Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Predicting a riot.

Over at Captain Ranty's place, he has a link to an article on one of those New World Order conspiracy sites. It's a long article but worth a read even if you think it's all hogwash.

I haven't researched any of that stuff myself so I can't say whether it's all true or not. Some of it rings true, or at least likely. Some of it sounds a bit far-fetched to me. Although I admit a lot of it does sound exactly like typical Righteous behaviour, just on a grander scale. Whether it all connects into a global conspiracy or not I can't say.

One line that particularly caught my eye was this one: raise up a revolution and you sacrifice the men who truly want to resist.

The article refers to the Bay of Pigs and similar instances where a rebellious group were encouraged to fight, with the promise of outside help, and then the outside help was withdrawn and they were left to be wiped out. The Bay of Pigs is not theory. It's history.

The key is that in doing this, you not only identify those who most want to resist, you isolate them and defeat them and in so doing you make clear to the rest of the population that rebellion will not work. Those who were not courageous enough to fight the first rebellion will certainly not risk it after the more courageous have been eliminated. Subsequent control is much easier once the troublemakers have been dealt with.

Could this be in the minds of those who provoke us daily and who wonder why we didn't revolt as expected last summer?

It's another factor to add to the list of why a rebellion would be in the Gorgon's interests more than ours.

- Any rebels would be instantly branded 'right-wing extremists' by the press, who can't be trusted to report even the simplest story without just making it all up.

- The Civil Contingencies act would come into play. Then those Guardianistas will find out what 'fascism' actually means.

- Rebellion must, of course, mean the identification of the primary malcontents who are stirring up the people. They'll be on some database somewhere, nobody can escape them all.

- The ringleaders would be contacted by someone who will claim to be able to help them and who will stir them into action. Might already be happening within groups like EDL.

- Wait for the rioting. Not the mini-ones. Wait for a really big one. One where most of those who are determined to resist are present. The outside 'helper' fails to show and the authorities crush the rebellion easily.

The population now sees that rebellion is futile. Some will thank the State for saving them from the terrible Right Wing even though there really isn't one these days. It's socialism or middle ground now. There'll be no more rebellion for at least a generation, and the next generation doesn't know any other way to live.

If you're planning rebellion, forget it. All the bases are covered and rebellion will provide an excuse to clamp down hard. If you're hearing about some outside agency promising help, forget it. It's a setup. Don't riot no matter how hard the provocation. Once that riot is quashed (and it will be because it's expected and prepared for) we're done for.

Open fighting won't work this time. The next battle will be won with words.


Quiet_Man said...

I sometimes rail against apathy, but at the moment it might be the only thing stopping a bloodbath by the hidden elements of the state.

Still I though at least Bradford or Luton might have kicked off at some stage.

Junican said...

I started to read your recommended literature, but ........ it is rather dense, isn't it? Are you an advocate of 'speed reading'? I don't know how you get the time.

As regards rebellion, two years ago, on 'Taking Liberties', smokers were calling for marches against the smoking ban. I was saying that not, on the grounds that it is PERCEIVED by the public that smoking is harmful and that, if smokers march, they would be perceived to be marching in support of A KILLER - not a good idea.

As regards the smoking ban, there are certain avenues open to smokers which could, possibly, produce some sort of amendment or relaxation.

Number one is, by perseverence, to show that passive smoking harm is a myth. The science is very suspect. It can be done.

Number two is 'Freedom to Choose'. By this, I do not simply mean the enjoyment of minor, 'naughty' pastimes, but MAJOR things like the freedom to take risks, the freedom not to be dictated to by Insurance Companies, the freedom not to be dictated to by 'the majority'.

There are obviously others.

The sort of rebellion which we need, not only as regards smoking, but as regards all the other Nanny State interferences, has to be a smoldering discontent, for the time being. We need to continue to complain and, especially, about how our tax monies are being spent. For example, how did we come to be funding this Dr Whatsit,s Indian empire? Why is the EU also funding his empire? These are the questions which constitute a rebellion which is not physical and therefore not easy to put down.

What we lack is an over-arching group. The Taxpayer's Alliance could be such a group if it were not so obviously a Tory tool. Perhaps I might put it to them as a new goal.

JuliaM said...

"The Civil Contingencies act would come into play. Then those Guardianistas will find out what 'fascism' actually means."

Sadly, I suspect far more would actually welcome it.

They want the smack of firm government more than they think they want 'freedom'...

Corrugated Soundbite said...

On the flip side, it must be very frustrating. We've seen what happens when the Gorgon gets frustrated. He just openly insults the entire population. Still no riot though. We just take our money and put it under our beds.

