Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 34 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-new-domestic-war-on-terror-is?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxODkxOTUyOCwicG9zdF9pZCI6MzE2MzY3MDIsIl8iOiI4bFMxaiIsImlhdCI6MTYxMTE1MTM1NSwiZXhwIjoxNjExMTU0OTU1LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTI4NjYyIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.b1-Lk9JeKoLrjKF3-wN4w4YjTyFfGi358mjDSThVGHQ

      Another inciteful and thought provoking piece of journalism. He’s saying the unpopular thing that needs to be said. How long will the Capitol building have 10 foot high fenses surrounding it? How long will DC be held in this state of martial law? How far from DC will this spread? We’ve seen this sort of fear mongering before and it never ends well for liberty.

      Don’t let the politicians convince you that things have changed when they haven’t. There was no “insurrection”. There was a mob. There were no armed rebels who took over the capital with plans of taking over the government. It’s head spinning how fast people are willing to chuck civil liberty in the trash when they are convinced of the danger, a group of people they dislike presents to them.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Meanwhile, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) — not just one of the most dishonest members of Congress but also one of the most militaristic and authoritarian — has had a bill proposed since 2019 to simply amend the existing foreign anti-terrorism bill to allow the U.S. Government to invoke exactly the same powers at home against “domestic terrorists.”

      Why would such new terrorism laws be needed in a country that already imprisons more of its citizens than any other country in the world as the result of a very aggressive set of criminal laws? What acts should be criminalized by new “domestic terrorism” laws that are not already deemed criminal? They never say, almost certainly because — just as was true of the first set of new War on Terror laws — their real aim is to criminalize that which should not be criminalized: speech, association, protests, opposition to the new ruling coalition.

      Scary scary scary shit.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      An entire book could — and probably should — be written on why all of this is so concerning. For the moment, two points are vital to emphasize.

      First, much of the alarmism and fear-mongering is being driven by a deliberate distortion of what it means for speech to “incite violence.” The bastardizing of this phrase was the basis for President Trump’s rushed impeachment last week. It is also what is driving calls for dozens of members of Congress to be expelled and even prosecuted on “sedition” charges for having objected to the Electoral College certification, and is also at the heart of the spate of censorship actions already undertaken and further repressive measures being urged.

      This phrase — “inciting violence” — was also what drove many of the worst War on Terror abuses. I spent years reporting on how numerous young American Muslims were prosecuted under new, draconian anti-terrorism laws for uploading anti-U.S.-foreign-policy YouTube videos or giving rousing anti-American speeches deemed to “incite violence” and thus provide “material support” to terrorist groups — the exact theory which Rep. Schiff is seeking to import into the new domestic War on Terror.

      It is vital to ask what it means for speech to constitute “incitement to violence” to the point that it can be banned or criminalized. The expression of any political viewpoint, especially one passionately expressed, has the potential to “incite” someone else to get so riled up that they engage in violence.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      And this really boils it down to the empty pot….

      If you rail against the threats to free speech posed by Silicon Valley monopolies, someone hearing you may get so filled with rage that they decide to bomb an Amazon warehouse or a Facebook office. If you write a blistering screed accusing pro-life activists of endangering the lives of women by forcing them back into unsafe back-alley abortions, or if you argue that abortion is murder, you may very well inspire someone to engage in violence against a pro-life group or an abortion clinic. If you start a protest movement to object to the injustice of Wall Street bailouts — whether you call it “Occupy Wall Street” or the Tea Party — you may cause someone to go hunt down Goldman Sachs or Citibank executives who they believe are destroying the economic future of millions of people.

      If you claim that George W. Bush stole the 2000 and/or 2004 elections — as many Democrats, including members of Congress, did — you may inspire civic unrest or violence against Bush and his supporters. The same is true if you claim the 2016 or 2020 elections were fraudulent or illegitimate. If you rage against the racist brutality of the police, people may go burn down buildings in protest — or murder randomly selected police officers whom they have become convinced are agents of a racist genocidal state.

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 4018

      Isn’t there an inauguration today? Of course there is a lot of security for the inauguration after what happened ONLY TWO WEEKS AGO! WTF?

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      The Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and hard-core Democratic partisan, James Hodgkinson, who went to a softball field in June, 2017 to murder Republican Congress members — and almost succeeded in fatally shooting Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) — had spent months listening to radical Sanders supporters and participating in Facebook groups with names like “Terminate the Republican Party” and “Trump is a Traitor.”

