Mike Huckabee

No matter how we feel about social media or what our level of awareness is about how it operates, its algorithms still manage to shape our conversations, if only by inspiring us to find work-arounds against the political censorship we know is happening.

In time, it starts to become second nature to refrain from using “trigger words” and go only so far, not over the line on certain subjects, even if we have solid reasoning behind what we want to say. Over time, we start to build a lawyerly sense of where that line is. The distinctions can be very subtle. For example, a person comes to understand that it’s permissible to say there was some evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 election, but not that there is evidence that Trump really won the election. That will be labeled by agenda-driven “fact”-checkers as “misinformation” and “conspiracy theory” and get that person suspended, demonetized, perhaps cast adrift to find an “alternative” platform.

To cite another example, for a long time, it was not permissible to say there was evidence that COVID-19 originated in a virology lab in Wuhan, China, where they were studying bat coronaviruses, rather than a nearby “wet market” as the CCP continued to insist. That would have been labeled by “fact”-checkers as “misinformation” and gotten a person similarly suspended, demonetized, etc.. If a person wanted to communicate candidly about this, it was necessary to find another platform, one with far less reach.

Oh, but then it turned out that this “misinformation” about the origin of the virus was most likely true.

Were the “fact”-checkers chastened by this turn of events? Did they say, “Oh, we’re so sorry! We realize the error of our ways and from now on will respect your free speech rights and leave you alone to present your own opinions and evidence, and just stay the heck out of it”? No, they went right on as they had. No apologies.

And the scrutiny never stopped. Over time, we of the conservative persuasion gradually learn to sense automatically when we need to pull back from what we wanted to say. If we’re still going to be on, for example, Twitter, we know this is what we have to do. It becomes an unconscious process.

And that’s exactly what Big Tech wants of us, especially if we are conservative. Their goal is for us to exercise self-censorship, as automatically as Winston Smith did in front of the telescreen. (I know, I apologize for yet another Orwell reference.) They’re training people to do it. It makes their job SO much easier.

Even some people on the left have figured this out, after becoming victims of the left's obsession with ideological purity and its inclination to eat its own. Glenn Greenwald and Naomi Wolfe are two who come to mind. And that’s what makes them worth reading. This link introduces you to Wolfe, if you don’t know her, and also provides links to various alternative social media platforms.

https://www.nationandstate.com/2021/07/30/naomi-wolf-on-censorship-vaccine-passports-and-the-reversal-of-my-body-my-choice-teaser/

All of the above is primarily to set the stage for a story in the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON about a function of social media that apparently is not being interfered with at all: organized Islamic terrorism. As this report says, Taliban leaders have had no problem spreading propaganda and establishing control over Kabul as they continued their takeover of Afghanistan. It was easy; they used Twitter. Also WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/taliban-leaders-used-twitter-and-whatsapp-to-help-capture-kabul/

While conservatives on social media were busy trying to find a way just to say what was on their minds, members of the Taliban were using it to pave their own way into Kabul after President Biden abruptly left it to them, boldly spreading lies to the citizens there to get them to give up with little resistance. As they entered the city, a Taliban spokesman tweeted out that the residents of Kabul were welcoming them in.

Their propaganda apparently even snowed observers in our own country and around the world. As Ned Price, our State Department spokesperson, shakily announced, the U.N. Security counsel issued a joint press statement calling for a new government that was “inclusive” and involved the “full and meaningful participation of women," as if that's going to happen. He went on to say that “the Council spoke with one voice, to underscore that Afghanistan must abide by its international obligations, including international humanitarian law for the safety and security of all Afghans and international citizens.” Also, pigs must fly.

I wonder what President Biden is going to do when the Taliban fail to follow instructions. Make them pay, after we just pulled out? After they've taken all the military equipment we just left there? Biden won't do anything. The Taliban knew Trump would've hit them hard, but, as with China regarding Taiwan, they don’t have to worry about him now.

But back to social media, and the role it plays here. As the FREE BEACON reports, the Taliban have been using WhatsApp and Twitter for years, to share their official statements. Now, they’re using these platforms to announce new rules to the people of Kabul. They even used WhatsApp to set up an emergency broadcast system. Isn’t technology wonderful?

Twitter and Facebook regularly ban ISIS from their platforms, but they appear to be letting the Taliban broadcast without incident. This is happening even though Twitter has a policy banning “hateful conduct” as well as “threatening or promoting terrorism.” The spokesperson who told this to the FREE BEACON did not say whether or not they consider the Taliban to be a terrorist organization. A Facebook spokesperson weaseled out of a specific answer, saying that they take action against accounts belonged to “sanctioned” groups but refusing to comment on specific cases.

To quote the BEACON: “Several Taliban spokesmen have maintained Twitter accounts for years, regularly tweeting updates on negotiations and regional battles. The accounts often post photos and videos from frontlines, which are then copied and shared by pro-Taliban accounts.”

The ultimate irony: This is going on while former President Donald Trump continues to be banned by both Twitter and Facebook, who blame him for the unrest at the Capitol Building on January 6. The reason: “incitement to violence.”

Mike Huckabee

As the Taliban zeroed in on Kabul, Afghanistan, in one of the most distressing examples of American military failure in our lifetimes, it was interesting to find out what the Department of Homeland Security is really concerned about.

It appears they’re worried about you and me.

