ๆญฃๅจๅ ่ฝฝ่ง้ข...
่ง้ขๅ ่ฝฝๅคฑ่ดฅ
๐๐ก๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฏ๐ข๐๐๐จ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ ๐ซ๐๐ฆ๐ข๐ง๐๐๐ซ ๐จ๐ ๐ก๐จ๐ฐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ฌ ๐ก๐๐ฌ ๐ซ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ญ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐๐ซ๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐๐ข๐ฌ๐๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ซ ๐๐๐๐ข๐ฌ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ ๐ญ๐๐ค๐๐ง ๐ข๐ง ๐ง๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐๐ฅ ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ. ๐ฝ On 11 May 1998, when Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee strengthened Indiaโs security through the Pokhran nuclear tests, Congress leader P. Chidambaram chose criticism over national unity. The fears they tried to... show more
10,509 ๆฌก่ง็ โข 2 ไธชๆๅ โขvia X (Twitter)
0 ๆก่ฏ่ฎบ
ๆๆ ่ฏ่ฎบ
ๅๅงๅธๅญ็่ฏ่ฎบๅฐๆพ็คบๅจ่ฟ้
![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)