      Hodgkinson had heard over and over that Republicans were not merely misguided but were “traitors” and grave threats to the Republic. As CNN reported, “his favorite television shows were listed as ‘Real Time with Bill Maher;’ ‘The Rachel Maddow Show;’ ‘Democracy Now!’ and other left-leaning programs.” All of the political rhetoric to which he was exposed — from the pro-Sanders Facebook groups, MSNBC and left-leaning shows — undoubtedly played a major role in triggering his violent assault and decision to murder pro-Trump Republican Congress members.

      I had to include this part because it gives fire his usual out where he says he can’t bother to read Glen Greenwald the Trumper. Willful blindness, but if thats how he can sleep at night then to each his own I guess.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      It goes without saying that First Amendment jurisprudence on “incitement” governs what a state can do when punishing or restricting speech, not what a Congress can do in impeaching a president or expelling its own members, and certainly not social media companies seeking to ban people from their platforms.</p>

      <script async src=”https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js”></script&gt;
      <ins class=”adsbygoogle”
      style=”display:block; text-align:center;”
      data-ad-layout=”in-article”
      data-ad-format=”fluid”
      data-ad-client=”ca-pub-6114677105545158″
      data-ad-slot=”1184249302″></ins>
      <script>
      (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
      </script>

      <p>But that does not make these principles of how to understand “incitement to violence” irrelevant when applied to other contexts. Indeed, the central reasoning of these cases is vital to preserve everywhere: that if speech is classified as “incitement to violence” despite not explicitly advocating violence, it will sweep up any political speech which those wielding this term wish it to encompass. No political speech will be safe from this term when interpreted and applied so broadly and carelessly.

      </p>

      <p>And that is directly relevant to the second point. Continuing to process Washington debates of this sort primarily through the prism of “Democrat v. Republican” or even “left v. right” is a sure ticket to the destruction of core rights. There are times when powers of repression and censorship are aimed more at the left and times when they are aimed more at the right, but it is neither inherently a left-wing nor a right-wing tactic. It is a ruling class tactic, and it will be deployed against anyone perceived to be a dissident to ruling class interests and orthodoxies no matter where on the ideological spectrum they reside.</p>
      <p>Dang…. this guy gets me.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      If you identify as a conservative and continue to believe that your prime enemies are ordinary leftists, or you identify as a leftist and believe your prime enemies are Republican citizens, you will fall perfectly into the trap set for you. Namely, you will ignore your real enemies, the ones who actually wield power at your expense: ruling class elites, who really do not care about “right v. left” and most definitely do not care about “Republican v. Democrat” — as evidenced by the fact that they fund both parties — but instead care only about one thing: stability, or preservation of the prevailing neoliberal order.

      This is really it. Preach on brother!

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      A standard Goldman Sachs banker or Silicon Valley executive has far more in common, and is far more comfortable, with Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan than they do with the ordinary American citizen. Except when it means a mildly disruptive presence — like Trump — they barely care whether Democrats or Republicans rule various organs of government, or whether people who call themselves “liberals” or “conservatives” ascend to power. Some left-wing members of Congress, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) have said they oppose a new domestic terrorism law, but Democrats will have no trouble forming a majority by partnering with their neocon GOP allies like Liz Cheney to get it done, as they did earlier this year to stop the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Germany.

      Neoliberalism and imperialism do not care about the pseudo-fights between the two parties or the cable TV bickering of the day. They do not like the far left or the far right. They do not like extremism of any kind. They do not support Communism and they do not support neo-Nazism or some fascist revolution. They care only about one thing: disempowering and crushing anyone who dissents from and threatens their hegemony. They care about stopping dissidents. All the weapons they build and institutions they assemble — the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the NSA, oligarchical power — exist for that sole and exclusive purpose, to fortify their power by rewarding those who accede to their pieties and crushing those who do not.

      That a new War on Terror is coming is not a question of speculation and it is not in doubt. Those who now wield power are saying it explicitly. The only thing that is in doubt is how much opposition they will encounter from those who value basic civic rights more than the fears of one another being deliberately cultivated within us.

      Sheesh, what a liberal hating Trumper…. and Jbear too! Anyone who’s against the things I’ve been told are righteous is a white supremacist and needs to be delt with!

      Am I getting through Fire?

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Isn’t there an inauguration today? Of course there is a lot of security for the inauguration after what happened ONLY TWO WEEKS AGO! WTF?

