Yes, There Is a Coup On in America

American Thinker ^ | October 26, 2016 | Peggy Ryan

[Ciexyz]

I haven’t watched national and local news for three months and I’m a calmer person because of it. I check my IPad four or five times a day for the weather, Drudge, FR, You Tube links of the latest conservative and Republican pro-Trump clips. I will never go back. I’m watching DVD’S and streaming of films and TV shows, many of them retro. I’m reading books online, Some of them classics that I always wanted to read and am now taking the time to read. I’m taking control of my news input.

[RonnG]

Such is the motto of the Fascist Party “ Stronger Together” symbolized a grouping of sticks ( fasces) bound together in strength.

At first, the people of Italy loved Mussolini because the “trains came on time” In America, the people will vote for the Fascist because “ The checks will come on time”

[lakecumberlandvet]

We’ve ignored the lessons of history and we’re paying a terrible price for that ignorance.

[combat_boots]

bttt

[Yulee]

Fantastic Post, and oh how true.

[US_MilitaryRules]

Wow. Very interesting story. Quite a few things I didn’t know before. Thanks.

[Yulee]

Please Post this on Facebook. It should go Viral. It is a very profound and important statement to the American Electorate.

[DJ Taylor]

"Quite a few things I didn’t know before."

And here are a few more things you probably didn't know:

Tet 1968

Obama visited Communist Vietnam this year most likely to thank the Communists for making it possible for him to be elected President of the United states. For you see, without the Vietnam War and the 1968 Tet Offensive, Obama would still be a Community Organizer and hanging out in Chicago bath houses, but the “Butterfly Effect” of the 1968 Tet Offensive made it possible for Barack Hussein Obama, a homosexual Muslim Communist, to be elected to the highest office in the land.

During the Vietnam War, the 1968 Tet Offensive resulted in the annihilation of Viet Cong units throughout South Vietnam and was a disaster for the Communist insurgency; it never recovered from its loses. This Tet Offensive was a coordinated “Do or Die” attack by every Viet Cong unit in South Vietnam on the night of January 30 and the morning of January 31, 1968 that simultaneously struck every South Vietnamese City, village, and military installation in an attempt to win the war in one country wide attack; they failed and they paid the price for their failure; they died.

The war was carried on after Tet 1968 by invading North Vietnamese, and North Vietnam could never move sufficient troops down the Ho Chi Minh Trail to ever hope to defeat the United States effort in South Vietnam, so they resorted to another Communist tactic; they lied.

1968 was a Presidential Election year in the United States, and the Communist Party USA attempted to use the Tet Offensive to influence the election by claiming it was a Communist victory and the war was lost. This American Communist Party organized an anti-war movement and assembled enough strength through this movement to seize control of the Democrat Party that summer during the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago.

These Communists attempted to nominate a Presidential candidate who would end the war and they failed, but the Communist Party USA still retained control of the Democrat Party, and this Party managed to elect enough Leftists to Congress to cut funding for the Vietnam War and the war was then lost, so in this way the 1968 Tet Offensive was indeed a Communist victory.

After using the Tet Offensive to gain control of the Democrat Party, the Communist Party USA never lost control of the Democrat Party, and when a few decades later they managed to elect an avowed Marxist Communist, Barack Hussein Obama, to the Presidency of the United States, it made the 1968 Tet Offensive the greatest Communist victory of all times.

[ColdOne]

The coup already happened. 2012.

[thirst4truth]

Thank you, yes we all need to be reminded about our history, and ‘63 was not that long ago. I have heard all kinds of dates of when the “coup” began, I think Chuck Baldwin has it correct. Scary though.

[ripley]

“...tempting to believe, but they are not stupid people...”

Psychotics are not stupid and even psychotics have to figure a way out of what they’ve sown.

Once they figure out a subterfuge, they’ll go back to running with the pack and sniffing around.

IMHO

[rlmorel]

I generally have a difficult time doing that overall, but I do believe there is a higher incidence of "useful idiots" in the clergy than committed leftists, though there are plenty of those too, IMO.

And it is well to keep in mind, Alinsky's use of the clergy as a tool to further his means. He was entrenched in the Catholic church and used it (many of them willingly used) to advance his immoral goals.

