How to protect yourself from the treasonous enforcers, informants, spys, and modern stasi of an illegitimate government

704

• (edited )

Public Service Announcement about the Congressional Occupation Government and the federal junta's spies and informants:

We all know the "glowie" meme. More often than not its simply spread by disinformation posters to spread FUD and paranoia. It's main purpose is to atomize us. Well heres how to protect yourself, identity legitimate people, and shut down their operations.

The best way to shut them down is simply to shun anyone that advocates violence or lawlessness. Thats how you know whos real and who isnt.

Doesn't matter whether you believe fighting is right, or breaking the rules is necessary or not. Simply shut them down by refusing to engage in useless and fruitless talk.

The glowfags will always try either to immediately talk about it or ease into it with alarmism and talks of "necessary evil."

Again and again this is their operating manual. If not, then they will elude to it constantly without explicitly calling for it. Every single time.

Always use that as a gauge and it'll never fail you.

It is not that legitimately defending your communities, family, property, and self against illegal lawfare, replacement, or against attacks from mobs (like antifa) is wrong, instead it is that unnecessary talk of these things is stupid, pointless, and only opens you up to unnecessary risks.

Everyone knows lawful self defense is just that. Free speech is just that. To engage in these or talk about these is not calls to violence, nor calls to action. Nevertheless they will always be treated as such, and so speaking of them serves no purpose.

The bureucracy also sometimes have informants who will talk about violence or crime, and then use a persons failure to report it as a means to arrest them (obligation/duty to report laws).

Heres how you protect yourself from these thinly veiled manufactured stasi political prosecutions: always dismiss someone calling for violence or lawlessness as "not being serious" or a "bad joke". It's important you do that, and then explain that you're not going to engage with the clowns and their dangerous rhetoric. Which frankly all of them are bad jokes, and I dont take any of them serious, because almost all of them are entrapment schemes, which by definition means the people talking about committing violence or crimes aren't serious. Refuse to participate. Refuse to take them seriously. Assume its a joke. Make that explicit and then refuse to engage any further with them, at all. Your refusal to report a 'potential' crime such as calls to violence, cannot legitimately itself be converted into a crime, when the people encouraging it never intended to follow through because those same people are federal agents or contractors engaged in entrapment. So by starting with the very assumption that calls to violence or crime are always entrapment, you can always rightfully claim that you didn't believe they were serious, and were instead making a bad joke or engaged in entrapment.

Bad jokes are not crimes. And refusing to take someone serious who is clearly not intent on their words, is also not a crime either as long as you start with the assumption it is entrapment and therefore not going to lead to anything.

The junta's federal enforcers (to make a legitimate case) then have to disprove what you believed, the same way in libel cases intent has to be proved.

Which of course exposes them to discovery. And the moment they are exposed to discovery, you can show it was an entrapment operation, which by definition implies they never seriously intended to follow through, because that would be a crime, and the illegitimate federal bureaucracy would never break the law (lol). For them to argue otherwise would be for them to suggest the federal government intended to follow through.

Ipso facto, your defense then becomes that they were not serious because of course it was entrapment, and not a legitimate conspiracy to commit crimes or violence, which comports with any sincere defense you make about not taking them seriously.

This does not prevent you from being dragged through the israeli-co-opted bolshevik kangaroo courts. But it does allow you to gum up the works and show them for the criminals and fools they are.

Talk is talk. Crime is crime. And entrapment is entrapment. Know the difference, and be prepared and willing to explain the difference if you ever have to.

And by using this gauge you'll always be able to weed out the worst informants and junta spies early on.

Naturally, this is not legal advice, please consult an attorney if you need to.

Public Service Announcement about the Congressional Occupation Government and the federal junta's spies and informants: We all know the "glowie" meme. More often than not its simply spread by disinformation posters to spread FUD and paranoia. It's main purpose is to atomize us. Well heres how to protect yourself, identity legitimate people, and shut down their operations. The best way to shut them down is simply to shun anyone that advocates violence or lawlessness. Thats how you know whos real and who isnt. Doesn't matter whether you believe fighting is right, or breaking the rules is necessary or not. Simply shut them down by refusing to engage in useless and fruitless talk. The glowfags will always try either to immediately talk about it or **ease** into it with alarmism and talks of "necessary evil." Again and again this is their operating manual. If not, then they will elude to it constantly without explicitly calling for it. Every single time. Always use that as a gauge and it'll never fail you. It is not that legitimately defending your communities, family, property, and self against illegal lawfare, replacement, or against attacks from mobs (like antifa) is wrong, instead it is that *unnecessary* talk of these things is stupid, pointless, and only opens you up to unnecessary risks. Everyone knows lawful self defense is just that. Free speech is just that. To engage in these or talk about these *is not* calls to violence, nor calls to action. Nevertheless they will always be treated as such, and so speaking of them serves no purpose. The bureucracy also sometimes have informants who will talk about violence or crime, and then use a persons failure to report it as a means to arrest them (*obligation/duty to report* laws). Heres how you protect yourself from these thinly veiled manufactured stasi political prosecutions: always dismiss someone calling for violence or lawlessness as "not being serious" or a "bad joke". It's *important* you do that, and then explain that you're not going to engage with the clowns and their dangerous rhetoric. Which frankly all of them *are* bad jokes, and I *dont* take any of them serious, because almost all of them are entrapment schemes, which by definition means the people talking about committing violence or crimes aren't serious. Refuse to participate. Refuse to take them seriously. Assume its a joke. Make that explicit and then refuse to engage any further with them, at all. Your refusal to report a 'potential' crime such as calls to violence, cannot legitimately itself be converted into a crime, **when the people encouraging it never intended to follow through** because those same people are federal agents or contractors engaged in entrapment. So by starting with the very assumption that calls to violence or crime are *always* entrapment, you can always rightfully claim that you didn't believe they were serious, and were instead making a bad joke or engaged in entrapment. Bad jokes are not crimes. And refusing to take someone serious who is clearly *not* intent on their words, is also not a crime either **as long as you start with the assumption it is entrapment and therefore not going to lead to anything**. The junta's federal enforcers (to make a *legitimate* case) then have to *disprove* what you believed, the same way in libel cases intent has to be proved. Which of course exposes them to discovery. And the moment they are exposed to discovery, you can *show* it was an entrapment operation, which by definition implies they never seriously intended to follow through, because that would be a crime, and the illegitimate federal bureaucracy would never break the law (lol). For them to argue otherwise would be for them to suggest the federal government *intended* to follow through. Ipso facto, your defense then becomes that *they were not serious* **because of course** it was entrapment, and not a legitimate conspiracy to commit crimes or violence, which comports with any sincere defense you make about not taking them seriously. This does not prevent you from being dragged through the israeli-co-opted bolshevik kangaroo courts. But it does allow you to gum up the works and show them for the criminals and fools they are. Talk is talk. Crime is crime. And entrapment is entrapment. Know the difference, and be prepared and willing to explain the difference if you ever have to. And by using this gauge you'll always be able to weed out the worst informants and junta spies early on. Naturally, this is not legal advice, please consult an attorney if you need to.

