The COVID-19 Pandemic Narrative and the Link to Domestic Terrorism in the United States

Back in June 2021, the United States National Security Council released its strategy paper on countering domestic terrorism:

 

 

...which specifically mentioned the following with my bolds throughout:

 

"Domestic terrorists have – particularly in recent years – often been lone actors or small groups of informally aligned individuals who mobilize to violence with little or no clear organizational structure or direction. These individuals often consume material deliberately disseminated to recruit individuals to causes that attempt to provide a sense of belonging and fulfillment, however false that sense might be. Their ideologies can be fluid, evolving, and overlapping. And they can, in some instances, connect and intersect with conspiracy theories and other forms of disinformation and misinformation. The often solitary and, at times, rapid nature of such mobilization to violence poses a particularly acute challenge to law enforcement and others seeking to prevent, disrupt, and deter domestic terrorism.

 

These elements combine to form a complex and shifting domestic terrorism threat landscape and create significant challenges for law enforcement. Especially on Internet–based communications platforms such as social media, file–upload sites, and end–to–end encrypted platforms, all of these elements can combine and amplify threats to public safety."

 

...as well as this:

 

"For example, the Department of Homeland Security and others are either currently funding and implementing or planning evidence– based digital programming, including enhancing media literacy and critical thinking skills, as a mechanism for strengthening user resilience to disinformation and misinformation online for domestic audiences."

 

 In other words, a form of government controlled brainwashing.

 

This is also part of the document:

 

"These efforts speak to a broader priority: enhancing faith in government and addressing the extreme polarization, fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms, which can tear Americans apart and lead some to violence."

 

In my opinion, under the section entitled "Assessment of the Domestic Violence Extremism Threat" on page 10, we find this key paragraph with my bold:

 

"The Intelligence Community (IC) assesses that domestic violent extremists (DVEs) who are motivated by a range of ideologies and galvanized by recent political and societal events in the United States pose an elevated threat to the Homeland in 2021. Enduring DVE motivations pertaining to biases against minority populations and perceived government overreach will almost certainly continue to drive DVE radicalization and mobilization to violence. Newer sociopolitical developments–such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID–19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence–will almost certainly spur some DVEs to try to engage in violence 

 

With the focus on so-called "domestic terrorism" which, according to the aformentioned document can be as simple as "disinformation and misinformation" that is posted on social media platforms and the observation that the COVID-19 pandemic is part of the raison d'être for a domestic terrorism prevention program, a recent release from the Department of Homeland Security is particularly concerning.

 

Before we go any further, let's look at the Department of Homeland Security's definition of mis-, dis- and mal-information or MDM:

 

"Misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation make up what CISA defines as “information activities”. When this type of content is released by foreign actors, it can be referred to as foreign influence. Definitions for each are below.

 

Misinformation is false, but not created or shared with the intention of causing harm.

Disinformation is deliberately created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, organization, or country.

Malinformation is based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.

Foreign and domestic threat actors use MDM campaigns to cause chaos, confusion, and division. These malign actors are seeking to interfere with and undermine our democratic institutions and national cohesiveness."

Now, let's look at the Department of Homeland Security National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin dated February 7, 2022:

 

Here is the key sentence:

 

"Meanwhile, COVID-19 mitigation measures—particularly COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates—have been used by domestic violent extremists to justify violence since 2020 and could continue to inspire these extremists to target government, healthcare, and academic institutions that they associate with those measures."

 

Not even eight months after the National Security Council issued its paper on combatting domestic terrorism, particularly as it relates to information that appears on social media platforms, we find that the Department of Homeland Security has already fallen into line by defining the appearance of mis-, dis- and mal-information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination response as a threat to the homeland.  It's a good thing that government bodies through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and their spokespersons have not been responsible for any false or deliberately misleading information over the past two years, isn't it?  We should also note that highly qualified researchers with a COVID-19 narrative that is factual but that differs from the government's could well be considered domestic terrorists under this definition.

 

In case you were curious, this domestic terrorist threat to the American homeland is set to expire on June 7, 2022 at 02:00 p.m. at which time we can all breathe a sigh of relief.

