Don't mention possibility of civil war

[SassyLady]

Don't talk about next civil war in any of your discussions or you might go to jail.

Seriously? There’s nothing new or even alarming about people speaking in private about whether America is nearing “civil war.” Polls repeatedly show most Americans believe we are headed for a new civil war, including people on both sides of the political aisle. Is the FBI going to start rounding them up, too?

January 6 protestor arrested for trespassing, etc., but will be held until trial (sometime in 2022) because he is a white supremacist who was recorded discussing there might be a civil war approaching.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/12/t...e-supremacist/

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Don't talk about next civil war in any of your discussions or you might go to jail.

Really...
So are they going to arrest crazy Joe??
Or is it going to be only those that in --any way-- opposes the dem party platform and leadership?
You know this is starting to take on similarity to how Hitler and the Nazi's first started off, imho.-Tyr

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/19...the-civil-war/

January 6 protestor arrested for trespassing, etc., but will be held until trial (sometime in 2022) because he is a white supremacist who was recorded discussing there might be a civil war approaching.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/12/t...e-supremacist/

Washington Examiner
Biden’s dangerous assault on freedom of speech
Washington Examiner - Monday

Just days after calling voter identification requirements “the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War,” President Joe Biden accused Facebook of “killing people” by failing to censor what the White House characterizes as “misinformation” about COVID-19 vaccines.

Biden’s penchant for hyperbole would not be so worrisome if his press secretary, Jen Psaki, had not called on social media companies to work together in banning sources from all social media platforms.

“You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others for providing misinformation out there,” Psaki said.

The White House’s efforts to deputize social media platforms into becoming de facto government censors should be deeply troubling to every citizen who has ever voiced an opinion outside of the politically acceptable mainstream.

It was not that long ago when some social media platforms actively suppressed claims that COVID-19 originated in a Wuhan laboratory and spread after an accidental leak. It was not that long ago when government officials encouraged people not to buy masks to protect themselves from COVID-19. It was not that long ago experts said COVID-19 spread through physical surfaces or that we had to be a full 6 feet away from each other to socially distance.

In each of these cases, the Biden White House would have preferred to quash any debate about the truth of the virus. They want only one voice of expert opinion reaching people, and they want to ban anyone voicing a dissenting opinion from all platforms.

The implications of this White House conspiracy to shut down speech it does not like becomes even scarier when the subject moves beyond COVID-19. Just consider NPR’s recent story about The Daily Wire in which the story admits that “the articles The Daily Wire publishes don’t normally include falsehoods” but by “only covering specific stories that bolster the conservative agenda and only including certain facts readers still come away with the impression that Republican politicians can do little wrong.”

And: “If you’ve stripped enough context away,” NPR chosen expert Jaime Settle said, “any piece of truth can become a piece of misinformation.”

Truth as misinformation. This Orwellian idea is probably why social media platforms colluded with Democrats to suppress true stories of Hunter Biden’s laptop containing evidence he sold access to his father.

Or why they suppressed evidence COVID-19 did originate from a Chinese communist lab.

Or why they banned books documenting the harm of invasive surgery on confused young children.

The power of social media platforms is only growing. More than half of adults prefer to get their news on a digital platform. Even if the people running these platforms didn’t give 90% of their political donations to one party, it should be worrisome these firms are conspiring with the federal government to control what can and cannot be said about any subject.

Policy solutions to this problem are hard. But the Biden administration is showing the need for a solution is great and growing.

Tags: Editorials, Social Media, Misinformation, Biden Administration, Facebook

Original Author: Washington Examiner

Original Location: Biden’s dangerous assault on freedom of speech

[Gunny]

No need. After watching the year leading up to it and the election, the 70+% is caving to the 20+% without a fight. Too many heads would have to come out of too many asses for an actual fight.

Not seeing it.

[revelarts]

No need. After watching the year leading up to it and the election, the 70+% is caving to the 20+% without a fight. Too many heads would have to come out of too many asses for an actual fight.

Not seeing it.

xactly.
I've never understood people (mostly on the right) who talk about a new civil war.
It makes no sense.
Whenever i've asked people who talk like that "Who are you going to shoot? Cops? Military? certain Politicians? most Democrats?" (the socialist/communist party, BLM and Antifa don't run Squat so no need to shoot them)
When asked they act like they never really said "civil war" or that somehow civil war does not mean shooting anyone .. like in a war. When asked to clarify what they meant, they sputter or don't reply or accuse me of something or other.