We were ordered to riot last summer, and we were ordered to carry out a wave of racist attacks after Griffin's appearance on TV. Nothing doing. I've been talking to a few people about it in one of the 3 pubs left within 20 miles of me, and they seem a lot keener on the idea of peaceful rebellion. I must admit, I'm not keen on the idea of throwing bricks at a lowdown constable who is drowning in the same toilet as we are. I can evade tax on my freelance activities though, or just stop trading in money for some of them. Get paid in wine instead - home made wine - thus avoiding the duty whack to a notable extent.

They have, after all, tried to breed us out of working smarter, not harder.

PT Barnum said...

If, as seems plausible, they are trying to engineer civil unrest then they don't understand the British people very well at all. We protest, we complain, we resist in small, quiet ways but we don't riot unless we are in possession of some messianic conviction that the world is about to end.

However, if you'll permit me a briefish account of my recent experience in east London, they who have sowed the storm may yet reap the whirlwind. I've always enjoyed east London's cultural mix, all races, creeds and colours, muddling along in broad tolerance. In spring 2009 that was how it was on the streets of Whitechapel. In January 2010 it was unrecognisably different. The daytime and evening streets were full of groups of young Asian men, 6, 8, 10 of them standing around watching the world go by, talking to each other occasionally. No Asian women to be seen. No black people. No white people. At 5pm the streets reverted to their 2009 look, with every kind of people visible, before reverting again after the rush hour. This whole thing was, to me, completely unexpected and walking around became an intimidating experience, being Not Like Them and given a clear and repeated feeling that I did not belong there and was not welcome.

So how did it change so quickly? If I lived there, or Bradford, or Luton, I think I might become angry rather than nervous and bewildered, to find myself so abruptly in what felt like a foreign country.

Captain Ranty said...

I am always hesitant before hitting the "publish" button because there is a thin line between madness and genius.

Phelps spent years researching his book which spans over 500 years of church history. If it was about kittens, miracles and rainbows I doubt it would sell. His loathing for the jesuits shines brightly in some of his answers during the interview. His religious zeal is a worry, too.

It contained a range of topics that interest me so I thought I would go ahead and publish the piece.

I found huge chunks of it fascinating, but I am all too aware this stuff is not for everyone.


Leg-iron said...

What does ring true in the article are the titles. Calling themselves 'knights' of this and that, and so on.

The Righteous love all that. They really love to have titles but they don't want to have to work for them.

You'd soon round up a fair army of arrogant busybodies by giving them a free, impressive sounding title. These days it's 'diversity outreach consultant' or something equally meaningless.

So yes, you could easily get those people onside by telling them they are 'knights' and they have a 'secret mission' that involves no danger to themselves but lets them order other people around.

It's certainly not impossible. Like CR, I was a bit put off by the guy's evident hatred of Jesuits. Did that come after or before the research?

Captain Ranty said...

I was wondering if his hatred drove the research. I happen to know that if you go out looking for blue cars, then blue cars are what you find.

The guy says that he turned to religion when he was 17.

I'm 47 and I am still struggling with theology. How can anyone be sure of anything at 17?

I was fairly sure that I wanted to drink and mess around with the opposite sex, beyond that, I knew nothing.


paulo said...

I'm not sure on this.

At what point do we say "enough is enough?" Or must we continue to do nothing and allow ourselves to be slowly ground down. Yes I can see the dangers in an upheaval - that provokes a clamp down. But do nothing and they reach (eventually) the state they wanted anyway and the inherent danger with this is that the subdued masses are so beaten that they do not even carry the seeds of simmering discontent that remained from a failed revolution!

Covert defiance is all well and good but it only benefits people like ourselves. What about the masses who are slowly being poisoned and who don't really have the nounce to think for themselves?

Of course that sounds elitist but how many people do we all know who agree with us but if push came to shove would simply fall into line? Hell I don't know how long my bottle would last. Would it last?

But if we (?) the "defiant" (?) ones don't start to organize I fear the Righteous will get their way regardless.

Can't we just string up the worst 600 and then start again?


Leg-iron said...

Paulo - For me, number one priority is to get the current lunatics out of power. I don't support the Tories but at least they appear to be moderately sane.

Would Cameron invoke the civil contingencies act? Or revoke it? I don't know enough about him to be sure but I think he'd consider the matter very hard before doing anything with it.

I'm sure the Gorgon will invoke it at the drop of a baton and I'm convinced he's actively seeking an excuse to do so.

If that happens, the lunatics will be able to do anything they please. They are only loosely constrained now but imagine them with no constraints and no accountability at all.

So, first, the ballot box. Then see what Cameron decides to do.

(I don't want a Tory government and won't be voting for them but it's likely they'll win anyway,and of the three available, they are the least mad option).

opinions powered by