I note that I disagree with Tom regarding the appropriateness of Waters' statements. I heartily approve of the call to hold government accountable by individuals and groups, despite any regulatory protections such parties are subject to, or availed of.
I could not more strongly disagree with Rep. Waters' reasons for making her statements, as I am of the opinion that she is corrupt, and acting to disempower Americans, but do agree on her tactic in this specific statement.
Conversely, I strongly support Judicial Watch and Tom Fitton, while feeling that he is working to counter his own overarching principles in this particular suit. C'est la guerre. Politics inevitably produces learning moments, and I am confident I will learn from this one. I hope all of us do.
Tom seems to be of the opinion that Trump is some kind of saviour, and I am skeptical. I see that Mossad and nefarious institutions have strongly contributed to Trump's investiture, and this alone would give me great incredulity. However, other information contributes to my skepticism of Trump, particularly the Syrian and Yemeni (and many other) wars, Q's push for the same policy regarding Iran that has been standard operating procedure since before I was born, and his cabinet.
Under no theory promoting lawful governance and free people is 'Bloody Gina' Haspel an appropriate Director for CIA.
I was unable to embed this video, as it isn't in a format I am previously experienced with, so to view it you must visit the long link above. Sorry! I am working much of late, and posting little as a result. I assure you that care that I have not changed my interests nor focus. I am seeking to fund a technological development, and this requires longer hours, so am putting them in.
If anyone has a Creality CR10 for sale, and would accept Steem in some form for all or part of the purchase price, I would be able to expend less fiat. Let me know if you do.
You and I are two peas of a pod on Trump. Love the rhetoric...very cautious about the reality-- (ala Reagan, after whom he is clearly modeled.)
If one good thing comes out of the Trump presidency it would be the fact that wages are raising, I guess the liberal base corporate hierarchy got the message that Americans aren't about being brought down to nor competing with third world economics of haves and have nots.
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 200+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 8
Ways you can help the @informationwar
using threats and violence for political ends is terrorism.
Well, apparently, that's all that government actually does. I can't recall ever dealing with a government agency that didn't threaten me with violence if I didn't agree to their policy.
that's not a political goal.
You have strange definitions of policy and goal.
Government is politics in action, and is the essence of terrorism. The goal of every governmental agency is to terrorize me, and everyone they can, into compliance with their policies.
Its their goal.
No, they threaten you with fines so you will pay your tickets or taxes or buy a dog license or whatever you are refusing to pay, it's only terrorism if their motivation is to influence your politics. And of course you need the violence or threats of violence. Neither condition is satisfied. Like you said their goal is compliance with their policies, that has nothing to do with politics. They may inadvertently influence your politics but that is not the motive. Not paying taxes or other fees or fines, even if you are threatened with arrest ( I had a warrant put out on me one time for not paying an excise tax) is not a threat of violence. Those things are not capital offences and we don't have corporal punishment in the US.
You grossly mischaracterize violence. It is not only being murdered that meets the test, although you would probably agree that sometimes arrests can go 'wrong' and people end up dead during an arrest when they should not have.
I have suffered far more than being ushered into a room I didn't want to remain in during arrest. Regardless of the test for violence, arrest meets it.
Compliance with the terrorists is the goal of terrorists. The term was coined to refer to government, as practiced in France during the revolution. People were terrified of being guillotined, and so complied.
That's what the dog catcher does to me.
You too.
Nope, just the threat of a fine. Almost everyone who is arrested is uninjured, those that are almost always were violently resisting or refusing to follow legal orders. In cases where someone is injured improperly the police are liable for any damages they may cause.
The dog catcher is not going to guillotine you bro. In fact we are not living in 1794 France where people are executing all their perceived political rivals. If the dog catcher threatened to kill you if you didn't proclaim the glory of the revolution then maybe you could call it terrorism.
What did they do to you?
What if the term was coined after the slogan "We will strike terror in the hearts of disbelievers"?