There's absolutely a new War on Terror being initiated -- it'd been lurking for awhile, but it's accelerating now for obvious reasons. This new one is aimed inward, domestically. It entails many of the same frameworks.
If the last few decades teach anything, it should be that making weighty decisions at times of high and intense emotions, closely following an event that unifies most everyone to the point that any deviations or questioning are treated like treason or heresy, is extremely unwise.
Amazing - yesterday I wrote: the same tactic used against critics of the first War on Terror would be used for the new one: demonizing those who question its excesses as "pro-terrorist."
Today, up pops neocon @davidfrum to reprise his role, this time as a liberal thought leader
Liberals who are behind the Biden/Harris plan to initiate this new War on Terror, this time with a primary domestic focus, won't need to study what neocons did with the first War on Terror to learn those old tactics against critics. Neocons are their full allies in all of this.
A key ally for the Dems in this domestic War on Terror will be the same media outlets who have acted as their spokespeople since 2016. CNN employs a former conservative, @oliverdarcy, whose main function in life is to demand censorship on behalf of Dems:
Most of these pro-Dem media outlets employ people whose principal job is do demand censorship of Democrats' adversaries. When FB yesterday announced the Trump ban, Darcy immediately popped up to complain it wasn't broad enough, that we need mass banning on those on the Right:
I spent the first decade of my journalism career devoted to exposing and denouncing the excesses of the first War on Terror, and I see exactly the same tactics forming:
If you question or are concerned about these new powers, you'll be branded as sympathetic to the terrorists.
As I said, one could see this new domestic War on Terror forming long before the events at the Capitol. Someone just posted this clip where I discussed it with @joerogan before the election, in Oct. Lots of big institutions with an interest in doing this:
In case any of you doubt there is a new War on Terror underway: here's a former CIA operative and Pentagon official now a member of Congress (a Democrat, needless to say), explicitly saying (on MSNBC, of course) that the new War on Terror is domestic:
If Joe Biden had announced that any private universities that allow criticism of him or Dems shall immediately lose all federal funding -- while keeping the funding if they allow criticisms of Trump -- would that have been constitutional since no school has the right to funding?
How about if Biden cut off all federal funding to universities that deny the validity of the trans identity or the existence of multiple genders -- on the ground that such teaching incites violence against trans people and is hate speech?
Would that have been constitutional?
The only tactic needed to induce support for censorship is train people to believe the views they hate are violence.
Anti-trans activists are inciting violence and calling for genocide, etc.
Opponents of Israel's war on Gaza are calling for genocide and must be censored, etc. etc.
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.