      Yeah well, we’ll see what happens. I hope they take the walls down real soon.

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      Except when it means a mildly disruptive presence — like Trump

      This tells me all I want know about the author and his stance. Mildly disruptive … that’s some funny shit. It would be nice to see some thoughts on this from some somewhat unbiased sources, though ….. if there even are any.

    • Donkey_Hunter

      Participant
      Post count: 1800

      If you identify as a conservative and continue to believe that your prime enemies are ordinary leftists, or you identify as a leftist and believe your prime enemies are Republican citizens, you will fall perfectly into the trap set for you. Namely, you will ignore your real enemies, the ones who actually wield power at your expense: ruling class elites, who really do not care about “right v. left” and most definitely do not care about “Republican v. Democrat” — as evidenced by the fact that they fund both parties — but instead care only about one thing: stability, or preservation of the prevailing neoliberal order.

      This is really it. Preach on brother!

      Great quote…

      …up until the very last sentence…

      …which was basically a common bullshit alt-right talking point.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Except when it means a mildly disruptive presence — like Trump

      This tells me all I want know about the author and his stance. Mildly disruptive … that’s some funny shit. It would be nice to see some thoughts on this from some somewhat unbiased sources, though ….. if there even are any.

      Clink with the ol, Glen Greenwald is a Trumper defense for covering his ears and loudly singing the national anthem while they round up the deplorables.

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      Clink with the ol, Glen Greenwald is a Trumper defense for covering his ears and loudly singing the national anthem while they round up the deplorables.

      Spare me the histrionics, jbear. Come back when something is actually done that we can discuss instead of bullshit posturing on hypotheticals ….. and the ironic thing about this is that it probably wouldn’t even be being discussed if your and Greenwald’s boy Donnie hadn’t been “leading” this country the last 4 yours and empowering, especially in the last three months, the domestic terrorist groups that triggered this at this point in time.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1167

      . Come back when something is actually done that we can discuss instead of bullshit posturing on hypotheticals …..

      With all due respect Klink, we just spent 4 years running around chasing our tails because of “dog whistles”. There are plenty of folks out there, Democrat, pundits and in the media espousing about what they want to do exactly, no dog whistles involved, therefore I think it is a legitimate fear. Particularly seeing how “Big Tech” have performed over the last few weeks demonstrating how easily it can be achieved.

      I agree that proof is in the pudding, but when you have the likes of Adam Schiff proposing legislation exactly the same as was passed after 911 but to be directed at American Citizens, there is, at the very least, cause for concern.

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6559

      Faux outrage is back I see.

      These next 4 years are gonna be fun!

      “We need to balance the budget”.

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      With all due respect Klink, we just spent 4 years running around chasing our tails because of “dog whistles”. There are plenty of folks out there, Democrat, pundits and in the media espousing about what they want to do exactly, no dog whistles involved, therefore I think it is a legitimate fear. Particularly seeing how “Big Tech” have performed over the last few weeks demonstrating how easily it can be achieved.

      I agree that proof is in the pudding, but when you have the likes of Adam Schiff proposing legislation exactly the same as was passed after 911 but to be directed at American Citizens, there is, at the very least, cause for concern.

      If they’re a threat to this country, why should American citizens be treated any different than non-citizens? When/if this becomes a reality, I’ll be more than happy to discuss the merits of the exact legislation but just have a problem with the premature “1984”, Chicken Little sky is falling hand wringing crowd about stuff like this …

      As far as “Big Tech” goes, I’m the wrong guy to talk to about that. I think social media is one of the worst things to have happened to this country in a long while. Wouldn’t have a problem at all if they shut all of it down …… and yes, I realize that would include parts of here.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Hey I have a great idea….. lets “upgrade” our message board two weeks before the Bucs are in the NFC championship game with a broken piece of garbage….. great idea PR… great $&^#*@^ idea!

      Hopefully I’ll be back when they fix this crap, probably a week or so after the superbowl.

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6559

      That’s capitalism. You’re still here with their shitty product.