The Biden Administration's efforts to create a domestic terrorist boogeyman out of thin air should concern us all.  How can we be certain that, in the future, anyone who takes a stand against government won't be classified as a terrorist and treated as such by the justice system?

Facebook and its Battle Against Extremism

With the Biden White House releasing its plans for battling domestic terrorism, the latest iteration of terror that is supposed to fill us with fear as shown here:

 

....Facebook has also availed itself of the opportunity to fight against domestic terrorism as shown here:

 

 

As you will see in the later part of this posting, Facebook has taken its responsibility for battling extremism to a new level.

Facebook's Redirect Initiative claims the following:

 

"The Redirect Initiative helps combat violent extremism and dangerous organizations by redirecting hate and violence-related search terms towards resources, education, and outreach groups that can help. This initiative is based on Facebook’s “Get Help” search based modules in combination with the Redirect Method, evolved to fit Facebook and Instagram. 

 

For example, when people search on Facebook for terms related to white supremacy in the US, results are directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups, and outreach."

 

Facebook has several initiatives that fall under the "counter speech" banner as follows:

 

1.) Extreme Lives

 

2.) Resiliency Initiative

  

3.) Peer to Peer Facebook Global Digital Challenge

  

4.) Online Civil Courage Initiative (OCCI)

 

Now, let's look in detail at two additional initiatives that are specilifally focussed on terrorism:

  

5.)  The Global Internet forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) - GIFCT's aim is to disrupt terrorist abuse and exploitation of digital platforms to maximize the extraordinary benefits of a free, open, and secure internet.   

GIFCT was formally established in July 2017 by four founding companies - Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube - as a program of knowledge-sharing, technical collaboration and shared research.  Today, it is an independent organization capable of sustaining and deepening industry collaboration and capacity in its efforts to prevent terrorists and extremists from abusing and misusing digital platforms.

 

GIFCT has four goals:

 

1.) improve the capacity of technology companies to prevent and respond to abuse of their platforms by terrorists and violent extremists.

 

2.) enable multi-stakeholder engagement around terrorist and violent extremist misuse of the internet.

 

3.) encourage those dedicated to online civil dialogue and empower efforts to direct positive alternatives to the messages of terrorists and violent extremists

 

4.) Advance broad understanding of terrorist and violent extremist operations and their evolution, including the intersection of online and offline activities.

 

Member companies agreed that governments will not be able to remove terrorist content directly from company platforms.

 

6.) Redirect Initiative - Here is a quote from Facebook about this initiative:

"The Redirect Initiative helps combat violent extremism and dangerous organizations by redirecting hate and violence-related search terms towards resources, education, and outreach groups that can help. This initiative is based on Facebook’s “Get Help” search based modules in combination with the Redirect Method, evolved to fit Facebook and Instagram. 

 

For example, when people search on Facebook for terms related to white supremacy in the US, results are directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups, and outreach.

 

Redirect is disrupting the connection between followers and the violent, extreme content they seek with Facebook claiming that the program has been successful and has expanded its program with organizations in the United States, Australia, Germany, Indonesia and the United Kingdom "to help individuals leave a life of hate so they can live a life of hope." "

  

Here is a "Life After Hate" promotional video:

 

  

Under the Redirect Initiative, Facebook is testing a new alert system by using pop-ups which redirect users to a support page.

 

Here is an example:

 

The "confidential support" link is found here:

 

 

Here is more information from Life After Hate:

 

 

Here is more information on the program:

 

The group is closely linked with ExitUSA as shown here:

 

...and here:

 

This test which is only on Facebook's main platform was being run in the United States as a pilot program and is being used to identify both users who may have been exposed to rule-breaking extremist content and other uses who may have previously been subject to Facebook's enforcement procedures.  

 

Now that we know that Facebook only has our best interests at heart with this new initiative that, coincidentally has been launched within days of the Biden Administration's plans to battle the domestic terror "bogeyman", let's go back in time to the mid-1960s for a quote from Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican National Convention:

 

 

Here's the key quote:

  

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you, also, that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

 

Take that Facebook.

