, it could formulate “safe harbor” exemptions that would allow platforms to share data about QAnon and other conspiracy theory communities with researchers and government agencies without running afoul of privacy laws.) And it could become the tip of the spear for the federal government’s response to the reality crisis.”

So, the secret to resolving the massive tech censorship and election manipulation is more collusion with government and Big Tech in perpetuity?

Does that make sense? Only to someone who wants to rule over everyone else.

In their minds, the more centralization of this thought policing the better. It is efficiency that always wins over humanity, because what could possibly go wrong:

“Right now, these experts said, the federal government’s response to disinformation and domestic extremism is haphazard and spread across multiple agencies, and there’s a lot of unnecessary overlap.”

““…If each of them are doing it distinctly and independently, you run the risk of missing connections, both in terms of the content and in terms of the tactics that are used to execute on the campaigns,” Ms. DiResta said.


So, the real threat in the delusional reality of Mr. Roose and progressives is decentralization and compartmentalization of government so it doesn’t get too powerful–the precise principles on which America was founded.

That is all you need to know about these anti-American worms like Roose. They simply hate America and disagree fundamentally with its very essence and core principles. And, instead of leaving and going anywhere else in the world that accepts authoritarianism, they hang out here because they want to see their opponents go down and bask in the glory of their demise.

And they absolutely know they are doing this:

“It sounds a little dystopian, I’ll grant. But let’s hear them out.” he says casually and unironically while promoting absolutely dystopian nightmare scenarios to deal with his ideological opponents.

In a free society–which America is no longer–he should be able to say whatever wacky thing he wants. But, when a handful of people control all of government, business, speech, and your ability to work and even exist within society, that is a tyranny that the founding fathers spoke of when they designed this country.
It is precisely what they fought against, regardless of the new technologies that empower tyrants so much more than ever before.

Will Americans fight again?
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

The Gaslighting Of The American Mind

WEDNESDAY, FEB 03, 2021 - 17:51
Authored by J. Peder Zane via RealClearPolitics.com,
Democrats are the party of make believe.

Through their domination of the media, academia, Hollywood, and growing swaths of corporate America, they successfully peddle propaganda as reality. They insisted President Trump was a dictator and a treasonous ally of Vladimir Putin who refused to denounce white supremacy. They dismissed questions about the business dealings of President Biden’s family as “Russian disinformation” that had been “totally discredited.”

When investigations and fact checks revealed those claims to be false, they just kept on repeating them. Tell a lie long and loud enough and many accept it as truth.

Having secured the White House and control of the Senate in the last election, Democrats and their allies are adding a strong dose of intimidation to their campaign of deceit. They are using social media to silence dissent from their views while creating blacklists to make it difficult for their opponents to find gainful employment. In a sign of how far gone they are, many journalists at influential outfits are now questioning the wisdom of the First Amendment and calling for government regulation of speech.

As cancel culture spreads, they gaslight the public by denying that it is happening. At the same time they argue that Republicans must be silenced and even “deprogrammed” because they are delusional liars. To conservative ears, the national discourse often boils down to this: Are you going to believe us or your lying eyes?

The caricature of conservatives certainly describes some people on the right. Sen. Mitch McConnell has spoken out against his party’s lunatic fringe. But there is little evidence they enjoy meaningful support. The Jan. 6 criminal assault on the Capitol was a disgrace, but it was also widely condemned by Republicans – a stark contrast to Democrats who have largely ignored or even celebrated the repeated violence perpetrated by antifa. Casting that action as an attempted coup – pretending the mob could have gained control of the government – is deceitful propaganda aimed at smearing 74 million Trump voters.

U.S. history is full of examples of movements that many Americans considered dangerous. Usually these were progressives who fought for unions, and marched for civil rights, and demanded an end to foreign wars. Most people see those causes as worthy, even though communists were interspersed among the activists’ ranks. We also now see that the suppression they provoked was shameful. As future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis noted in 1913, sunlight is “the best of disinfectants”; the way to defeat dangerous ideas and behaviors is to expose them to reason.

This is a foundation of our pluralistic democracy.

History reveals two main reasons why factions seek to limit speech:
  • first, because it is an effective means to quash dissent and
  • second because they won’t or can’t defend their own ideas.
Today’s Democrats and their allies are driven by both rationales. Their control of most communication channels has empowered them to spread narratives that delegitimize their opponents by caricaturing them as racist conspiracy theorists.

It may be impossible to change the minds of those who embrace the accuracy of that portrayal, but it is worth asking: If your view is true, why advance so many mistruths to support it? For Democrats this propaganda coup is a twofer: As it marginalizes Republicans, it keeps the focus off the ramifications of their own ideas and politics. Their argument boils down to this: Let us do what we want because otherwise those Neanderthals will be in charge. This strategy is increasingly essential for Democrats as they advance leftist ideas that are hard to support through fact-based metrics – i.e. reality instead of ideology.

Democrats are the party of activist government. Their core progressive idea – the plinth course of their Great Society programs – is that the combination of vast federal resources and elite expertise can solve most of society’s problems. There have been some successes – credit progressives and libertarians for helping advance the rights of marginalized groups. But the last half-century has also seen the breakdown of the nuclear family, continuing hopelessness and blight in many cities, and the failure of public schools to raise educational achievement despite massive increases in per pupil spending.

While many African Americans have entered the middle class since the 1960s, blacks still lag behind other Americans in a wide variety of measures of health and wealth despite massive government interventions. The reasons for these failures are myriad and complex. The rise of a competitive global economy, for example, has gutted manufacturing jobs and depressed low-skill wages.