      Supply and demand

    • Charles

      Participant
      Post count: 351

      jbear, get help dude. You lost. You suck. You’re a diminishing demographic.</p>
      <p>Old white people are going to dying off.</p><div class=’code-block code-block-1′ style=’margin: 8px 0; clear: both;’>
      <script async src=”https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js”></script&gt;
      <ins class=”adsbygoogle”
      style=”display:block; text-align:center;”
      data-ad-layout=”in-article”
      data-ad-format=”fluid”
      data-ad-client=”ca-pub-6114677105545158″
      data-ad-slot=”1184249302″>
      <script>
      (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
      </script></div>

      <p>Trumpism is a dead end.</p>
      <p>Die…please…

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      @Fire

      Yeah, capitalism sucks. Things will be much better when our internet is run by the government and speech is censored so we can surf the web in safety like they do in North Korea.

      Enjoy

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      @Charles

      I was wondering why you never talk to me…. nah just kidding. Get a grip dude.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      I think it’s time you update your avatar to reflect the wonderful state of affairs brought about by Uncle Joe’s blue wave. I found some ridiculous smiley’s that convey just the right amount of willful blindness and surreal absurdity. You need the kind of image that conveys the insanity of a person grinning from ear to ear while sitting on the floor of their living room while all four walls are on fire. That would be perfect for you.

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6559

      Yeah I hate capitalism and love socialism and Biden is a huge socialist.

      Totally…

      I swear to God, no joke, when I read what you write I legit worry for the future of this great nation.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Fire Quote;

      I swear to God, no joke, when I read what you write I legit worry for the future of this great nation.

      I don’t know if you read Klink’s post above but he outright advocates banning social media because he doesn’t like it and it could be for our own good.

      And this shit is every day with you guys. Then you go on and on about how reasonable you are. You’re not reasonable fire. If you in your core believe that it’s ok to ban shit because you don’t use it or don’t like it and it could possibly be harmful to somebody somewhere then you and I have a very fundamental disagreement that’s quite frankly bound to lead to a disagreement.

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      I don’t know if you read Klink’s post above but he outright advocates banning social media because he doesn’t like it and it could be for our own good.

      Jesus Christ, jbear, what a fucking drama queen. It’s called hyperbole, you simp. Do I think that social media, while it has it’s obvious positives, has had a horrible effect on this country ….. absolutely, but how can I advocate something like banning social media that I, and anyone with a lick of fucking common sense, knows will never, ever happen.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      Jesus Christ, jbear, what a fucking drama queen. It’s called hyperbole, you simp. Do I think that social media, while it has it’s obvious positives, has had a horrible effect on this country ….. absolutely, but how can I advocate something like banning social media that I, and anyone with a lick of fucking common sense, knows will never, ever happen.

      Look Klink it already is happening. Parler no longer exists. That was met with cheers from, I’ll just say, people like you and fire… and Roy. Why were they cheering? Because it’s perceived that it only hurts the enemy. So instead of championing of free speech and diverse views, you have a weaponization of censorship.

      So if you advocate for the use of censorship to keep us safe from people talking on Parler at all or from saying anything untrue on Facebook or twitter then you are not advocating something that will never happen. It is happening.

    • Donkey_Hunter

      Participant
      Post count: 1800

      I’m still confused.

      I mean, I heard on good authority, that the world ended a few weeks ago. Or maybe it was a month ago.

      Are we in the afterlife part yet?

      Because if we are, it seems eerily similar.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      I’m still confused.

      I mean, I heard on good authority, that the world ended a few weeks ago. Or maybe it was a month ago.

      Are we in the afterlife part yet?

      Because if we are, it seems eerily similar.

      That joke gets more Hilarious every time DH.

      Every time I see your name pop up on one of the threads I’m involved in, I think…. This time DH must see my point… DH must be here to support me. lol

      You’re killing me DH.

    • Donkey_Hunter

      Participant
      Post count: 1800

      Just poking fun at your overreactions.

      That’s all.

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 4018

      JBear I think you’re wrong. I didn’t see if you answered my question from another thread.</p>
      <p>When people are advocating and organizing violence or an attack on the government that’s like selling drugs and human trafficking. Its not only violating TOS, its breaking the law. Are you saying tech companies should be required to support illegal activities?

      And its disingenuous and wrong to try to put the Democrats on hook for censorship. Perhaps you already forgot about Trump’s advocacy of Section 230. Or the Patriot Act. Or McCarthyism. Stop trying to frame liberals for pushing the 1st Amendment around when its usually the conservatives.

      Legally, the social media companies are private companies. Think of a shopping mall. That is private property, so its different than a public space. They aren’t required to allow protestors. But just because its private property doesn’t mean its Carte Blanche for them. They can’t discriminate because of race or age for example.