You must admit that it's reassuring to see that Facebook through its Redirect Initiative is attempting to protect us all from extremist propaganda at the same time as it is censoring any narrative that doesn't follow its own COVID-19/pro-vaccine beliefs. (sarcasm intended)

Washington's Plan for Combatting Domestic Terrorism

After the January 6, 2021 "insurrection", Washington (in particular the Biden Administration) has been fixated on domestic terrorism.  The Biden Administration has recently released its strategy for combatting domestic terrorists as you will see in this posting.

 

In the newly minted National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism:

 

...the White House outlines its strategy for controlling and defeating domestic terrorism, the latest "boogeyman in the closet".  

Here are some excerpts from the document's cover letter signed by Joseph R. Biden Jr.:

 

"Too often over the past several years, American communities have felt the wrenching pain of domestic terrorism. Black church members slaughtered during their bible study in Charleston. A synagogue in Pittsburgh targeted for supporting immigrants. A gunman spraying bullets at an El Paso Walmart to target Latinos. It goes against everything our country strives to stand for in the world, and it poses a direct challenge to America’s national security, our democracy, and our national unity. This National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism lays out a comprehensive approach to addressing the threat while safeguarding bedrock American civil rights and civil liberties – values that make us who we are as a nation....

 

Preserving and safeguarding constitutionally protected expression and freedom of association are national security priorities. Our rights and our historic liberties are an intrinsic part of what makes America strong. So this Strategy is narrowly tailored to focus specifically on addressing violence and the factors that lead to violence – violence that violates the law, threatens public safety, and infringes on the free expression of ideas.

 

We cannot ignore this threat or wish it away. Preventing domestic terrorism and reducing the factors that fuel it demand a multifaceted response across the Federal Government and beyond....We have to take both short–term steps to counter the very real threats of today and longer–term measures to diminish the emerging threats of tomorrow.

 

This is a project that should unite all Americans. Together we must affirm that domestic terrorism has no place in our society. We must work to root out the hatreds that can too often drive violence. And we must recommit to defend and protect those basic freedoms, which belong to all Americans in equal measure, and which are not only the foundation of our democracy— they are our enduring advantage in the world."

 

I like that - a project that should unite all Americans.

 

Before we go any further, let's look at the Federal government's legal definition of domestic terrorism:

 

"Domestic terrorism is defined as “activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

 

The document opens by noting that domestic terrorism has a long history in the Untied States from the post-Civil War Ku Klux Klan to the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City (among others).  After the list of "domestic terror attacks", most of which involve mass shootings, the document makes this claim:

 

"And just months ago, on January 6, 2021, Americans witnessed an unprecedented attack against a core institution of our democracy: the U.S. Congress."

 

And there we have the main reason for the battle against domestic terrorists.  

 

The document then goes on to outline the motivations of today's domestic terrorists which include:

 

"...a range of violent ideological motivations, including racial or ethnic bigotry and hatred as well as anti–government or anti–authority sentiment."

 

....and a variety of forms of domestic terrorism which include:

 

"...lone actors and small groups of informally aligned individuals, to networks exhorting and targeting violence toward specific communities, to violent self–proclaimed “militias” who, despite legal prohibitions in all fifty states against certain private militia activity, assert a baseless right to take the law into their own hands."

 

Washington's strategy against domestic terrorism is built on four pillars:

 

1.) efforts to understand and share information regarding the full range of domestic terrorism threats. 

 

2.) efforts to prevent domestic terrorists from successfully recruiting, inciting, and mobilizing Americans to violence. 

 

3.) efforts to deter and disrupt domestic terrorist activity before it yields violence. 

 

4.) the long–term issues that contribute to domestic terrorism in our country must be addressed to ensure that this threat diminishes over generations to come.

  

The document also outlines key elements of domestic terrorism:

 

1.) Ethnic and racial motivation: "...the threat that emerges from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists and networks whose racial, ethnic, or religious hatred leads them toward violence, as well as those whom they encourage to take violent action. These actors have different motivations, but many focus their violence towards the same segment or segments of the American community, whether persons of color, immigrants, Jews, Muslims, other religious minorities, women and girls, LGBTQI+ individuals, or others. Their insistence on violence can, at times, be explicit. It also can, at times, be less explicit, lurking in ideologies rooted in a perception of the superiority of the white race that call for violence in furtherance of perverse and abhorrent notions of racial “purity” or “cleansing.”

