A domestic “Color” Revolution in the United States of Obama?

“Color” Revolution has no discernible racial meaning. It refers to generally non-violent efforts to change or to overthrow authoritarian governments.

This post is based on a May 1, 2014 article at The Voice of Russia titled US Color Revolution coming soon to a country near you. That article reports on

the international scholarly symposium on “Coloured revolutions as an instrument of geopolitical transformation” was held at the Academy of Arts and Sciences of the Republic of Srpska on April 26, 2014. The symposium was under the auspices of the “Strategic Culture Foundation” in Moscow and “Srebrenica Historical Project” from Den Haag, the Netherlands.

It claims, among other things, that the United States are, and have long been, using deception to encourage anti-government outbreaks outside the United States.

The basic mechanism used in the implementation of this technique is exacerbation, across the broad social spectrum, of existing and often justified causes for discontentment, whereupon mass negative energy is directed toward political objectives in line with the agenda of foreign instigators. The real goals are of an entirely different nature from the proclaimed ones, for which local partisans have been led to believe that they are struggling. In that process, key roles are played by false “NGOs” specifically formed for the purpose, controlled media, and local political figures subject to blackmail, prosecution and other forms of external pressure. [Emphasis added.]

The Russian post offers guidance to “legitimate” governments about dealing with such interventions. Although the focus is on the Republic of Srpska, the principles seem applicable elsewhere.

I am unaware of any false flag actions by the Obama Government within the United States; there may well have been some, but that’s hardly the type of action publicly announced or reported. However, the Benghazi incident of September 11, 2014 was in the nature of a false flag incident resembling those described in the Russian post. Blame was officially cast on a YouTube video to avoid successful challenges to Obama Administration foreign policy or, of greater concern, to President Obama’s 2012 reelection.

As noted at Counter Jihad Report,

In March 2011, Reuters announced a secret order signed by Barack Obama to provide covert support for Libyan rebel forces. The operation became known as Zero Footprint, but after Obama finished with it, Big Foot was identified. For about 18 months before the attacks on our Benghazi Special Mission, intelligence had successfully identified terrorist factions inside the rebel factions. Those terrorists included the Muslim Brotherhood as well as al-Qaeda. Nevertheless, Senator John McCain said the rebels were his heroes. Qadhafi made a fatal mistake, literally, by working toward once currency for Africa, which threatened the West. The idea of a gold dinar sealed his death by the West, if these informants are correct. Chris Stevens is named liasion to Libyan rebels, and a year or so later he was named U.S. Ambassador to Libya — in truth, he was in the international arms transfer business. [Emphasis added.]

Conspiracy theory? I don’t know. However, the responses of President Obama and His administration provided fertile soil for them to germinate and grow.

Many of the suggestions in the Russian post resemble steps being taken domestically within the United States of Obama to put down popular opposition to an authoritarian Federal Government. They are the focus of this post. Those now most commonly seen and which I consider the most pernicious are pasted below, with my comments.

Social consolidation

– At least one nation-wide television, radio and internet facility should be dedicated to the service of the Republic of Srpska, without the slightest admixture of foreign influence.

The Obama Administration does not have one such facility; it has many which, while owned and operated “independently” of the Administration, are monitored by it and often follow its lead. Media bias in favor of the Obama Administration in news reporting (as distinguished from editorial content)? Perish the thought.

– Media should ensure that organizations which advocate solutions for problems by means other than democratic procedures prescribed by the law shall publicly and clearly be perceived as such, especially if they happen to champion any variety of “street action” and non-institutional resistance.[Emphasis added.]

What if “democratic” procedures are unavailable to counter executive overreach via Executive Decrees, which President Obama relishes when He wants to bypass the Congress?

How about Federal refusals to enforce existing Federal laws deemed ideologically inconsistent with the ideology of the President? Negating State law for similar reasons? Strict enforcement of Federal laws (regulations) “enacted” by unelected and unaccountable political appointees and their bureaucrats? Agency regulations are not demonstrably fact-based (as required) when an agency refuses to make public the information on which they are based. A case is now before the Supreme Court on the extent to which the EPA can do that in adopting “climate change” regulations.

EPA’s so-called “science” is intolerable “secret science.” The agency refuses to share it with outside experts or even members of Congress and businesses impacted by its regulations. The agency claims this taxpayer-funded information is somehow “proprietary,” even though it is being used to justify onerous regulations that dictate and impair our lives, livelihoods, liberties, living standards and life spans. EPA refuses to be transparent because it wants to prevent any examination of its internal machinations.

Just as bad, EPA routinely ignores its own scientific standards, and many climate reports it relies on come straight from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. However, as the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow observed in its amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court in this case, the IPCC has been caught red-handed presenting student papers, activist press releases and emailed conjecture as “peer-reviewed expert reports.” It has been caught deleting graphs that clearly show its computer models were worthless, and employing junk models like the one that generated Michael Mann’s infamous “hockey stick” to support assertions that it is 95% certain that humans are causing climate change chaos.