Bottom line I simply can't imagine many people on the right shooting down cops and/or military.... to "make America Great again".
Some seem to ass-ume that most of cops and military will be on "their side". But like you said 70% of cops and military will simply cave to who ever is at the top of the chain of command. Local, State and federal. "legal" orders and "laws"will be enforced.
Can't have cops and military thinking for themselves following the constitution as they understand it, I've been told that'd be insubordination, treason, chaos and anarchy.

When asked to clarify what they meant by "Civil War" they got nothing... or won't say.
It comes across to me as a knee Jerk Expression that vents a broad general frustration.

In contrast to the 1st US civil war there were actual CLEAR sides in terms of land. And gov't officials and military people that were CLEARLY on one side of the succession and slavery issues and ready to form a new gov't with the backing of most of the people and arms in the states.

I'd challenged anyone today to name one politician today that stands up constantly and strongly (with more than words!) for the values and issues the "civil war" minded folks want to promote/maintain. Much less one that would support a "civil war".
Also I have to wonder if the "civil war" minded people could even come up with set of issues that they'd all agree on.
Other than the 2nd amendment.

The other thing that i really don't get is this. Some folks that talk about a "civil war" are often the same ones that like to point Black people to Martin Luther King as a GOOD example of how to make political change. And disparage Malcolm X and the original Black Panthers (who never killed whites BTW).
During the pandemic many people on the right did take to the streets... and organize to protest. even disobey the law?!? () this is the REAL way to make changes. All the war and violence talk is pissing in the wind. IMO MLK had it right.
Tons of organization, strategic protest and boycotts, pressuring politicians to do what's right even if they don't want to (LBJ was a Racist democrat but he passed the Civil right bill and more). When the cops and army came out they didn't try to have a "civil war" they let them prove who were unconstitutional oppressors.

And the MAIN thing that's always lost from MLKs approach was that he said ... as Jesus said .. LOVE your enemies.
Sometime phrased as "...we must Love our deluded white brothers..." "... they've been raised in hatred and lies but are still God's children..." .

People on the right (like everyone else) appreciate being on the receiving end of forgiveness and love. And as "Americans", love when groups forgive our national "mistakes" becasue "America's not perfect". But few on right reach a hand out to be merciful to others in their imperfections.

I know some people in the military and those who revere it tend to have a Hammer mind set and see most problems as nails, meaning "War". But seems to me that more people on the right should look hard at the 100+ other options BEFORE pulling the "civil war" card on fellow Americans. Seems to me "civil war" is a real LOOSE LOOSE option. short and long term.
It's a waste of time talking about "civil war". And just gives the other side more BS civil "ammo" for propaganda and legal war.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

xactly.
I've never understood people (mostly on the right) who talk about a new civil war.
It makes no sense.
Whenever i've asked people who talk like that "Who are you going to shoot? Cops? Military? certain Politicians? most Democrats?" (the socialist/communist party, BLM and Antifa don't run Squat so no need to shoot them)
When asked they act like they never really said "civil war" or that somehow civil war does not mean shooting anyone .. like in a war. When asked to clarify what they meant, they sputter or don't reply or accuse me of something or other.

Bottom line I simply can't imagine many people on the right shooting down cops and/or military.... to "make America Great again".
Some seem to ass-ume that most of cops and military will be on "their side". But like you said 70% of cops and military will simply cave to who ever is at the top of the chain of command. Local, State and federal. "legal" orders and "laws"will be enforced.
Can't have cops and military thinking for themselves following the constitution as they understand it, I've been told that'd be insubordination, treason, chaos and anarchy.

When asked to clarify what they meant by "Civil War" they got nothing... or won't say.
It comes across to me as a knee Jerk Expression that vents a broad general frustration.

In contrast to the 1st US civil war there were actual CLEAR sides in terms of land. And gov't officials and military people that were CLEARLY on one side of the succession and slavery issues and ready to form a new gov't with the backing of most of the people and arms in the states.

I'd challenged anyone today to name one politician today that stands up constantly and strongly (with more than words!) for the values and issues the "civil war" minded folks want to promote/maintain. Much less one that would support a "civil war".
Also I have to wonder if the "civil war" minded people could even come up with set of issues that they'd all agree on.
Other than the 2nd amendment.