      What role does social media play regarding the first amendment? That’s a good topic of discussion. But to try to paint this issue as liberals vs. conservatives, liberals as the attackers and the conservatives as the protectors, is disingenuous and wrong. Trump and the Republicans are ordinarily no champions of the first amendment. They usually focus more on #2. They are only crying about it now because the cesspool of hate was shut down for allowing illegal activities.

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      Look Klink it already is happening. Parler no longer exists.

      The “it” you’re referring to there is my declaration that social media will never be banned so no, “it’s” NOT already happening. Parler still exists and is just looking for a new home. Your 1984, Doomsday scenarios pertaining to government control are nowhere close to being a reality. You need to broaden your scope outside the close minded right wing outlets you apparently regurgitate stuff from ……. Google/Bing/Whoever can be your friend to double check things.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 4108

      @Roy

      If I’m being fair, I don’t think it’s only a left wing problem I think a large share of representatives from both sides advocate this sort of trampling of civil liberties. On the right it’s the libertarian leaning ones who don’t. People like Mike Lee, Rand Paul and several others.

      Trump was actually all over the place when it came to this. Sometimes he seemed to be on the side of civil liberties and sometimes he seemed to be their worst enemy. One reason is that civil liberty encompasses a whole lot of stuff. Some of it is pet issues of the left and some of it pet issues for the right.

      Regarding violent attacks, I’m at the same place you are. When we’re talking about violence not about gathering to protest. There seems to be a whole lot of conjecture and and big lack of actual evidence regarding “violent” right wing attacks on the govenrment right now being propagated on social media. So I’m all for social media posts asking for or condoning violence being removed. But the net right now seems to be a lot wider than it should be.

      Ask Antifa members if they think it would be fair to remove social media mentions of a planned protest. I hate Antifa but it’s their right to plan protests. Where it becomes illegal is when there is planning for violent attacks. And that goes right down to a group of 20 people dressed in black bringing rocks or things they can turn into weapons to a protest. That doesn’t make the protest illegal but there was some sort of planning involved. Now when that can be discovered in social media it needs to be removed. If the government has evidence of planning violence then it needs to be addressed.

      We also have no arguments on the fact that FB is a private company and can remove whatever they like from their site. Where I’m bothered right now is that the left seems to be using this as a defense of censorship. The companies can do what they want but we’re talking about the public policy. are we condoning censorship or are we condemning it?

    • Col. Klink

      Participant
      Post count: 186

      Regarding violent attacks, I’m at the same place you are. When we’re talking about violence not about gathering to protest. There seems to be a whole lot of conjecture and and big lack of actual evidence regarding “violent” right wing attacks on the govenrment right now being propagated on social media. So I’m all for social media posts asking for or condoning violence being removed. But the net right now seems to be a lot wider than it should be.

      I think we all agree that gathering to protest isn’t a problem but I’m still kind of puzzled at your lack of evidence pertaining to violent right wing attacks being propagated and the mocking of the measures used for the inauguration. There was chatter on the Net leading up to Jan 6th about violence and it was borne out. Obviously there was a faction egged on by the traitorous speeches at the rally that morning but you’d have to be blind to ignore the evidence that there was also a faction that came there prepared to do exactly what they did. With the same type noise leading up to Jan 20th, it would have been negligent to not have a show of force that discouraged anything remotely similar from happening …

    • FireLicht2020

      Participant
      Post count: 6559

      Few points:

      -Parler is back up on a Russian server

      -This is capitalism. Companies can ban idiots who are liabilities. I’ve been banned from this very website before for calling PR biased with the Winston/Mariota debate. They literally silenced me. I had to message them and apologize. So while it pissed me off at the time, if I want to use their terms and services, then I gotta watch what I say. Does that outrage you? These social media companies can do what they want. Your attempt at calling it authoritarianism is quite literally the opposite. You want government intervention to tell these private companies to stop being mean to white nationalists like MAGA.

      Social media is an echo chambers and too many people get their news from it.

      -Funny that you mentioned Lee and Paul (both Trump butt plugs) but not Amash… and by funny I mean expected.

      -Biden isn’t a socialist and delivered day one. I fully expect him to piss you off as he will (hopefully) listen to those of us more lefty than him. I think he’s done a great job thus far… so naturally you will think the world is coming to an end…

      -you voted for Trump. Nuff said

Viewing 34 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.