THE WAR ON DISSENT

                  COUNTERTERRORISM AND IT’S USE ON DISSENTING VOICES

Is the United States use of counterterrorism programs overextending its original purpose? The definition of counterterrorism is political or military activities designed to prevent or thwart terrorism. The definition of terrorism is the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Where does the right to protest, as guaranteed by the First Amendment, fall within these boundaries? The definition of protesting is a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something. It was seen with many recent events that the United States government, local police, and other agencies are declaring protests an act of terrorism.

The ever-expanding militarization of police was highlighted with the actions taken against the protesters at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. The protesters even went out of the way to call themselves water protectors, which was the entire reason for them being there. It’s easy to assume the reason they did this was to avoid the implications that come with the word protester.

In leaked documents obtained by the intercept, police worked closely with a mercenary and security firm called TigerSwan. TigerSwan being a client of Energy Transfer Partners. The TigersSwan documents clearly show that they never intended to treat Standing Rock water protectors as peaceful. They even went as far as to compare them to Jihadists and would refer to them as Insurgents.(https://theintercept.com/2017/05/27/leaked-documents-reveal-security-firms-counterterrorism-tactics-at-standing-rock-to-defeat-pipeline-insurgencies/). After Standing Rock, legislation that would restrict protesting rights, and further criminalize a First Amendment protected act, started to surface. As of 4/25/2018 there are 62 bills in 31 states. (More details of this can be found at http://www.icnl.org/usprotestlawtracker/?location=42&status=&issue=&date=&type=)

This treatment was also seen in regards to the Black Lives Matter protests. Black Lives Matter is a group of activists standing up and speaking out against police brutality. It did not take long for the corporate media to start painting them all as thugs. The FBI sent a memo addressing Black Lives Matter protesters as black identity extremists. The memo stated “the FBI assesses it is very likely Black Identity Extremists (BIE) perceptions of police brutality against African Americans spurred an increase in premeditated, retaliatory lethal violence against law enforcement and will very likely serve as a justification for such violent.”democracy now’s Amy Goodman spoke with black lives matter founders on what it was like to be labeled a terrorist.

This claim that “black identity extremists” and water protector at Standing Rock are as much of a treat as Jihadists is laughable. In fact, there is much more data to suggest that the opposite is true. A study was conducted by records keepers the United States to analyze the numbers of police involved homicides. It was first reported that you were nine times more likely to be killed by police than an act of terrorism. In this study, it was revealed that the FBI’s “justifiable homicide” data was flawed. Approximately 545 homicides were omitted from the official “justifiable homicide” counts each year for almost a decade. This would mean that citizens of the United States are closer to 55 times more likely to be killed by police than a terrorist. (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/04/police-killed-people-fbi-data-justifiable-homicides) Even with this new data, these estimates do not show the entire picture. There is no national standard or law that requires law enforcement to compile these statistics. (https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/03/no_author/youre-55-times-more-likely-to-be-killed-by-a-cop/)

What does all of this mean, in the bigger picture, of where the United States is headed? Just like the US has expanded its military presence across the globe for years and years. It only makes sense that they would do so domestically as well. The US government, military, and all intelligence agencies show time and again they believe the only answers to any given problem is force. It would seem that the phrase spreading democracy actually translates into spreading dictatorships. Not only does the US support 70% of the worlds dictatorships, but has overthrown democratically elected officials to then replace them with theocrats or dictators. Why do the American people think that they are immune to this ever-expanding global show of force?

Of course, there are many different ways that dissent can be squashed out. There’s the obviousness of a physical oppression, but there is also economic oppression. Many anti-establishment voices on YouTube and other platforms have seen increasing democratization of content. This massive demonetization campaign was dubbed the name adpocalypse. The reason for this mass demonetization was that ads were showing up on extremist content. A reference that was made was an ad showed up on a neo-Nazi platform. Since ads are put on videos via algorithms, if nothing within the title and tags are bracingly “hate speech”, ads can slip through the cracks. The bigger issue of the algorithm is that it will not distinguish between pro-neo-Nazi content and anti-neo-Nazi content. This means that even using the word could get your video demonetize. Journalists and political commentators have been hit very hard by this. The problem at hand seems to become increasingly more vague. Where YouTube will demonetize content simply based on whether or not it’s controversial. This has led to antiwar voices, and voices that are simply anti-establishment in general, having to diversify to maintain a platform.

Now how does this fit into the narrative of a counterterrorism and/or state oppression? YouTube is owned by Google and Google has direct involvement with US intelligence agencies. It would seem that their hope is to cut peoples funding and to stop them from being able to speak out against the establishment.

The First Amendment in The United States is under attack in many different ways. The state is going after the First Amendment and every facet. Freedom of the press is being attacked under the guise of not offending people. Protesting and dissent are under attack by the large boot of the state and physical acts of violence perpetrated by the state, and private security firms. If this pattern persists is safe to say it only gets worse. We the people are far more powerful than we realize. There is true strength in numbers.

The diversity within America is a beautiful thing, regardless of what some people might have you believe. As tensions in America grow it is important to realize where the fight actually needs to be directed. This is not a fight about Republicans vs Democrats, black vs white, citizens vs immigrants. This is a fight with the powerful and the rich versus the poor and disenfranchised. The strategic move of divide and conquer seems to be as old as time. The 24 hour news cycle of corporate media is a poisonous and toxic representation of ourselves. It feeds on the most visceral feelings of others while demonizing critical thinking and logic. This is done to keep us arguing amongst ourselves, while the oligarchy that the US has become, continues to erode our constitutional rights. Unity among groups will not be an easy task. The important thing is always to see the bigger picture. The current system in which we all live thrives when people are oppressed. Greed and consumption are seen as a virtue and something to be envied, while compassion and kindness are viewed as weakness. We are stronger together and this scares those in power. Continue questioning everything and stay strong. You are not alone.