 

2.) Anti-government and anti-authority motivation: "This significant component of today’s threat includes self–proclaimed “militias” and militia violent extremists who take steps to violently resist government authority or facilitate the overthrow of the U.S. Government based on perceived overreach; anarchist violent extremists, who violently oppose all forms of capitalism, corporate globalization, and governing institutions, which they perceive as harmful to society; sovereign citizen violent extremists, who believe they are immune from government authority and laws; or any other individual or group who engages in violence – or incites imminent violence – in opposition to legislative, regulatory, or other actions taken by the government. Other domestic terrorists may be motivated to violence by single–issue ideologies related to abortion–, animal rights–, environmental–, or involuntary celibate–violent extremism, as well as other grievances – or a combination of ideological influences. In some cases, individuals may develop their own idiosyncratic justifications for violence that defy ready categorization.

 

The document goes on to note that these elements combine to create a complex and changing domestic terrorism threat landscape thanks to the following:

 

"Internet–based communications platforms such as social media, file–upload sites, and end–to–end encrypted platforms, all of these elements can combine and amplify threats to public safety. This is the domestic terrorism threat America faces today – one with the distinctive imprint of today’s digital age as well as longstanding roots in domestic terrorism challenges throughout our country’s history."

  

Basically, Washington is admitting that domestic terrorism is complex and unpredictable yet makes the following "prediction" as found on page 10 with my bold:

 

"Enduring DVE (domestic violent extremists) motivations pertaining to biases against minority populations and perceived government overreach will almost certainly continue to drive DVE radicalization and mobilization to violence. Newer sociopolitical developments–such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID–19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence–will almost certainly spur some DVEs to try to engage in violence this year."

 

So, there you have it.  Washington equates those who have not drunk the "COVID KoolAid" narrative with domestic terrorists who bomb federal buildings and participate in mass shootings.

  

Washington also believes that it knows the root of all domestic terrorism; the internet and social media in particular as quoted here:

 

"Especially on Internet–based communications platforms such as social media, file–upload sites, and end–to–end encrypted platforms, all of these elements can combine and amplify threats to public safety. This is the domestic terrorism threat America faces today – one with the distinctive imprint of today’s digital age as well as longstanding roots in domestic terrorism challenges throughout our country’s history."

 

In the roughly 26 pages of text, the word "internet" appears 7 times, social media appears 4 times, online appears 20 times , platform (as referring to social media) appears 19 times and encrypted appears 4 times.  Here are some examples of the use of the word "online" in the document:

 

"It will also help us to reduce the factors contributing to incitement to domestic terrorism online that exacerbate the spread of calls to violence. It will, moreover, guide the United States toward achieving the resilience that can prevent domestic terrorists from gaining traction and adherents in the first place." (page 7)

 

"The overarching goal of this Strategy is preventing, disrupting, and deterring that violence. Pursuing that goal includes reducing the factors contributing to domestic terrorism. Those factors have multiple dimensions, including incitement to imminent violence online, some transnational linkages, and certain self–proclaimed private “militia” activity that, to varying degrees, is prohibited by the laws of all 50 states." (page 13)

  

"And it can mean, broader still, cultivating the type of digital literacy that can empower the American public to resist those who would use online communications platforms and other venues to recruit, radicalize, and mobilize to violence." (page 14)

 

But, don't worry, here's what the document has to say about the privacy, civil freedom and civil rights of Americans:

 

"Furthermore, we will focus specifically on violence and factors which contribute to it while respecting civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy protections, and while recognizing and maximizing the positive benefits of modern communications technologies such as the Internet."  (page 12)

 

And, here's an example where just about all of the "buzz words" are included:

 

"Recruiting and mobilizing individuals to domestic terrorism occurs in many settings, both in–person and online. These activities are increasingly happening on Internet–based National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism communications platforms, including social media, online gaming platforms, file–upload sites, and end–to–end encrypted chat platforms, even as those products and services frequently offer other important benefits. The widespread availability of domestic terrorist recruitment material online is a national security threat whose front lines are overwhelmingly private– sector online platforms, and we are committed to informing more effectively the escalating efforts by those platforms to secure those front lines." (pages 21 and 22)

 

