Posted by Jim Gilliam, WhiteHouse2.org at 12:43 PM on March 26, 2009.

Why Obama shouldn't chuckle at the question of legalization.

Violent resistance is amongst the NWO favorite tools to cowardly mope to their owned media audience and enforce their "war on terror" against dissidents, it is an old trap but works beautifully:

hired militias and riots, false flags, provocateurs, always as a general rule: expect no honor, no man to man, face to face fair fights, they are basically cowards, no dignity, no valor, no courage, and they would gladly give away their "loved" ones to save themselves.

Violent AND non violent dissidents are indeed in a dilemma, damned if you do, damned if you don't, here is one of the banned Illuminati game cards:kill for peace






So I usually prefer the elegance of truth, the steady hand when the soul is clean, the readiness to take it in the chin before my people, the calm example and the dignity of patience, tolerance and compassion.

If all else fails though, armies of immoral traitors, spies, double agents etc... while they may win the battles, their shaky selves will always loose the war against the predictable but cohesive, force of honest men, the ultimate warriors.
here I quote a fragment from a Simon Davies illuminating article:

---------------------------
Mainstream media throughout the US and Europe are busy peddling a line of propaganda which seeks to place into the common consciousness the notion that violence this summer is the inevitable consequence of the social pressures arising from the financial crisis. This is an outright lie, a lie told for a very clear and specific purpose. The Managers and the Puppets are terrified of the masses for they know that should the masses rise up against them in a coordinated, coherent and peaceful manner then the Chessboard will be overturned, they will fall and their empires, economic, financial and military, crumble into the dust. They cannot risk the rise of a genuine social movement based on coordinated action, a coherent and truthful understanding of reality and a peaceful means for political and social change.

Movements that challenge the power and privileges of the established order are then seen as threats to national security rather than for what they are - which is threats to wealth, privilege and power of long established elites.

Most people in the US and the UK erroneously believe their countries to be essentially benign powers which have had to stave off the threat of communism or other violent revolution from without and within. What they do not know is the truth, which is that under the banner of fighting communism and in the case of the British, Irish nationalism, both countries have left a trail of blood, terror and destruction across the globe and at home.

To grasp the mindset of those that manage the world the words of Britain's famous counter-insurgency specialist, General Sir Frank Kitson, are illuminating (Low Intensity Operations: Subversion, Insurgency and Peacekeeping (1971)):

Subversion....mean[s] all measures short of the use of armed force taken by one section of the people of a country to overthrow those governing the country at the time, or to force them to do things they do not want to do. It can involve the use of political and economic pressure, strikes, protest marches and propaganda....

Insurgency is defined by Kitson as the same as Subversion with the addition of armed force. This is the mindset of the ruling elite throughout the world; a mindset so narrow, so parochial, that any challenge to it, even peaceful and law abiding is seen as Subversion. Add armed struggle to the attempts of people to get those governing them to take different actions or change their mode of governing, and you have Insurgency. Subversion is greatly feared by ruling elites because of its peaceful nature and because it is often widely supported. Insurgency, on the other hand, is not feared nearly so much because they have more firepower. Once the ruling elite can unleash extreme violence in real or imaginary reaction to any form of armed struggle then they have the upper hand, they have control and control is what "ruling" is all about. Insurgency is therefore preferred over Subversion by ruling elites.

Dominic: What do you think will happen?
Finch: What usually happens when people without guns stand up to people with guns? (V For Vendetta)

What Kitson realized very early in his (in)famous career was that in order for the established governmental power to have any chance of suppressing the deeply held desire for freedom in a people subject to colonial or any other oppression extreme violence is essential. This view was by no means unique for extreme violence had been the hallmark of colonial power since the creation of the colonies; how else could a relative handful of white men have dominated countries such as India for so long? The other plank of successful colonial power, other than a dominant navy such as that of the British, was the co-opting of the existing elite of the colony itself. As is typical of elites anywhere, the local leaders were easily brought to the service of the colonial power through the maintenance and usually substantial expansion of their own wealth and apparent power. Those that were not for sale, of which there were precious few, were simply removed.

What we are seeing developing in the countries of the "West" is the same model. We, the subject people, are governed by a small self interested ruling elite, which answers to masters hidden from us; we are reaching the point where we will no longer tolerate exploitation by our rulers and will seek genuine freedom. In order to counter this, extreme violence is planned against us. However, that violence needs to be justified to the masses.
----------------------------------------
God bless us all this coming red summer, it doesnÂŽt have to be this way if we do not want to.
Fernando Tognola