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

Your emphasis, not mine. Stressing 'unnecessary' implies that some times there is 'necessary talk of these things'... yep definitely seems like you are easing into it there. Was this a bad joke that was way too subtle for me?

No I'm saying just because the stasi condemn you for it, and also try to ease you into it, doesn't mean any given message is untrue. Who the messenger is, is unimportant, compared to the message. And there message is useless, disorganized, and alienating violence, used to paint you, and everyones beliefs as the boogieman, to the general public.

I specifically added that to clarify what I'm saying, and for a very good reason: If I don't say it, shills come in, and use this as an opportunity to divide on the basis of things like "lol, stay peaceful and be conquered faggots!", or to encourage it, or disparage the peaceful as "shills trying to keep people complicit."

It's important to call for peace, while clarifying that calling for peace is not an invitation to be a pushover, though thats what shills also sometimes do.

What they want is for you to think its a binary choice, so you do nothing.

When the truth is there is a vast array of options between peace and violence. For example theres a big chart of some 100+ methods of nonviolent resistance/protect/etc floating around out there on the net if you care to look for it.

But you'd never know that if you allow them to stick you on the horns of a dilemma, either labeling you yourself a glowfag for advocating peace, or a glowfag for advocating the opposite, and in doing, making you paranoid and keep you from unifying with your neighbors, your community, and everyone else who believes the same as us.

Which is why the glowfag meme is primarily about enforcing complicity and atomization/division by inducing paranoia.

You will see it brought up. Every. Single Time. On any thread or message that is remotely "dangerous" to the establishment. Almost without fail. Thats how you gauge what they don't want you to be engaged in.

I'm saying be peaceful wherever possible an call for peace wherever possible. Or if you prefer, be wise as a serpent and innocent as a dove.

Or speak softly and carry a big stick.

No one who is sober, and serious needs to talk about that sort of shit, to "talk shop" as it were. If you organize at all, organize in strength for peace and avoid shitbags, windbags, shittalkers, weekend warriors who just want excuses to drink beer and fuck around in the woods, wannabe militiamen, people who just want to "be part of something" or play follow the leader, and any of the other self-involved useless types.

Talk is cheap.

Unity through peace, strength through unity.

> Your emphasis, not mine. Stressing 'unnecessary' implies that some times there is 'necessary talk of these things'... yep definitely seems like you are easing into it there. Was this a bad joke that was way too subtle for me? No I'm saying just because the stasi condemn you for it, and also try to ease you into it, doesn't mean any given message is untrue. Who the messenger is, is unimportant, compared to the message. And there message is useless, disorganized, and alienating violence, used to paint you, and everyones beliefs as the boogieman, to the general public. I specifically added that to clarify what I'm saying, and for a very good reason: If I don't say it, shills come in, and use this as an opportunity to divide on the basis of things like "lol, stay peaceful and be conquered faggots!", or to encourage it, or disparage the peaceful as "shills trying to keep people complicit." It's important to call for peace, while clarifying that calling for peace is not an invitation to be a pushover, though thats what shills also sometimes do. What they want is for you to think its a binary choice, so you do nothing. When the truth is there is a *vast* array of options between peace and violence. For example theres a big chart of some 100+ methods of nonviolent resistance/protect/etc floating around out there on the net if you care to look for it. But you'd never know that if you allow them to stick you on the horns of a dilemma, either labeling you yourself a glowfag for advocating peace, or a glowfag for advocating the opposite, and in doing, making you paranoid and keep you from unifying with your neighbors, your community, and everyone else who believes the same as us. Which is why the glowfag meme is primarily about enforcing complicity and atomization/division by inducing paranoia. You will see it brought up. Every. Single Time. On *any* thread or message that is remotely "dangerous" to the establishment. Almost without fail. Thats how you gauge what they don't want you to be engaged in. I'm saying be peaceful wherever possible an call for peace wherever possible. Or if you prefer, be wise as a serpent and innocent as a dove. Or speak softly and carry a big stick. No one who is sober, and serious needs to talk about that sort of shit, to "talk shop" as it were. If you organize at all, organize in *strength* for *peace* and avoid shitbags, windbags, shittalkers, weekend warriors who just want excuses to drink beer and fuck around in the woods, wannabe militiamen, people who just want to "be part of something" or play follow the leader, and any of the other self-involved useless types. Talk is cheap. Unity through peace, strength through unity.

(post is archived)