The White House has begun an extraordinary assault on free speech in America. It is no longer content merely to force social media companies to suppress dissenting views. It appears to be setting the stage to use federal police powers.
How else to read the “National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin” the Department of Homeland Security issued on Monday? Its first sentence:
SUMMARY OF THE TERRORISM THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES: The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories... [emphasis added]
You read those words right.
The government now says “misleading narratives” are the most dangerous contributor to terrorism against the United States.
The bulletin’s next sentence:
These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence. [emphasis added]
You read those words right too.
A federal agency says that to “undermine public trust in government institutions” is now considered terrorism. Speech doesn’t even have to encourage rebellion or violence generally, much less against anyone specific. It just has to “potentially inspire” violence.
Potentially.
Later, the bulletin explains exactly what speech the government now considers a terrorist danger:
Widespread online proliferation of false or misleading narratives regarding unsubstantiated widespread election fraud and COVID-19.
There’s that word misleading again.
Who’s defining “misleading”? Misleading to whom? Misleading how?
I have no doubt whatsoever that I fit as a terrorist threat under these guidelines.
So does Joe Rogan. And Tucker Carlson. After all, we’ve “undermine[d] public trust in government institutions” about Covid and the mRNA shots (I try not to call them vaccines anymore).
This bulletin marks an extraordinary escalation of the war on speech and the First Amendment.
The Biden Administration has issued five bulletins since it assumed power. Regularly issuing these warnings at all is problematic - they are not “alerts” to warn people about specific and ongoing terrorist plots. Thus they inevitably contain political judgment about what future threats may be the most severe.
But none of the earlier reports contained language remotely similar to Monday’s.
The original January 2021 bulletin highlighted “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” and specific threats of violence against “critical infrastructure.” The fourth discussed how foreign and domestic extremists were trying “to inspire potential followers to conduct attacks in the United States, including by exploiting recent events in Afghanistan.” It added "that as of November 10, 2021, DHS is not aware of an imminent and credible threat.”
In contrast, Monday’s bulletin clearly equates speech with terroristic activity. That connection may seem ridiculous and absurd. It is not.
These public statements are not merely wallpaper. They can reflect secret government decisions about what police or intelligence tactics are acceptable against targeted groups.
This is not a conspiracy theory; in 2017, Central Intelligence Agency director Mike Pompeo publicly called Wikileaks a “non-state hostile intelligence service.” As Yahoo News reported three years later:
More than just a provocative talking point, the designation opened the door for agency operatives to take far more aggressive actions, treating the organization as it does adversary spy services.
What, if anything, are government agencies planning to do about the terrorist threat that I and other Covid skeptics represent? I have no idea.
But make no mistake. This bulletin marks a clear escalation of the targeting from the highest levels of the federal government that began last year.
Remember: in July President Biden, Jennifer Psaki, and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy all encouraged social media companies to clamp down on Covid vaccine skeptics less than 24 hours before Twitter began the process of deplatforming me. Last week Psaki specifically targeted Rogan, who has a much larger audience.
Now, though, the government appears to want to target my First Amendment rights directly.
—
The stakes here could not be higher.
What if our worst fears about the mRNA Covid vaccines come to pass? What if they turn out to have long-term immunosuppressive effects that lead not just to more infections but to more serious illness over time?
I want to be clear. I’m not saying they do.Or will. But both the epidemiological data and the new cellular studies suggest the risk of such an outcome is non-zero.
It is not hard to imagine the anger and unrest that would accompany such revelations. The entire public health establishment and nearly every politician and elite institution in the United States has strongly encouraged Americans to take these shots. Many did so willingly, but millions more agreed to do so only because they faced unemployment if they did not comply. The defense that we just didn’t know, we took them ourselves, will be thin indeed.
But if pointing out problems with vaccines - or even potential problems - is not speech but terrorism, then the government can do what it needs to make the “terrorists” go away.
And we will be one step closer to 1984.
NOTE: I have never done this before, and I probably won’t again for a while. But if you’ve gotten this far, I hope you will consider supporting Unreported Truths with a subscription. I don’t know how long or messy this fight may become, and I’m eager for all the help I can get. (And if you sold your Bitcoin at the high last year and want a signed copy of PANDEMIA - I’m still sending them to people who become founding members.)
No matter what, I will not back down. This threat to free speech cannot go unchallenged. I hope you will join me.
EXTREMELY URGENT: The Biden Administration says I'm a terrorist threat.
That headline sounds like a joke.
It’s not.
The White House has begun an extraordinary assault on free speech in America. It is no longer content merely to force social media companies to suppress dissenting views. It appears to be setting the stage to use federal police powers.