But the bottom line is that many progressive programs have not delivered on their promise of prosperity and opportunity for many of the groups they specifically aimed to help.

This is a particular problem for Democrats because African Americans remain their core voting base. The demonstrable shortcomings of their efforts help explain why they have embraced the concept of systemic racism and sound their incessant alarms about white supremacy despite America’s significant progress toward social justice. The message: Our programs would have worked but for rampant racism.

Unable to change the facts, they work to alter the definition of reality. President Biden codified this make-believe style of government on his first day in office when he signed the Modernizing Regulatory Review memorandum. As the government seeks justifications for new controls on society, it directed agencies to “fully account … for regulatory benefits that are difficult or impossible to quantify.”

Difficult or impossible to quantify? Translation: make ’em up. This is just the latest, frightening evidence that the party that claims to embrace science, facts and truth is driven by ideology. When you’re running a make-believe society, it’s no wonder you have to silence dissent.
 

marsh

TB Fanatic

In Order To Have A "Tolerant Society", The Elite Believe They Must Be Intolerant Of All Dissenting Views

WEDNESDAY, FEB 03, 2021 - 16:20
Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

When information becomes a “threat”, even thinking the wrong thing can be dangerous. Over the past several weeks, I have heard the word “misinformation” uttered in the same sentence as “terror” or “terrorists” countless times. In the old days, the “extremists” and the “terrorists” were on the other side of the globe, but now we are being told that they live among us. So how can we identify them? Well, we are being told that “the bad guys” can be identified by what they believe. Those that do not embrace the propaganda that big tech and the corporate media are relentlessly pushing are being systematically “deplatformed”, “canceled” and pushed to the fringes of society. But apparently that is not nearly enough, because the New York Times is now asking for the Biden administration to appoint a “reality czar” that will be given authority to deal with “misinformation” and “extremism”.


So exactly what will be done to those that are guilty of committing “thought crimes” against the government?

Sadly, I think that we are eventually going to find out.

For decades, the elite have been telling us that we need to have a “tolerant” society. But now that they have almost total control, we are being told that in order to have that tolerant society they must be extremely intolerant of dissenting viewpoints.

They seem to have embraced a very radical form of the “paradox of tolerance”, and as a result our society is becoming more dystopian with each passing day.

For example, this week U.S. Representative Jackie Speier suggested that it is time to start referring to Republicans as “the terrorist right”.

That is close to half the country. Does she really want nearly half the nation to be considered “terrorists”?

Last month, I wrote about a new bill that has been introduced in Congress which is essentially the Patriot Act on steroids. But of course the Patriot Act was primarily focused on terror threats from overseas, while even Democrats are admitting that this new bill appears to be specifically targeting Americans that do not have the correct political views. If you doubt this, just consider what Tulsi Gabbard is saying about this new bill
This is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don’t have to guess about where this goes or how this ends. What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life?
In the end, they don’t have to put millions of people in prison to chill free speech in America.

All they have to do is set a few examples and most others will willingly fall in line.
It is all about behavioral conditioning. They want to shape what we do, what we say and what we think by creating fear.

As Grace-Anne Kelly has aptly pointed out, this is something that they are doing to our children as well.

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1356287809787723777
.57 min

Fear is the mind killer.

The elite understand that it is the best way to control large masses of people, and that is why they are continually looking for new ways to keep us in a constant state of fear.

Ultimately, what they want are vast herds of “sheeple” that are extremely easy to manipulate.

If you would like to see what this looks like, spend some time studying the Chinese system.

In China, the government is so utterly dominant over the population that hardly anyone objects when “mandatory anal swabs” are implemented.

Unfortunately, the U.S. is moving in the same direction very rapidly.

Decades ago, Americans would get very upset when the government would decide to start dangerous new military conflicts.

But now Joe Biden can roll U.S. military forces into Syria without hardly anyone even noticing.

And it appears that the Biden administration is also setting the stage for a potential war with Iran
Iran could be “weeks away” from having sufficient material to develop a nuclear weapon if it continues to violate the 2015 nuclear deal, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned Monday in an interview with NBC News.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are getting ready to raise our taxes, and many Americans are actually begging them to do it.

The Democrats also want to end the Second Amendment, but of course millions of people are quite eager for that to happen as well.

After everything that they have already gotten away with in the past few months, they probably figure that they may as well go nuts because nobody is going to stop them.

This isn’t about one political party implementing an agenda now that they are in power.

Rather, this is about one group of people wanting to permanently neuter and silence the opposition.
From now on, those that dare to question the official narratives handed down by our overlords will be branded “terrorists”, and this new “war on terror” will be designed to absolutely crush dissent wherever it is found. I really like how investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald recently made this point
“The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting ‘terrorism’ that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This New War on Terror—one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting ‘extremists’ and ‘domestic terrorists’ among American citizens on U.S. soil—presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.”
For a time in January, 1984 by George Orwell became the number one selling book on Amazon, and right now our society is moving in that direction at a pace that is absolutely breathtaking.

They really do want complete and total control, and they aren’t going to stop until they get it.

Needless to say, if we continue on this path as a nation, we are quite doomed.
The good news is that even Democrats such as Tulsi Gabbard are publicly pushing back against these assaults on our liberties and freedoms.

The bad news is that she is definitely in the minority, and there seems to be a consensus building in both parties that “extremism” in the United States must be crushed.

This is a very dark time in our history, and it appears that things will never be quite the same ever again.
 
Top