When it comes to the actions by the world’s most powerful governments, I’d rather hear what they have to say than have newspapers protect me from it. We should just explain to adults that when a newspaper publishes someone’s opinion, it doesn’t mean they agree with it:
When the Obama Admin seized the right to target US citizens for assassination with no due process, and then went on an unprecedented orgy prosecuting whistleblowers for espionage — 2 of the gravest civil liberties threats in decades — I wanted to hear from them justifying it.
Same when Bush/Cheney set up worldwide torture camps as CIA black sites, kidnapped people off the streets, created a due-process-free island prison, etc. Media should tell us how they defend it.
Same reason the US media blackout of Al Qaeda explaining 9/11 was a disservice.
And oh, just by the way: there are still dozens of people in cages in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, people kept for almost 20 years **with no trials**. No convictions of accused 9/11 attackers. And they keep delaying the trials indefinitely. Odd, no?
During the Dem primary campaign, one of RFK Jr.'s core issues was free speech and opposing censorship. Then he became known for wanting to combat chronic disease.
So what does he use his first month for? Threatening universities which allow protests against Israel on campus:
Note: you're free to protest the US on campus. You can protest any country or group: just not Israel.
And of course this censorship - like all censorship - is justified the name of stopping hate speech and keeping one group "safe": as if they're being relentlessly attacked.
Every government in the world -- including the most repressive and tyrannical -- "protects free speech" for the views they like.
It's the views they most hate that are targeted. And the most sacred issue for many in the Trump Admin is Israel: that is what's therefore shielded.
There's nothing stopping Germany or the EU from funding war in Ukraine until the end of eternity if they wish, or sending their citizens to Ukraine to fight Russia.
But the German Greens -- the worst of the worst -- are emblematic of European liberals: all posturing, no action.
British pundits prance around as if they're Churchill, and Macron walks around like he's a tough guy, and German Greens and other vague Berlin liberals posture as if they're the paragon of compassion: all while they rely on the US to finance wars, fight and protect them.
Zelensky begged and begged Westerners to get off line and stop tweeting with their blue-yellow emojis and instead go to Ukraine to help them fight the Russian Army, knowing he couldn't win without non-Ukrainians volunteering to fight. Very, very few did.
For a long-time, harsh critiques of US foreign policy and interventionism were found on the populist right. Listen to Pat Buchanan (who worked for Nixon and Reagan) as well as Ron Paul on US policy toward Israel. Very, very few Dems now speak this way:
In February 2021 -- more than a year before Russian troops entered Ukraine en masse -- the inspiring democrat, President Zelensky, banned 3 popular opposition TV networks by accusing them of spreading Russian disinformation.
It'd be as if Biden banned Fox or Trump banned CNN:🇺🇦
In 2014 -- after Victoria Nuland, @ChrisMurphyCT, John McCain etc. used NED to fund protests in Kiev to remove the democratically elected leader and replace him with an unelected pro-US puppet -- Kiev began bombing ethnic Russian civilians in Donbas:
@ChrisMurphyCT It's bizarre to watch history re-written in real time to serve war propaganda: how Azov Battalion was described as neo-Nazi by western elites, only to be turned into heroic warriors the minute we armed them.
EXCLUSIVE: Trump's media company and Rumble jointly sue Brazilian Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes in a U.S. federal court in Florida, arguing that his most recent censorship orders require a global ban, thus violating US sovereignty and US law:
This comes in the wake of yesterday's indictment of former President Jair Bolsonaro, accusing him of plotting a violent coup (that never happened) against Lula and Moraes.
That indictment follows polls showing a collapse in Lula's popularity, with only Bolsonaro beating him.
A residual guardian of GOP establishment foreign policy - @RichLowry - urges rejection of Tulsi by denouncing her support for Snowden.
To do so, Lowrey falsely claims Snowden "handed [NSA docs] over to Julian Assange’s Wikileaks."
Snowden never gave a single doc to WikiLeaks.
This isn't a small error, nor is it an excusable one. Anyone who knows even the most basic facts of the Snowden story -- which should be a requirement for opining so didactically about it -- knows he only gave docs to the Guardian (through me) and WPost (through Laura Poitras).
Lowry also repeats the standard establishment smear against Snowden -- totally false -- that he "defected to Russia."
Even if he had, it'd be understandable - Obama DOJ tried to imprison him for life -- but Ben Rhodes admitted Snowden tried to leave Russia and they trapped him.