It is interesting to note that in the early editions of "Rules for Radicals", the dedication shown below from a later edition (printed when greater numbers of people have abandoned God) was omitted to avoid tipping off the clergy to his real intentions and affiliations:

What is disturbing to me is that the people from the Left in this country (specifically including Obama and Hillary, but tens of thousands of others as well) worship this man Alinsky and his ideas. That disturbs me as much as anything else.

All in all, I group many clergy in the "useful idiot" group.

[rlmorel]

Yes. I understand completely.

As a son of a career naval officer living in Japan and the Philippines for a large part of the Vietnam war, I hated liberals from a very early age, about 9 or 10.

To me, I read stories about all the demonstrations back in the states, the people mistreating our veterans and military personnel, accusing them of crimes, calling them unspeakable names, generally painting honorable men (who were serving their country that had asked them to serve) as dishonorable, corrupt, and criminal.

How I hated them. The were talking about my dad and my friend's dads, and it really steamed me. I developed a deep hatred for liberalism as a young boy.

And when you guys came home, many Americans, myself included, said nothing when you were vilified, had abuse heaped on you, classified as degenerate, mentally ill scum. I was silent and said nothing, to my regret.

When our troops went to Iraq and Afghanistan, I was determined to do my part not to allow that to happen when those men came home, as small as that part might be.

I hooked up with the DC Chapter of Free Republic, and spent many nights outside Walter Reed counter protesting against the reprehensible Code Pink pieces of crap and other anti-military and anti-war demonstrators. It was an eight hour drive for me, but I went two or three times a year for almost a decade, and also went to several of the Gathering of Eagles and Protect the Monuments activities.

I got to see many of your brethren down there for those demonstrations, and as you said, they remember. They remember their mistreatment, and it was great to see them giving it back to those a-holes who have been performing character assassination on them all these years. I took great joy in their abuse, and every man I was able to look in the eyes of and shake a hand, helped me diminish that blot on my conscience for that silence and complicity by acquiescence many years ago.

This was my salve, seeing these men in their later years lustily fighting back with vigor, giving far better than they got, and enjoying it immensely:

And I was able to spend an entire evening outside Walter Reed talking with these Swift Boat veterans who were the ones fighting against the despicable John Kerry during his presidential run:

Those men could have shut up and stayed home, as I and many other Americans did back in the late Sixties and early Seventies, but...they got up and did that additional service to their country, firing a spread of torpedoes into the campaign of that traitorous POS Kerry.

So, yeah. You guys did your job with honor; you all deserve the honors. My thanks to you and your brothers.

[rlmorel]

Interestingly enough, typical of liberals, there are many of them who deny that unfair abuse, verbal, psychological, and physical (actually spitting) ever occurred, and that it was an urban legend.

I know it wasn’t.

And I thank Reagan for his work to make military service honorable again. Probably another reason liberals despise him, undoing all of their Alinskyite works.

[NorseWood]

Save to read sooner than later . . . if it isn’t too late already!

[Jacquerie]

If The Beast, along with her crime syndicate, and all the executive branch agencies on her side "win," the rats will never lose another presidential election.

As to your second point, Diversity is our Demise.

[cpforlife.org]

"It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country from its government."
--Thomas Paine

https://twitter.com/mitchellvii
https://www.youtube.com/user/bstill3/videos

[Pipe Dog]

BTTT!

[Elsie]

1968 was a Presidential Election year in the United States, and the Communist Party USA attempted to use the Tet Offensive to influence the election by claiming it was a Communist victory and the war was lost. This American Communist Party organized an anti-war movement and assembled enough strength through this movement to seize control of the Democrat Party that summer during the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago.

---

#15 and #22

---

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply.

These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the conspiracy or  coverup. 

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor,  etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen,  and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.  Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus  on side issues which can be used show the topic  as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the  'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.  Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's  argument which you can easily knock down to make  yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.  Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.  This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger'  ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs',  'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics',  'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others  shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet  and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal  agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent  is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.  Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.  Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.  This requires creative thinking unless the crime  was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.  If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys  listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can  'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule.  Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant  and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other  empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable  events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid  the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

How to spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

 

 

[Elsie]

Interestingly enough, typical of liberals, there are many of them who deny that unfair abuse, verbal, psychological, and physical (actually spitting) ever occurred, and that it was an urban legend.

#15 and #19