So, how does the Biden Administration propose to fix the problem of domestic terrorism?  Of course, with more government intervention, most particularly including the Department of Homeland Security:

 

"Maximizing the Federal Government’s understanding of this particular threat also means supporting and making appropriate use of the analysis performed by entities outside the government that bring to bear relevant expertise and doing so in a structured way that provides a channel for such analysis while also avoiding bias or improper influence – or even the appearance of it. To that end, and consistent with civil liberties and privacy protections, the Department of Homeland Security will introduce a new systematic approach for utilizing pertinent external, non–governmental analysis and information that will provide enhanced situational awareness of today’s domestic terrorism threat. That includes, where appropriate, specialized areas and types of analysis, including ways in which gender–motivated violence can have implications for domestic terrorist threats." (page 16)

 

"...the Department of Homeland Security and others are either currently funding and implementing or planning evidence– based digital programming, including enhancing media literacy and critical thinking skills, as a mechanism for strengthening user resilience to disinformation and misinformation online for domestic audiences." (page 20)

 

In other words, force-feeding the masses the government-approved narrative and discouraging all of us from seeking out sources that disagree with Washington's views.

 

"The Department of Homeland Security has expanded its efforts to provide financial, educational, and technical assistance to those well placed to recognize and address possible domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization to violence and will ensure that its counter– domestic terrorism prevention efforts are driven by data and informed by community–based partners. The Department of Homeland Security also has increased the grant funding available in this area in support of evidence–based programs and with transparency regarding their use." (page 20)

  

"Our law enforcement agencies also play a critical role in responding to reports of criminal and otherwise concerning activity. That is why the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security are working to enhance public understanding of the full range of assistance that can be provided to those in need, including how mental health experts are complementing traditional law enforcement response." (page 21)

 

And, while it doesn't directly involve the Department of Homeland Security, here is an admission that should concern every American:

 

"Therefore, even as we augment our approach to domestic terrorism under existing authorities, the Department of Justice is examining carefully what new authorities might be necessary and appropriate." (page 25)

After all, we can never get enough of the heavy hand of government, can we?

 

I believe that is enough information to digest for this very important subject.  As Americans found out once Washington formulated its plan to combat and prevent international terrorism after the events of September 11, 2001 (i.e. the onerous and far-reaching Patriot Act), privacy and freedom can be a fleeting thing no matter how much Washington tries to reassure us that our privacy is their greatest concern.  WIth the threat of domestic terrorism now being used to subjugate the will of the masses to even more invasive scrutiny, we can be assured that what little remains of our privacy has now disappeared into the ether.

Washington's New Domestic War

Updated January 26, 2021

With the recent events at Capitol Hill in mind, a look ahead at what is likely to be one of the Biden Administration's first legislative items is in order, particularly given Joe Biden's history with the issue.

Let's start with this speech given by Joe Biden on January 7, 2021 in an address to the nation (1 minute 5 second mark):

 

Here is a transcript of the key section:

  

"Yesterday, in my view, was one of the darkest days in the history of our nation.

 

An unprecedented assault on our democracy, an assault literally on the citadel of liberty, in the United States Capitol itself. An assault on the rule of law. An assault on the most sacred of American undertakings: ratifying the will of the people and choosing the leadership of their government.

 

All of us here grieve the loss of life. Grieve the desecration of the people's house.

 

But we, what we witnessed yesterday was not dissent, it was not disorder, it was not protest. It was chaos. They weren't protesters — don't dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob of insurrectionists, domestic terrorists."

 

Note the use of the words "domestic terrorists".  You will be hearing that phrase many times over the coming months.

 

Let's now look at what the Council on Foreign Relations, one of the most influential think-tanks in Washington, had to say about the issue of "domestic terrorists" through an post-Capitol Hill events interview with Bruce Hoffman, a CFR Senior Fellow for Counterterrorism and Homeland Security and former Corporate Chair in Counterterrorism and Counterinsurgency at the RAND Corporation as shown here:

 

Let's start by looking at his definition of terrorism (my bold):

 

"Terrorism is determined by the act itself, not by the type of perpetrator or their cause. This is the U.S. government’s approach. The FBI, the lead agency for countering terrorism, cites the definition of terrorism found in 18 U.S. Code 2331(5) [PDF]: “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” The FBI further defines domestic terrorism as acts intended to be a means to “Intimidate or coerce a civilian population; [or] Influence the policy of government by intimidation or coercion.”

