Biden’s Terror Strategy Defines Republicans as the New Terrorists

Source: Frontpage Mag.

Daniel Greenfield deconstructs the Biden administration’s newly released National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.

If you liked Animal Farm, you’ll love the new policies.

The Biden administration will only acknowledge two terrorist threats. The first threat comes from “anti-government extremists” which justifies a crackdown on any kind of political opposition and a suppression of “conspiracy theories”. The second threat comes from racists which creates an urgent need to tackle “the threat posed by domestic terrorism” with “substantial efforts to confront the racism that feeds into aspects of that threat”.

That “means tackling racism in America” with a civics education that covers “when racism and bigotry have meant that the country fell short of living up to its founding principles”.

Put another way, “All pigs are equal” is now officially “Some pigs are more equal than others.”

17 thoughts on “Biden’s Terror Strategy Defines Republicans as the New Terrorists

  1. It was inevitable. Obama labeled Libertarians as terrorists and even wanted to put us on no-fly lists, They have to go for the GOP now as the next step.

    Like

    1. “Obama labeled Libertarians as terrorists . . .”

      Laughable BULLSHIT.

      Unless by “Libertarian” you mean people who threaten to stop “tyranny” with their secret arsenals. People like that merit closer watching than decent citizens when the goal is to head off domestic terrorism. Is that what you are referring to?

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Your initial statement – “Obama labeled Libertarians as terrorists” – was a LIE. The “evidence” you provide doesn’t even try. It is the opinions TODAY of someone who used to work for President Obama and, of course, your sources distort and cherry-pick even that so that it fits your victimy narrative.

          As for your second link, I had already read that nonsense before replying to your initial lie. It says nothing about adding Libertarians to watch lists. Just another whiny victimy opinion piece.

          The kernel of truth in all this victimhood and whining is that there is significant overlap between what Libertarians and domestic terrorists talk about. The main difference is that the domestic terrorists (like those who tried to overthrow the election) have the courage of their convictions while Libertarians are mainly hot air. Separating the real threats from the hot air is an ongoing challenge for our security services.

          Liked by 1 person

      1. Your link says nothing except that domestic terrorism is a serious problem.

        Whiney suppositions abound in that phony article.

        “…conveniently ignoring true extremists on the left, particularly those who are Islamic.”

        Islamic terrorists are left wing? Ignorance personified. There are few organizations in the world more conservative than radical Islam. The only difference between them and our own religious hard right is female circumcision and debate over which holy book is best.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. RE: “Your link says nothing except that domestic terrorism is a serious problem.”

          Wrong. The link reports that Obama’s newly formed domestic terrorism division intended to target librtarians.

          Like

          1. The link “reports” nothing of the kind. Made up shit is not a “report.” The author – NOT OBAMA – is the one who equates “homegrown violent extremists” with constitutionalists, libertarians, and pro-lifers. Read the opening paragraph and note what is in quotes and what is not . . .

            [The Department of Justice has created a new “domestic terrorism” division to combat its true enemy: “homegrown violent extremists,” like the hated constitutionalists, libertarians, and pro-lifers … Wait, what?]

            The actual people this unit is targetting are the VIOLENT extremists who use or threaten VIOLENCE to pursue their political agenda. In other words . . . terrorists. Just because you agree with the goals of a Timothy McVeigh or a Paul Hill or a Cliven Bundy or Proud Boys does not mean that they are not terrorists.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “The author – NOT OBAMA – is the one who equates ‘homegrown violent extremists’ with constitutionalists, libertarians, and pro-lifers.”

            Wrong: “One example is the Department of Homeland Security’s 2009 report, which specifically cited constitutionalists and libertarians as domestic terrorism threats.”

            Like

  2. It is increasingly obvious that domestic terrorism is a greater threat than Al Qaeda and it’s spin-offs.

    Gaslighting to obscure that problem is the main strategy of the Republican Party and its anti-government positions. (Antifa as the main attackers on the Capitol with gang members like PBoys traitors as tourists is believed by the ignorant, but vulnerable.)

    “Stand by”, as a command from the president directed at domestic gangs kind of says it’s all.

    Follow that with well armed gangs in tactical gear and messaging about taking over Congress on 1/6 and we have the real threat.

    Legitimate militias as envisioned by the 2nd Amendment were used to secure the US from domestic rebellions early on. Now the phony gangs are getting legitimacy by conservatives.

    Second Amendment solutions are the pride of the right. And that is the very definition of terrorism: violence to advance a political agenda.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “It is increasingly obvious that domestic terrorism is a greater threat than Al Qaeda and it’s spin-offs.”

      That’s a dubious proposition on its face, since Al Qaeda’s influence has obviously declined on its own.

      The new strategy is concerning, however, because it conflates domestic terrorism with right-wing ideology, creating a risk that the national security apparatus will be used to attack political opposition. There isn’t much evidence in the public record to justify the association.

      Like

      1. “There isn’t much evidence in the public record to justify the association.”

        Really? Have you already forgotten the 500 or so shitheads facing criminal prosecution and jail for their terrorist attack on Congress on January 6th? They were not leftists.

        Here is some simple advice . . . Don’t want to be investigated as a domestic terrorist? Then do not threaten or plan violence. Nor associate with those who do. Simple.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. RE: “Really? Have you already forgotten the 500 or so shitheads facing criminal prosecution and jail for their terrorist attack on Congress on January 6th?”

        How many of the protesters are facing “domestic terrorism charges? For that matter, how many of the unindicted conspirators were federal agents who committed crimes?

        Like

  3. The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

    H. L. Mencken

    Like

  4. “ The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed…”

    “Hordes at the border…Gay marriage…election fraud…Mexican rapists…BLM…Dr. Seuss…suburban invasion by inner city folks…”

    Yeah, I think you finally got it.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s