Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Wednesday, September 15, 2021

War on Terror II


Silverfiddle Rant!
The Election of Donald Trump encrazened the left, and they keep getting crazier:

Trump is Hitler, Jan 6th was the US Beer Hall Putsch, the Jan 6 MAGA mob launched a more horrible attack than 9/11, Trump voters are domestic terrorists, rightwing anti-vaxxers are endangering America (Fact Check:  They're Not, and they make up about half the unvaxxed cohort, but anyhoo...) 

What's going on?

The left's use of hysterical hyperbole and apocalyptic language make them today's millenarians:
"The Jim Crow Republican Party and larger neofascist movement are escalating their war on democracy by passing laws across the country designed to stop Black and brown people from voting."

"Fascist violence continues unabated."

"The Taliban, all of them together, plus every Al Qaeda fighter in the world, do not pose the threat to the United States that Trump or Trumpist extremists do."
Facts like this don't matter to the left screaming that Jan 6th was an attempted coup, or terrorist attack, or insurrection, or whatever...
It's pure fantasy, especially when one considers Jan. 6 wasn’t even the worst attack on the Capitol building. Indeed, between the 1915 Capitol bombing, the 1954 shooting by Puerto Rican nationalists, the 1971 Weather Underground bombing, and the 1983 M19 bombing there's stiff competition for the title of "worst" attack on the People's House.
The Infotainment Media Complex blares out exciting new revelations:
Former CIA Director Halspel:  The US was 'on the way to a right-wing coup' after Trump lost the election!

Gen Milley feared President Trump would "go rogue," so he convened a secret meeting of senior military officials.  (If anything looks like a potential coup, it's generals meeting secretly) 

Stan McChrystal and other 'experts' have compared Trump voters to Al Qaeda and radicalized home-grown terrorist insurgents.
Finally, firebug dunce George W. Bush--while desecrating hallowed ground this past 9/11--made similar disgraceful comparisons that had no place at that Shanksville ceremony.  What was his point?

Prepping the Battlespace

Bush spoke for the establishment, writes Rod Dreher:
Bush is legitimizing the US turning the vast intelligence and surveillance apparatus he built to fight Islamist terror onto American citizens who dissent.

It is the duty of we who are old enough to remember what happened in the year and a half between 9/11 and the launch of the Iraq War to remember how the US Government and a compliant media manufactured public consent for that war. 

We have to tell our children about it — about how the people in power told lies to make us deathly afraid of the people they wanted to punish, even though those people (the Iraqis) had nothing to do with 9/11. ... It’s starting to happen again — and George W. Bush yesterday laid down an important marker in that speech.
I agree. What say you?

31 comments:

  1. I normally caution against nazi comparisons, but the Beer-hall Putsch one has a little something to it: both strategically moronic episodes which only happened because a charismatic rabble-rouser got people over-excited before leaving them to their own devices, after which the crowd was doomed to improvise pathetically...
    Big difference is that Hitler definitely wanted to overthrow the democratic government, whereas Trump might have just been a bit clumsy.

    How much survaillance should domestic movementss like these be subjected to? I am absolutely with you that 9/11 was a convenient pretext for all sorts of government overreach, but I can also see that it wouldn't have taken much more planning and sobriety for Jan 6th to have panned out a great deal worse than it did; maybe the intelligence agencies should be in a position to intercept or resist these attacks more robustly? Or was it something other than Intelligence that was lacking on that day?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buckle up Jez - this weekend is Jan 6th, part II. The opportunity for some sort of instigated 'false flag' event is ripe for the picking....by either side.

      Delete
    2. The Beer Hall Putsch analogy is kinda apt, but not in the way the left is using it. Democrats are the ones using Jan 6 to justify their bs.

      Delete
    3. The worst that rabble could have done was get their hands on some politicians. No way they could have done a coup, siezed government or anything like that.

      Jan 6th was horrible enough on its own without all the hysterical leftwing propaganda.

      Delete
    4. "Jan 6th was horrible enough on its own..."

      true, no need to guild the lily.
      One of our MPs was shot dead in the run-up to the brexit referendum. It was horrible.

      Delete
    5. Yeah, well one of our protesters was shot dead in the halls of Congress. By a cop. For no good reason. No comparison.

      Delete
    6. @ed "For no good reason." -- what are you talking about? If you do what she did, guess what you might get shot. Anyway, my point is that 6th Jan could easily have escalated to harm or kill one or more of your elected representatives, which would have been much worse than what actually happened, not to make the comparsion -- I agree, there is none.

      Delete
  2. AS much as I don't want to be confused with defending W, we will not fall from an external terrorist threat.....but we certainly will from the threat within.

    The Left isn't the only entity that has been 'crazened'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we agree there are crazy and/or dangerous people on the extreme right, but I don't see any kind of major coordination there that positions them to do anything serious.

      What I greatly resist is conflating everyone to the right of Pelosi with far right extremists. That is a leftwing propaganda ploy, and I fear it is working.

      Delete
    2. We do have a threat within, and its in the Government Blob.

      Delete
    3. I disagree about the coordination. On the Right, you have hierarchical groups, often organized along quasi-military lines who are participating [or entertaining the idea of] in actions that in their own words....imply an overthrow of the government....or 'Civil War II.

      On the Left, you have a far looser and far less coordinated effort.

      And the Right engages in the "far/radical/extreme Left" rhetoric just as well as the Right does.

      Delete
    4. Silver said... "I think we agree there are crazy and/or dangerous people on the extreme right...

      What I greatly resist is conflating everyone to the right of Pelosi with far right extremists."


      Well... perhaps the reason "everyone to the right of Pelosi" does, I admit, get tarred and feathered sometimes is because the right itself refuses to call out or even define the extremist ppl within their ranks.