 

He goes on to state that:

 

"What occurred at the U.S. Capitol yesterday conforms to this definition. It involved people using violence or the threat of violence to intimidate democratically elected representatives, the wanton vandalization and destruction of government property, the deliberate subversion of the U.S. electoral process, and the derailment of the peaceful transfer of power that is the hallmark of U.S. governance."

 

The events on Capitol Hill were a catalyst for America's mainstream and not-so-mainstream media as shown here:

 

1.) Washington Post:

 

2.) Vox: 

 

3.) Mother Jones:

 

4. ) Propublica: noting the use of one of the few members of the "mob" wearing a gas mask to ensure that its readers are filled with fear:

 

 

5.) NBC News:

Some influential members of the mainstream media and academia were discussing the need for control of domestic terrorism :

 

6.) ABC News: was part of the "domestic terrorism" narrative a week prior to the events on Capitol Hill as shown here:

 

7.) The Center for Strategic and International Studies: was also in early as shown on this screen capture from a CSIS Brief on October 22, 2020:

 

8.) Georgetown University: back in September 2020, Amy C. Collins at Georgetown University's Program on Extremism  published this document:

  

Here is an excerpt from the introduction to Collins' missive (my bolds):

 

"Although the United States has taken a powerful stance in fighting the War on Terror, and attempts have been made to define domestic terrorism alongside international terrorism within federal legislation, there is a “considerable amount of ambiguity over domestic terrorism, what it means precisely, [and] how it’s charged.” This ambiguity arises from the lack of a standalone criminal offense outlawing domestic terrorism. In light of this ambiguity and the rise in domestic terrorism within the United States since September 11, 2001, the United States needs to enact a law specifically outlawing domestic terrorism but has clear bounds to its application. Accordingly, this paper recommends that Congress enacts the law set forth here, which outlaws actual, threatened, attempted, or conspiracy to violate a criminal law of the United States or any state, where the person does not act pursuant to a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), an act takes place in within the jurisdiction of the United States, and the acts appear to be intended to (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population, or (ii) influence the policy or conduct of a government by intimidation, coercion, or violent means."

 

According to Collins:

 

"Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act…defines domestic terrorism as committing “an act dangerous to human life” violative of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act occurs primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, and appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping."

 

It is interesting to note that Collins brings up the USA PATRIOT Act that was signed into law on October 26, 2001 in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001.  This act which has the goal of "Of Preserving Life and Liberty" and seeks to deter and punish terrorists, a laudable goal, however, it has led to massive and irreversible changes in how the state deals with the privacy and civil liberties of the very citizens that it seeks to protect by giving governments wide-ranging powers of surveillance without judicial approval as shown here:

 

 

In addition, the very same Joe Biden who will be taking over the reins of Washington has repeatedly claimed that he was the author of the USA PATRIOT Act by way of a bill that he wrote in 1994 in response to the Oklahoma City bombing as shown here:

 

Let's close this posting with a few points to ponder.  As we know from relatively recent history, governments love to have an excuse to snoop on our private lives and that once the laws are in place to legalize government actions, they are never rescinded.  Given the repeated appearance of the "domestic terrorism" narrative over the past year and Joe Biden's referring to the "mob" that "invaded" Capitol Hill as "domestic terrorists", we can pretty much assure ourselves that Washington will be enacting a bill to counter this "threat" at its earliest convenience.  As far as what Congress uses to define "domestic terrorism" is pretty much anyone's guess with the strong possibility that "spreading disinformation" and "questioning election outcomes"  included among crimes that are part of "domestic terrorism".  Additionally, such laws could ultimately be used to quash political viewpoints that are not shared by the ruling party.

 

By repeatedly floating the "domestic terrorism" mantra and with a severely polarized political reality, the Biden Administration is signalling its intention to further trample on what few civil rights we now have.  The events on Capitol Hill will be just the excuse needed.

Remember, one person's terrorist is another person's hero.  It's all in your perspective as it has been throughout history.

Addendum

The fix is in:

That didn't take long, did it?