正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
Whitney Webb: "The domestic terror infrastructure… [has] been…developed by every administration… since 9/11… and governments tend to use… vague definitions [of domestic terrorist]... to their advantage… [for]… more control and a removal of our liberties."
0 条评论
暂无评论
原始帖子的评论将显示在这里
![Whitney Webb on Charlie Kirk's assassination: "The national security state takes advantage of these...things... for greater control... [and now there's been] a renewed push... [for] the war on domestic terror...steadily developed by every administration... since 9/11." This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), author of One Nation Under Blackmail and contributing editor of unlimitedhangout, is taken from an interview with Marty Bent posted to the TFTC (TFTC) YouTube channel on September 27, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "A lot of these big events, and a lot of times they capitalize on real tragedies. But the national security state takes advantage of these types of things pretty consistently, consistently to put for greater control. "And so...you brought up hate speech laws in California, presumably coming from the left. There's been a lot of questionable, rhetoric from the right after the Kirk assassination, talking about hate speech as well. And so ultimately, you know, where does that take us? To a place where there's a lot more censorship than people would want. "Censorship was a big political issue, last election cycle, you know, really big, for certain, you know, demographics. And so to have sort of the idea that hate speech is going to be potentially embraced by both sides, I definitely don't see that as a good thing. And also, you know, some of the stuff that has come out in the, in the aftermath of this assassination has been this, what I would call a renewed push to upstart the war on domestic terror, which people have to keep in mind. "There's a long history to that. And so a lot of times when people get really emotionally sucked in, to things they kind of are focusing very much on, like, the present and the recent. Whereas, you know, the domestic terror infrastructure is something that's been steadily developed by every administration ever since 9/11. "Because remember, in the post 9/11 environment, that's how we got the Department of Homeland Security. And right before 9/11, they introduced legislation to basically make DHS, but under a different name. And there wasn't a lot of support for it until conveniently after 9/11, when a lot of legislation that was liberty curbing was pushed through. The Patriot act being the most well known, but also the creation of DHS and numerous other laws, and ultimately a lot of the war on terror infrastructure was always meant to be used domestically at some point, which is why you have a lot of those same things launching, you know, at the same time in the early 2000s. "And so...every administration since then, from Bush to Obama and then Trump the first time around, and Biden, they have all expanded the domestic terror infrastructure and apparatus. And if you actually look at the definition of how the government defines domestic terrorism, which is actually put out by the Biden administration, but it's been supported. I haven't seen them change, to the best of my knowledge, the definition since Trump came in, but it includes people really on both sides of the divide. People that are against perceived government overreach, for example, can be defined as domestic terrorists. And then people who are against all forms of capitalism, for example, and that was Biden that put that out. But that could include potentially you're against stakeholder capitalism of the World Economic Forum, for example, and some of the, and it's a pretty wide, wide reaching thing, unfortunately. "And...governments tend to use kind of these vague definitions and use them to their advantage whenever they want. So they're kind of, they give themselves a lot of wiggle room so they can label whoever they want a domestic terrorist. And so, you know, Antifa has now been labeled a domestic terror organization. And I would look at them as something you know, sort of like probably most likely very Fed infiltrated in the same way that like Patriot Front and like even the proud boys had feds or like informants like at the very top of the, of the structure and things like that. "This is how the national security state operates when it wants to justify bigger budgets, more control and a removal of our liberties. And this has been going on since the 1980s with Operation Gladio. When they developed the strategy of tension. They were, the CIA and intelligence agencies basically were funding terrorism against civilians in Europe and then they were blamed on on left leaning groups and they specifically were going after civilians. And it was a CIA plan really to prevent regimes that they deemed as aligned with the Soviets potentially, but not even actually just like left wing parties. They wanted to push Europe politically in a particular direction or towards particular candidates. "They...were financing terrorism and they were doing that with like the mob in the Vatican. I mean it was a very. But I mean it's a documented thing. So you know, call me a conspiracy person all you want, which of course people like to do. But I mean it's something that you know, intelligence agencies have been doing and so that you know, if they want to institute draconian control measures, digital control measures, over the United States or Western society or global society at large, they're probably, you know, they tend to go fall back on these same patterns and tactics that they've used time and again, decade over decade."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1972016609935212742/amplify_video_thumb/1972012682086899713/img/sWSEjXT2_i7fCzGT.jpg)