How else to read the “National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin” the Department of Homeland Security issued on Monday? Its first sentence:
SUMMARY OF THE TERRORISM THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES: The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories... [emphasis added]
You read those words right.
The government now says “misleading narratives” are the most dangerous contributor to terrorism against the United States.
The bulletin’s next sentence:
These threat actors seek to exacerbate societal friction to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions to encourage unrest, which could potentially inspire acts of violence. [emphasis added]
You read those words right too.
A federal agency says that to “undermine public trust in government institutions” is now considered terrorism. Speech doesn’t even have to encourage rebellion or violence generally, much less against anyone specific. It just has to “potentially inspire” violence.
Potentially.
Later, the bulletin explains exactly what speech the government now considers a terrorist danger:
Widespread online proliferation of false or misleading narratives regarding unsubstantiated widespread election fraud and COVID-19.
There’s that word misleading again.
Who’s defining “misleading”? Misleading to whom? Misleading how?
DHS February 2022 bulletin
—
I have no doubt whatsoever that I fit as a terrorist threat under these guidelines.
So does Joe Rogan. And Tucker Carlson. After all, we’ve “undermine[d] public trust in government institutions” about Covid and the mRNA shots (I try not to call them vaccines anymore).
This bulletin marks an extraordinary escalation of the war on speech and the First Amendment.
The Biden Administration has issued five bulletins since it assumed power. Regularly issuing these warnings at all is problematic - they are not “alerts” to warn people about specific and ongoing terrorist plots. Thus they inevitably contain political judgment about what future threats may be the most severe.
But none of the earlier reports contained language remotely similar to Monday’s.
The original January 2021 bulletin highlighted “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” and specific threats of violence against “critical infrastructure.” The fourth discussed how foreign and domestic extremists were trying “to inspire potential followers to conduct attacks in the United States, including by exploiting recent events in Afghanistan.” It added "that as of November 10, 2021, DHS is not aware of an imminent and credible threat.”
In contrast, Monday’s bulletin clearly equates speech with terroristic activity. That connection may seem ridiculous and absurd. It is not.
These public statements are not merely wallpaper. They can reflect secret government decisions about what police or intelligence tactics are acceptable against targeted groups.
This is not a conspiracy theory; in 2017, Central Intelligence Agency director Mike Pompeo publicly called Wikileaks a “non-state hostile intelligence service.” As Yahoo News reported three years later:
More than just a provocative talking point, the designation opened the door for agency operatives to take far more aggressive actions, treating the organization as it does adversary spy services.
Yahoo article about the CIA and Wikileaks
What, if anything, are government agencies planning to do about the terrorist threat that I and other Covid skeptics represent? I have no idea.
But make no mistake. This bulletin marks a clear escalation of the targeting from the highest levels of the federal government that began last year.
Remember: in July President Biden, Jennifer Psaki, and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy all encouraged social media companies to clamp down on Covid vaccine skeptics less than 24 hours before Twitter began the process of deplatforming me. Last week Psaki specifically targeted Rogan, who has a much larger audience.
Now, though, the government appears to want to target my First Amendment rights directly.
—
The stakes here could not be higher.
What if our worst fears about the mRNA Covid vaccines come to pass? What if they turn out to have long-term immunosuppressive effects that lead not just to more infections but to more serious illness over time?
I want to be clear. I’m not saying they do. Or will. But both the epidemiological data and the new cellular studies suggest the risk of such an outcome is non-zero.
It is not hard to imagine the anger and unrest that would accompany such revelations. The entire public health establishment and nearly every politician and elite institution in the United States has strongly encouraged Americans to take these shots. Many did so willingly, but millions more agreed to do so only because they faced unemployment if they did not comply. The defense that we just didn’t know, we took them ourselves, will be thin indeed.
But if pointing out problems with vaccines - or even potential problems - is not speech but terrorism, then the government can do what it needs to make the “terrorists” go away.
And we will be one step closer to 1984.
NOTE: I have never done this before, and I probably won’t again for a while. But if you’ve gotten this far, I hope you will consider supporting Unreported Truths with a subscription. I don’t know how long or messy this fight may become, and I’m eager for all the help I can get. (And if you sold your Bitcoin at the high last year and want a signed copy of PANDEMIA - I’m still sending them to people who become founding members.)
No matter what, I will not back down. This threat to free speech cannot go unchallenged. I hope you will join me.
Create your profile
Only paid subscribers can comment on this post
Check your email
For your security, we need to re-authenticate you.
Click the link we sent to , or click here to sign in.