      Even in forums like this.

      I know many lefties, myself included, who regularly repudiate folks on the extreme left. Most elected Dems have disowned and called the ppl calling to totally defund the police.

      But for the most part, my pleas to the right and to conservatives to define the dangerous ppl, extremists, or extreme views of ppl on the right have been met with crickets.

      If people such as yourself and other conservatives refuse to call out and define extremism within your ranks, isn't it reasonable for the Pelosists to assume it really is everyone to her right?

      Just as when conservatives said after 9/11 that failure of the more moderate Muslims to repudiate the extreme wings of their religion constituted approval, can't the same be said today as it relates to the current GOP and conservatism?

      Tell me Silver... who are those dangerous ppl of whom you spoke? What views do they hold? What do they believe that is beyond the pale?

      Delete
    5. Jean Baudrillard, "The Agony of Power"

      "Contrary to domination, a hegemony of world power is no longer a dual, personal, or real form of domination, but the domination of networks, of calculation, and integral exchange. Domination can be overthrown from the outside, hegemony can only be inverted or reversed from the inside. They are two different, and almost contrary paradigms....

      ...Domination and hegemony are separated by the liquidation of reality. The superfast eruption of late of a global principle of simulation, a global hold by the virtual, globalization is the hegemony of a global power and can only occur in the framework of the virtual and the networks with the homogeneity that comes from signs, empty of their substance.

      The entire western masquerade relies on the cannibalization of reality by signs, or of a culture by itself. I use cannibalize here in the derivative sense of cannibalizing a car, using it as spare parts, cannibalizing a culture as we do it today means "tinkering with its' values like spare parts, in as much as the entire system is out of order.

      This distinction between domination and hegemony is crucial. It determines the forms of resistance appropriate for each, and the various ways in which the present situation could evolve."


      Left-Right... Right-Left. These are terms unsuitable for fighting a "hegemony" of corporate globalist power.

      Delete
    6. This brings us back to the literal meaning of the word ‘Cybernetic’ (Kubernetike, the art of governing).


      cybernetics
      NOUN
      the science of communications and automatic control systems in both machines and living things.

      Delete
    7. Left-Right are two opposing powers fighting each other to prevent "domination" in an hegemony and without affecting any changes to the control systems which govern it.

      Delete
    8. Dave,
      I have no responsibility to call out neo-nazis, KKK, and other violent right wing extremists. I do nothing and say nothing that supports them or would even lead anyone to believe that I support them.

      Same goes for you and the violent loonies on the left. I don't see you making comments supporting all of the violence and destruction perpetrated by antifa, so why would I ask you to constantly be repudiating the latest thing they've done?

      Delete
    9. Silver... I get what you are saying. The problem is conservatives, after 9/11 defined non repudiation as acceptance. As I explained in comment about Muslims.

      If there's any question, go back on this blog and at Geez to those time frames and take a look. And they weren't alone.

      While GW Bush rejected that thinking, he was pilloried by conservatives for it.

      And I'm still waiting for anyone here to define the characteristics and beliefs that make up "dangerous people on the extreme right."

      Absent at least a definition on that front, the left is free to assume everyone on the right fits that profile.

      Why is getting some simple definitions so hard?

      Delete
    10. The "dangerous people on the extreme right." are typically FBI provocateurs.

      Delete
    11. Dave,
      Use your eyes, your ears, and your brain. Anyone--left, right, wherever--who intimidates other with explicit or implicit threats of violence, advocates violence or engages in violence is a dangerous person.

      Stop broadbrushing people. Someone did or said something? Take it up with that person. I answer for myself, I cannot answer for others.

      I was one of those concerned about Muslims in this country after 9/11. I did not damn them all; any criticisms I leveled were targeted to specific behaviors. I absolutely hated the idea of that mosque near ground zero and I said so. I don't denigrate muslims or islam the religion. Once again when I level criticism is is specific.

      I have argued against bringing in people from demographics that hate us and I have argued against bringing people in when our government doesn't know how to vet them.

      Delete
  3. This thread validates what Trump meant when he said he could shoot someone dead in the street and not lose a single supporter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Whoever controls the media controls the American opinion and voter. The cover provided to biden and his lack of leadership is mind blowing. They gave GW a voice in promoting his attack on Afghanistan and now they give no voice to bidens massive screw ups.

    ReplyDelete
  5. My irony meter gets a buried needle and shatters whenever a Trump supporter calls someone unhinged.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hang in there scooter, Hillary could still run again!

      Delete
    2. Doubtful. Why would Democrats run the only candidate Trump could defeat?

      Delete
    3. I mean, he didn't even have a prayer against a senile kiddie diddler.

      Delete
    4. Curse you Silver! HRC was and always will be a toxic candidate. Hopefully never to be seen in the political realm again.

      Delete
  6. In the end no one gives a damn. Certainly not "our" side.

    Trump received 6 million votes in CA in 2020

    Recall only received 3 million votes yesterday

    Millions of Republicans stayed home

    I am looking forward to my free eyeglasses, hearing aids, and dental care coming right down the pike. Thankfully I won't be around when my Grand kids are out hunting and gathering and speaking Mandarin if they are lucky and survived the purge.

    63.8%
    5,887,471
    Yes
    36.2%
    3,335,779

    ReplyDelete
  7. Replies
    1. It is pathetic watching a sad, angry little girl continue to post her low IQ brain droppings in a forum where she has been rejected.

      Poor little 'this one' must be trapped in a shriveled, failure-stained life. Why else would someone continue to jump up and down and scream "hey! look at me!" to a group of people who view her with pity and contempt?

      Delete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective

!--BLOCKING--