While the textbook definition of a fascist is one who aligned w/Mussolini's party in right wing Italy & generally follows authoritarian right wing regimes, the definition has devolved to include fascistic actions of which left wing authoritarians can be guilty of. As such under this "expanded definition" acting a fascist isn't inherently a right wing take, but is very much the right wing's direction at present. For reference, look at Royal Caribbean bending to DeSantis political whims, as industry typically does under fascism becoming tools of the state, regardless of what protections they may have to run their business as they wish to.
Actually as outlined in the other threads -- Royal Caribbean still requires proof of vaccination if you claim to be vaccinated. They did not bend to DeSantis' will -- they simply decided to go the "test cruise" route so a 95% threshold of vaccinated passengers would not be required. They did this because they cater to families and many kids cannot be vaccinated yet.
I see, I just skimmed a few headlines this morning. Seems like this policy change is merely an optics play to let the media and DeSantis run w/some false victory. Smart
Yes.... but it is actually driven by Royal Caribbean's apparent success with their test voyage(s) with documented results. They expect approval from the CDC to allow a lower threshold of vaccinated passengers. Since Royal Caribbean caters to families (with unvaccinated kids) this is important for their business.
Science driven approach? We haven't seen one of those in 4 years. Been so long I must've forgotten what one looked like.
Remember in early 2020 all those cruise ships roaming the oceans with no port to dock in while they were being overrun with COVID, Nobody wants a repeat of this, it would be very bad for business. Due to this both the cruise lines and the CDC have been working on how to avoid this problem in the future. Obviously the best approach is to effectively have the level of vaccinated immunity on a cruise ship at "herd immunity" levels. Short of this a combination of other approaches -- backed by test cruises & science -- will be used.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/questions-about-the-fbis-role-in Questions About the FBI's Role in 1/6 Are Mocked Because the FBI Shapes Liberal Corporate Media The FBI has been manufacturing and directing terror plots and criminal rings for decades. But now, reverence for security state agencies reigns. The original report, published by Revolver News and then amplified by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson, documented ample evidence of FBI infiltration of the three key groups at the center of the 1/6 investigation — the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and the Three Percenters — and noted how many alleged riot leaders from these groups have not yet been indicted. While low-level protesters have been aggressively charged with major felonies and held without bail, many of the alleged plot leaders have thus far been shielded from charges. The implications of these facts are obvious. It seems extremely likely that the FBI had numerous ways to know of any organized plots regarding the January 6 riot (just as the U.S. intelligence community, by its own admission, had ample advanced clues of the 9/11 attack but, according to their excuse, tragically failed to “connect the dots”). There is no doubt that the FBI has infiltrated at least some if not all of these groups — which it has been warning for years pose a grave national security threat — with informants and/or undercover spies. It is known that Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio has served as an FBI informant in the past, and the disrupted 2020 plot by Three Percenters members to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) was shaped and driven by what The Wall Street Journal reportedwere the FBI’s “undercover agents and confidential informants.” What would be shocking and strange is not if the FBI had embedded informants and other infiltrators in the groups planning the January 6 Capitol riot. What would be shocking and strange — bizarre and inexplicable — is if the FBI did not have those groupsunder tight control. And yet the suggestion that FBI informants may have played some role in the planning of the January 6 riot was instantly depicted as something akin to, say, 9/11 truth theories or questions about the CIA’s role in JFK’s assassination or, until a few weeks ago, the COVID lab-leak theory: as something that, from the perspective of Respectable Serious Circles, only a barely-sane, tin-foil-hat-wearing lunatic would even entertain. This reaction is particularly confounding given how often the FBI did exactly this during the first War on Terror, and how commonplace discussions of this tactic were in mainstream liberal circles. Over the last decade, I reported on countless cases for The Guardian and The Intercept where the FBI targeted some young American Muslims they viewed as easily manipulated — due to financial distress, emotional problems, or both — and then deployed informants and undercover agents to dupe them into agreeing to join terrorist plots that had been created, designed and funded by the FBI itself, only to then congratulate themselves for breaking up the plot which they themselves initiated. As I asked in one headline about a particularly egregious entrapment case: “Why Does the FBI Have to Manufacture its Own Plots if Terrorism and ISIS Are Such Grave Threats?”
it’s not stupid. It’s intentional. it’s an argument where the past is not objective but rather the has to be proven. It’s being done because many people would lose their careers if evidence came out. There are reports that republic congressmen were giving tours to oath keepers the day before and that some congressmen knew that the attack wasn’t spontaneous. I think the fact that there won’t be a bipartisan investigation of the capitol attack is the turning point in America. America will take generations to heal from this if it ever does.