The other thing that i really don't get is this. Some folks that talk about a "civil war" are often the same ones that like to point Black people to Martin Luther King as a GOOD example of how to make political change. And disparage Malcolm X and the original Black Panthers (who never killed whites BTW).
During the pandemic many people on the right did take to the streets... and organize to protest. even disobey the law?!? () this is the REAL way to make changes. All the war and violence talk is pissing in the wind. IMO MLK had it right.
Tons of organization, strategic protest and boycotts, pressuring politicians to do what's right even if they don't want to (LBJ was a Racist democrat but he passed the Civil right bill and more). When the cops and army came out they didn't try to have a "civil war" they let them prove who were unconstitutional oppressors.

And the MAIN thing that's always lost from MLKs approach was that he said ... as Jesus said .. LOVE your enemies.
Sometime phrased as "...we must Love our deluded white brothers..." "... they've been raised in hatred and lies but are still God's children..." .

People on the right (like everyone else) appreciate being on the receiving end of forgiveness and love. And as "Americans", love when groups forgive our national "mistakes" becasue "America's not perfect". But few on right reach a hand out to be merciful to others in their imperfections.

I know some people in the military and those who revere it tend to have a Hammer mind set and see most problems as nails, meaning "War". But seems to me that more people on the right should look hard at the 100+ other options BEFORE pulling the "civil war" card on fellow Americans. Seems to me "civil war" is a real LOOSE LOOSE option. short and long term.
It's a waste of time talking about "civil war". And just gives the other side more BS civil "ammo" for propaganda and legal war.

Civil war would be the worst thing to happen to this nation!
For all the obvious reasons and in that is the one big one!
We would cease to exist as nation!
Except as a conquered nation!
At least one or --TWO- of this nation's biggest/most powerful enemies would use that weakness to conquer us, imho.
I fully agree, such must not occur....
Outside forces that want this nation utterly destroyed would not pass up the chance to come in and mop up..
In fact, much of the ongoing division, emerging hatred is being encouraged, promoted and aided by those outside forces.
"Forces" that very firm allies with the current dem party, imho.-- -Tyr

[Gunny]

xactly.
I've never understood people (mostly on the right) who talk about a new civil war.
It makes no sense.
Whenever i've asked people who talk like that "Who are you going to shoot? Cops? Military? certain Politicians? most Democrats?" (the socialist/communist party, BLM and Antifa don't run Squat so no need to shoot them)
When asked they act like they never really said "civil war" or that somehow civil war does not mean shooting anyone .. like in a war. When asked to clarify what they meant, they sputter or don't reply or accuse me of something or other.

Bottom line I simply can't imagine many people on the right shooting down cops and/or military.... to "make America Great again".
Some seem to ass-ume that most of cops and military will be on "their side". But like you said 70% of cops and military will simply cave to who ever is at the top of the chain of command. Local, State and federal. "legal" orders and "laws"will be enforced.
Can't have cops and military thinking for themselves following the constitution as they understand it, I've been told that'd be insubordination, treason, chaos and anarchy.

When asked to clarify what they meant by "Civil War" they got nothing... or won't say.
It comes across to me as a knee Jerk Expression that vents a broad general frustration.

In contrast to the 1st US civil war there were actual CLEAR sides in terms of land. And gov't officials and military people that were CLEARLY on one side of the succession and slavery issues and ready to form a new gov't with the backing of most of the people and arms in the states.

I'd challenged anyone today to name one politician today that stands up constantly and strongly (with more than words!) for the values and issues the "civil war" minded folks want to promote/maintain. Much less one that would support a "civil war".
Also I have to wonder if the "civil war" minded people could even come up with set of issues that they'd all agree on.
Other than the 2nd amendment.

The other thing that i really don't get is this. Some folks that talk about a "civil war" are often the same ones that like to point Black people to Martin Luther King as a GOOD example of how to make political change. And disparage Malcolm X and the original Black Panthers (who never killed whites BTW).
During the pandemic many people on the right did take to the streets... and organize to protest. even disobey the law?!? () this is the REAL way to make changes. All the war and violence talk is pissing in the wind. IMO MLK had it right.
Tons of organization, strategic protest and boycotts, pressuring politicians to do what's right even if they don't want to (LBJ was a Racist democrat but he passed the Civil right bill and more). When the cops and army came out they didn't try to have a "civil war" they let them prove who were unconstitutional oppressors.