On Saturday, conservative writer/news editor Jack Posobiec tweeted a screen shot of an NBC graphic that showed the DHS’s list of “Potential Terror Threats” in a “national terrorism alert” in advance of “the 9/11 20th anniversary.” Funny, this list of terror threats didn’t mention the Taliban or any other militant Islamists. Here’s what it listed as tip-offs that someone might pose a terrorist threat:

1. OPPOSITION TO COVID MEASURES

2. CLAIMS OF ELECTION FRAUD, BELIEF TRUMP CAN BE REINSTATED

3. 9/11 ANNIVERSARY AND RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS

The DHS is warning of the danger posed by “grievance-based groups.” As reported in BREITBART NEWS, an ABC news bulletin said that DHS’s National Terrorism Advisory System bulletin, issued on Friday, warned of threats from common domestic terrorists --- individuals engaged in grievance-based violence, “including grievances over public health safety measures and perceived government restrictions.”

Wait a minute. “PERCEIVED” government restrictions? There have been some very real restrictions on personal behavior, but you’d better not chafe at them, even just a little bit. or the government might "perceive" you as a threat.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/08/14/dhs-labels-opponents-of-covid-measures-as-potential-terror-threats-during-protests/

Let’s take a look at just the first two of these bullet points. (NOTE: I'm prefacing the following analysis with a strong sarcasm alert.) First, “opposition to covid measures.” I assume this would include any such measures that the government chooses to impose or even talks about imposing, including lockdowns, restrictions on the size of gatherings, “vaccine passports,” and face masks. In Philadelphia, starting September 1, the city government will be requiring unvaccinated employees to wear TWO masks, a cloth one OVER a surgical one. I am not kidding. (I guess they should just be glad they aren’t getting fired; must be a contractual thing or you could safely bet they would be.) And new employees will have to show proof of being fully vaccinated as a condition of their employment. I assume that policy applies whether or not they’ve already had covid.

Here’s the report in the WASHINGTON EXAMINER. The city also announced that all Philadelphia health care workers and all university students, staff and faculty must be vaccinated by October 15.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/philadelphia-all-employees-vaccinated-two-masks

If you have a problem with such requirements, you just might be a POTENTIAL TERROR THREAT.

On Friday, flag-waving protesters showed up at the Washington State Capitol building for a protest against Democrat Gov. Jay Inslee’s forced vaccine mandate for local healthcare systems. Similar protests occurred in Kentucky and Tennessee, over both vaccine and mask mandates. “We want to have our own right and have our own decision...to wear a mask or not,” said one woman in Tennessee.

Well, I just don’t know about this lady --- she sounds pretty dangerous to me. And they were waving American flags, like those "insurrectionists" at the DC Capitol Building, so they must be hotheads. It’s a good thing Homeland Security is monitoring people like this woman who dare to question official mandates instead of just quietly falling into line.

And if you agree with her, you just might be a POTENTIAL TERROR THREAT.

Let’s move on to the second indication of potential threat: “claims of election fraud, belief Trump can be reinstated.” The HHS sees danger signs in “conspiracy theories on perceived election fraud.” (There’s that pesky word “PERCEIVED” again.)

Well, apparently “the MyPillow Guy,” Mike Lindell, is on HHS’s terror watch list. Don’t you feel safer knowing the Department of Homeland Security is keeping their eye on him, and people like him? I wonder if he gets subjected to enhanced security measures at the airport or perhaps is on the no-fly list. Come to think of it, he has his own plane. That might be the only way he can get around.

Recall that we were one of the few news/opinion sites that gave Lindell the time of day; we covered all three days of his conference as objectively as possible and kept an open mind about the evidence he presented. And there IS a lot of evidence suggestive of fraud. Though we never for one minute thought that Trump could be reinstalled as President –- the Constitution doesn’t provide for that –- we know there was fraud. Heck, there probably has been some amount of fraud in every big election since the Flintstones voted on stone tablets. This time, though, with all the mail-in balloting and rule changes (let alone any problems with the electronic voting), there was a lot. Did it change the outcome? We can’t say for sure, but as observant and thinking human beings we do have our doubts about how it turned out.

Uh-oh...we just might be a POTENTIAL TERROR THREAT!

As startling as it was to see this graphic, the Homeland Security's focus on those of its own citizens who dislike unproven and punishing covid restrictions and have doubts about the 2020 election is not new. In a DHS advisory about Domestic Violent Extremists (DVE’s) posted in January –- on the heels of the January 6 debacle at the Capitol Building –- they singled out “anger over COVID-19 restrictions” and “the 2020 election results” as motivating issues.

https://www.dhs.gov/ntas/advisory/national-terrorism-advisory-system-bulletin-january-27-2021

Ned Ryun, founder and CEO of American Majority, called this new DHS bulletin “a read-between-the-lines threat” on Tucker Carlson’s Monday show. He saw it as “targeting Americans for ‘wrongthink.’” He observed that “the elite deeply resent us questioning their narrative.” He personally has questions about the obstacles being placed in the way of election audits, for example, and also about the real covid mortality rates for younger people who don’t have a serious co-morbidity. Should he be considered a potential threat just for asking the questions? When you’re trying to make half the country be defined as domestic terrorists, he said, it “does not end well." They would understand this, "if they would actually study history, instead of gender studies...”

Uh-oh; he’s probably on the watch list, too. Rest assured that even at a time when Biden’s total debacle of a Presidency makes us weaker and more vulnerable to terrorist attacks --- REAL terrorist attacks --- the Department of Homeland Security is keeping us safe from the MyPillow Guy and plain-spoken conservatives like Ned Ryun. And you, and me. And about half the country, for one thing or another.