Re: [Salon] NY Post: FBI & DHS Censorship Rampage to Control US Minds



Speaking of the euphemistically named “Radical Right,” the “f” word in actual fact, and sorry for this delayed response to my friend Jim Bovard’s article, but my question for Jim is: are you some kind of Communist? Or worse, a “Liberal,”or “Libertarian?" As Willmoore Kendall, one of the CIA founders of the Conservative Movement in the 1950s, so denounced, so often? 

And don’t you know Jim; we “don’t need no stinking Rights,” especially the “right to freedom of speech” and “freedom of thought!” Nor any of the other “Rights” contained in the Bill of Rights so “illicitly" added by Constitutional Amendment to what was a perfect "Philadelphia Constitution of 1787," sans Bill of Rights, according to Willmoore Kendall, and his right-wing, wing-man, George Carey, both of whom had more animus to “rights” than King George himself!

But, He lives! Kendall does I mean, in the ideas he most ardently propounded as what you criticize Jim: censorship! Something Kendall and Burnham always wished for, but couldn’t get as far as they wanted, under such “Liberals” as Eisenhower, and Justice Black, to name a couple. But it's on its way to being achieved now, as begun as Cheneyism, carried over into Trumpism, and now, not surprisingly, with the dialectics of politics, under Biden. So appeal the denial of your so-called “rights” Jim, to the Trumpite Judges on the SC. Then the renouncement of the 1st Amendment can be made "official” as Constitutional Law. In fact, to give them a headstart, they can cite to these documents by the Great Conservative himself, Willmoore Kendall (I’d had a query from someone uncertain who was the author of some previous files I’d shared, so I have to name him, even if that would be preferred to be kept “hidden)! That there are so many isn’t due to his “long life,” but rather to the intensity of his hostility to “freedoms” non-conservatives see as our “Right” as Americans under the Constitution. Little wonder he’s now considered a precursor to Trumpism!


Attachment: pdfAZZAVobq_s.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Academic Freedom.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Basic Issues Between Conservatives and Liberals.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Dialogues in Americanism.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: pdfd9svLDYIac.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Towards a Definition of Conservatism.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: The Function of a University.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: The Pons Asinorum of Contemporary Conservatism.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: The People vs Socrates Revisited.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Jefferson and Civil Liberties- The Darker Side.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: Kendall on Bill of Rights & American Freedom.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: The Government of Poland-2.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document


And this by one of his "PaleoConservative” followers I would guess:


Attachment: The Free Speech Facade - The American Mind.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document



So Jim, genuflect to the “Conservative Movement” when you realize you “have no rights due you as a human being and an American. The Fusionism of the 1950s prevailed, and under Frank Meyer, a friend and "fellow traveler”  of Kendall’s, "free speech” had nothing to do with so-called “libertarianism.” 


Biden is simply standing for the "the ability of society to uphold “a hard core of shared beliefs” by excluding “ideas and opinions contrary” to its self-understanding."

"What McCarthyism was really about, Kendall said, was the ability of society to uphold “a hard core of shared beliefs” by excluding “ideas and opinions contrary” to its self-understanding. McCarthy, in his view, was defending the traditional American consensus not only against Communists in government, but also against liberals, who view America as “a society in which all questions are open questions, a society dedicated to the proposition that no truth in particular is true, a society, in Justice Jackson’s phrase, in which no one can speak properly of an orthodoxy — over against which any belief, however immoral, however extravagant, can be declared heretical and thus proscribed.” It was this clash of fundamentally opposed understandings of American democracy that propelled McCarthy to the center of politics and endowed the controversy over his public career with “genuine civil war potential.”
So stop f***ing with the “consensus,” Jim :-) And interfering with “Democratic Majoritarianism” as a “minority” against the “majority,” with neither entitled to any actually “rights,” except as how some centralized authority decrees the “General Will, per Rousseau, and per Willmoore Kendall! (See attached The Government of Poland.)




On Nov 1, 2022, at 7:12 PM, Jim Bovard via Salon <salon@listserve.com> wrote:

https://nypost.com/2022/11/01/democrats-desperate-to-censor-anyone-that-disagrees-with-them/

New York Post, November 2, 2022
Democrats desperate to censor anyone that disagrees with them

by James Bovard

Federal agencies are censoring what you see online to protect America’s “cognitive infrastructure.”

A report Monday from the left-wing Intercept revealed shocking details on how the FBI and Department of Homeland Security secretly affected the 2020 election and are rapidly expanding their suppression of dissent.

In the spring, DHS revealed that it had a Disinformation Governance Board, headed by a wacky zealot named Nina Jankowicz. The New York Post led the charge against that “Ministry of Truth,” and many people believed the peril ended when that board was dissolved. But far more insidious federal censorship efforts are proliferating.

The FBI, DHS, Secret Service and even Customs and Border Protection are elbowing social-media companies like Facebook and Twitter to engage in “censorship by surrogate,” as law professor Jonathan Turley observed.

As the covert war against “misinformation” expands, the list of federally prohibited online thoughts is snowballing. DHS is targeting “inaccurate information on ‘the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine,’ ” The Intercept reported.

Are federal censors still seeking to enforce President Biden’s delusion that COVID vaccines prevent transmission? Are they continuing to suppress any information about COVID originating in a Wuhan lab? Is any criticism of Biden’s botched Afghan withdrawal considered heresy? In many cases, DHS notified Facebook and Twitter to suppress parody accounts — perhaps because nothing is more subversive than laughing at politicians.

How many votes were swayed by federal censorship in 2020, and how many will be swayed in next week’s midterm election? The campaign by the feds and former CIA poohbahs to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story was only the tip of the iceberg in the presidential race.

“The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions,” The Intercept noted.

As the Foundation for Freedom Online recently reported, federal contractors also alerted DHS (which then elbowed Big Tech) to suppress hundreds of posts by Americans that were “‘casting doubt on the integrity of the election outcome’ via criticism of things like the viability of drop boxes and mail-in ballots.”

 The real goal of the Truth Cops is to control America’s minds. Jen Easterly, Biden’s Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency chief, declared that “the most critical infrastructure is our cognitive infrastructure, so building that resilience to misinformation and disinformation . . . is incredibly important.”

And the most important cognitive “fix” is to train Americans to never doubt Uncle Sam.

Biden’s National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism explicitly proclaims a “broader priority” of “enhancing faith in government.”

In a March meeting with top Twitter executives, FBI official Laura Dehmlow “warned that the threat of subversive information on social media could undermine support for the U.S. government.” The FBI has 80 agents on a task force to curb “subversive data utilized to drive a wedge between the populace and the government.” Mike Benz, a former top State Department official, warns that thanks to DHS string-pulling, “The U.S. government, in effect, censored the ability to ‘cast doubt’ on the U.S. government.”

On Sunday’s “Face the Nation,” Biden chief censor Jen Easterly warned that the midterm elections face a “very complex threat environment” because “you have rampant disinformation.”

Easterly didn’t offer as an example Biden’s claim last week in Syracuse that the price for a gallon of gas was “over $5 when I took office.” What moral standing do federal officials have to suppress alleged private misinformation when the commander-in-chief is brazenly lying?

Federal censorship efforts have almost certainly been far more extensive than yet revealed. Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, could give a heroic booster shot to the First Amendment by revealing all the emails, texts and other messages federal agents sent to pressure Twitter to muzzle American citizens. If federal agencies have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear, right?

James Bovard is the author of 10 books and a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors.
--
Salon mailing list
Salon@listserve.com
https://mlm2.listserve.net/mailman/listinfo/salon

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.