And the MAIN thing that's always lost from MLKs approach was that he said ... as Jesus said .. LOVE your enemies.
Sometime phrased as "...we must Love our deluded white brothers..." "... they've been raised in hatred and lies but are still God's children..." .

People on the right (like everyone else) appreciate being on the receiving end of forgiveness and love. And as "Americans", love when groups forgive our national "mistakes" becasue "America's not perfect". But few on right reach a hand out to be merciful to others in their imperfections.

I know some people in the military and those who revere it tend to have a Hammer mind set and see most problems as nails, meaning "War". But seems to me that more people on the right should look hard at the 100+ other options BEFORE pulling the "civil war" card on fellow Americans. Seems to me "civil war" is a real LOOSE LOOSE option. short and long term.
It's a waste of time talking about "civil war". And just gives the other side more BS civil "ammo" for propaganda and legal war.

I didn't say there was no reason for a "civil war". As an aside, I didn't notice one damned thing civil about war. Not sure how that term got coined. I stated there isn't going to be one as things stand now. The people who should be rebelling against quite a few things are playing deer in the headlights, just hoping not to get noticed/called out by name.

We could argue the reasons/issues to disagreement for quite awhile. I do agree there are no definitive north/south type boundaries as in the US Civil War. The conservative vs progressive lines are the same though. The progressives are still using the same stale excuse -- slavery.

Be that as it may, the point I'm taking from the OP is the powers that be are using merely discussing the issue is tantamount to guilt. Add that to anything said against this Administration/the US Government is labeled "far right wing extremism based on conspiracy theories" which most on the right are terrified of being accused of, and I'm not seeing a whole lot of Ist Amendment protection for free speech. We have "free speech" so long as it agrees with what the MSM/left tells us we are allowed to say.

I am quite sure it will at some point come down to some form of armed conflict, but it'll be too late. As I have stated, and you as well, by the time anything of the sort takes place, the right is going to be labeled, isolated and outlawed.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I didn't say there was no reason for a "civil war". As an aside, I didn't notice one damned thing civil about war. Not sure how that term got coined. I stated there isn't going to be one as things stand now. The people who should be rebelling against quite a few things are playing deer in the headlights, just hoping not to get noticed/called out by name.

We could argue the reasons/issues to disagreement for quite awhile. I do agree there are no definitive north/south type boundaries as in the US Civil War. The conservative vs progressive lines are the same though. The progressives are still using the same stale excuse -- slavery.

Be that as it may, the point I'm taking from the OP is the powers that be are using merely discussing the issue is tantamount to guilt. Add that to anything said against this Administration/the US Government is labeled "far right wing extremism based on conspiracy theories" which most on the right are terrified of being accused of, and I'm not seeing a whole lot of Ist Amendment protection for free speech. We have "free speech" so long as it agrees with what the MSM/left tells us we are allowed to say.

I am quite sure it will at some point come down to some form of armed conflict, but it'll be too late. As I have stated, and you as well, by the time anything of the sort takes place, the right is going to be labeled, isolated and outlawed.

Right on target and that is exactly how--they-- plan on doing it.
Identify, then isolate, and outlaw --then push to take action once their enemy is too weak to win.
If one starts it will be they that start it.
And they that have game planned it for years......
THEY are the bought and paid for leadership of the dem party and its firm allies. a truth...
So corrupt, greedy and blinded by their own power-mad careers that they will destroy this nation to win at any and all costs.
A clear example are the scum that are in charge right now.
Violating our rights, freedoms and trampling ion the Constitution that they so truly hate.
Yet each election time they cry how they love the nation, our freedoms, the flag and our Constitution.
Man, it so damn sickening to watch, and even worse to know and see the blinded , brainwashed masses, fall for it each time..--Tyr

[Gunny]

I predicted this many times over the years but the second the term "civil war" is stated, people scatter like mice. Those who choose to pretend the topic doesn't exist, or censor the words because they think it'll make the ideal go away, are just slapping on blinders to the fact that it is a situation that should be considered as something that will have to be dealt with.

Everyone's always blaming the left, and IMO, they ARE the hate/fearmongers bullying any and everyone they can; but, I consider the right just as bad for pretending if they ignore it, it'll go away. There is only one way to deal with bullies.