![🤯Whitney Webb pitches mind-blowing theory on Joe Kent's real narrative purpose: engineer "anti-semitic, right-leaning domestic terrorists" to feed to the "pre-crime" machine: "[Kent's] an intelligence officer and top CIA guy." "Be careful in trusting 'former spooks' who come out of nowhere and are saying what you want to hear right away." "Basically, the first Trump administration defined the rising domestic terror threat because after 9/11 they've been building all this infrastructure for a war on domestic terror. Every administration has advanced it, Democrat and Republican. So who are they saying the domestic terrorists are? Anti-Semitic Right-leaning populists." "I worry when people from that exact nexus that existed in [Trump's first administration] come out and are trying to get Right-leaning populists in particular to do things that the Trump administration itself—even if no one else agrees with the definition—would define as anti-Semitic." This clip of Webb (Whitney Webb), author of One Nation Under Blackmail and contributing editor of unlimitedhangout(.)com, is taken from an interview with Jimmy Dore (Jimmy Dore) posted to Rumble on March 26, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Dore: "What do you make of Joe Kent?" Webb: "Yeah, so with Joe Kent, he's a intelligence officer and top CIA guy. I think a lot of stuff is going on right now, and I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it. But I think people should be careful in trusting former, quote–unquote, former spooks who come out of nowhere and are saying what you want to hear right away. Because a lot of times what happens is that these figures will do that to build up trust with the public and then they'll misdirect you somewhere else if you're not careful. "So I would advise vigilance and critical thinking, which is often in short supply, but should not be, about, that figure in, in particular. But I think— Dore: "So you think there's like, there might be some kind of a long-game plan with Joe Kent?" Webb: "Oh, yeah. So you saw—" Dore: "So, so I've heard this argument and, and that you know, don't take him as face value, that they're just setting him up to be the next Trump or JD Vance or something and then he's going to do all the horrible thing. So that's—" Webb: "They could. It's very possible, but I don't know how it'll go. But let me give you an example of why I'm really skeptical of him. "So when Trump was, I encourage people to go back and look at the first iteration of the Trump administration to understand what's happening now. And since my career in journalism began during Trump's first term, I thankfully remember a good amount of it. "So, about a year before the January Six event, there was this DHS official and this is the Trump administration, Elizabeth Neuman, I think her name was. She was basically saying, there's going to be a domestic terror event. We can see it building, but we can't quite stop it. It's another 9/11. Oh no. If only we had more surveillance powers and whatever, we could maybe stop this other imminent 9/11, whatever. "And so basically in that hearing, it was a hearing where she was testifying. Top officials from DHS and, and other intelligence agencies were basically painting who is the up-and-coming domestic terrorist profile in the United States, what Americans are domestic terrorists. "And so basically, the— I, I really wish I could remember the specific name of the hearing to direct people to that because it is on C-SPAN, still. But basically, the profile they gave were anti-Semitic Trump supporters or anti-Semitic Right-leaning populists. So I worry when people from that exact nexus that existed in Trump One come out and are trying to get Right-leaning populists in particular to do things that the Trump administration itself, even if it, no one else agrees with the definition, would define as anti-Semitic." Dore: "So, so what I— explain that again to me because you lost me a little bit right at the end. So you're saying that—" Webb: "Okay, so basically the first Trump administration defined the rising domestic terror threat because after 9/11 they've been building all this infrastructure for a war on domestic terror. Every administration has advanced it, Democrat and Republican. So who are they saying the domestic terrorists are? Anti-Semitic Right-leaning populists." Dore: "And so do you think Joe Kent is, is one of those?" Webb: "So before this era they had the domestic terror threat they were trying to put in front of you were obviously these groups of like Feds, like Patriot Front and the Proud Boys. And all of that. Okay, so how, if you, if, if you can't fake the demographic, how do you engineer the demographic?... "So basically if you have Trump officials that are part of this apparatus claiming right-leaning anti- Semites are domestic terrorists that need to be targeted by this infrastructure and the surveillance infrastructure, in pre-crime and all of that, that's been a part of this buildup of the war on domestic terror. And then you have people coming out and being like we're going to blame, you know, you know, saying what people want to hear because obviously Israel absolutely is intimately involved with getting us involved in the Iran war. "But the other side of it is you create— you, you signal boost that with people like Joe Kent potentially. And then you have people sort of muddy the waters between Israel and all Jewish people, which is not fair. And then you can have the Trump administration swoop in and you know, look at Alexis Wilkins. Foreign government operators are driving these narratives. "It's, it's like reverse Russiagate. And well, I mean I probably should have thought this theory a little bit more before explaining it on your show, but basically I worry that someone like Joe Kent is coming out of, out of nowhere to try and sort of engineer this problem that the US Government has had is we can't make domestic terrorists appear that fit our profile. "So now we want people to create a class of right- leaning populists who basically fit our definition. If we just define anti-Semites as people who are critical of Israel and then we can target these people with our domestic terror infrastructure. So I worry that could be happening."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2037354939635442113/amplify_video_thumb/2037350889284071424/img/h0fAF1sNQM8NIvCW.jpg)