– State media should always be open to representatives of the parliamentary  political opposition and they should facilitate quality debate, including voices from a wide political spectrum.

Are such media now open in the United States of Obama principally to opposition members of the Congress most likely compliant with, and least disfavored by, the Administration (a.k.a. “RINOs”)?

– Following the example of Vladimir Putin’s dialogues with the nation, government representatives should organize similar forums with citizens using the electronic media.

Do Organizing for Action and other entities dedicated to preaching the gospel according to Obama and to demonizing any heretical opposition resemble the Putin dialogues?

Policy of social self-defense

ZERO TOLERANCE FOR LAWLESS CONDUCT – From the very beginning of any hypothetical “protests” it is necessary to strictly enforce all applicable laws (noting whether a permit for the assembly was granted, at what location, and for what length of time) and there ought to be zero tolerance for the violation of legal norms, excluding any type of violence, disrespect for instructions to disperse given over loudspeakers, infliction of physical damage to buildings or vehicles, or assaults on law enforcement personnel. “Protest” organizers regularly count on the hesitation of law enforcement to act decisively from the very start. Indecisiveness in the of response enables them to establish physical control over some symbolically significant point which subsequently becomes the focus of further activities. [Emphasis added.]

This, coupled with governmental refusals to grant permits to organizations and individuals viewed as opposed to authoritarian governmental actions, allows an authoritarian Government to silence at will public speech with which it disagrees. Note that there is no mention of any necessity that there be “zero tolerance” for selective refusals to grant permits “peacefully to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (cf U.S. Constitution, First Amendment) or for any other constitutionally dubious governmental actions or inactions based on any standard beyond that of doing whatever an authoritarian Government may desire.

EQUIPPING AND TRAINING LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL – Retaining control over public space is key to the survival of legal authorities when under attack by “regime change” organizers. That task requires superbly equipped, professionally trained and highly motivated policemen specialized in crowd control, i.e. police professionals prepared to prevent large-scale violations of public peace and order. [Emphasis added.]

Another way of putting it might be that police must be obedient to authoritarian governmental authority and reject inconsistent concerns for those who pay for and are entitled to their protection.

Regular RS Interior Ministry units are inadequately equipped and trained, tactically and psychologically, for this exceptionally complex task. That is not surprising: the challenge of crowd control in the “colored revolution” context is such that regular police are not up to the task. It is one thing to control soccer fans, and quite another to control a carefully choreographed street coup. The Special Police Unit (SJP) is primarily tasked with conducting anti-terrorist operations and combating organized crime. It has in its ranks sharpshooters, divers, an SMB team, a canine unit, etc. but it lacks crowd control specialists. The unavailability of a specialized police unit for crowd control carries a double peril, as has already been noted elsewhere on “colored revolution” battlegrounds: if the police fail to successfully place unlawful conduct under control from the beginning, the violence, accompanied by the use of weapons, may later escalate and that is precisely what the orchestrators of the protest are aiming for.

For the foregoing reasons, a specialized Intervention Unit of the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Srpska should be formed and tasked with maintaining law and order along the same lines as similar specialized units which have proved efficient in other countries. Personnel for this unit should be selected according to the highest criteria from within the existing police ranks. Adequate equipment (armored transport vehicles, water guns with colored liquid, helmets and invulnerable body armor, transparent shields, gas masks, tear gas, rubber bullet sidearms, tasers, pepper spray, police dogs, horses, etc.) is indispensable for intense and continued tactical training to commence. In the area of theoretical preparation, it is of particular importance to teach members of the Intervention Unit about the technique of street revolutions, i.e. the methodology of the orchestrators and executors of “regime change.” This important aspect was missing in the training given to the Ukrainian Berkut. If members of the future Intervention Unit are comprehensively instructed in the difference between appearances and the genuine nature of the “protest,” they will be enabled to remain calm and firm in the performance of their tasks. [Emphasis added.]

How many State and local law enforcement entities are now equipped with federally donated or inexpensive military “surplus” equipment of the types mentioned? How often do they abuse their powers by using them to make unlawful searches and otherwise to harass their victims unnecessarily in entire areas following an actual terrorist attack, as happened after the Boston Marathon last year?

Might getting citizens acclimated to such conduct, and hence to complying with future governmental demands, be an objective? To create the mood necessary to establish a Department of Domestic Tranquility (DDT)? How about unconstitutional “snooping,” governmental surveillance of activities once thought private? That’s already happening in spades and with increasing frequency — and acceptance.

There are, of course, other effective ways to transform America. Ideologues can easily demagogue non-believers. Don’t believe with religious fervor in the tenets St. Al the Gored’s Church of Global smarming warming? Be labeled as a “climate denier,” “climate skeptic” or worse.

Think that the Major Hasan’s attack at Fort Hood, Texas was Islamic terror? It mustn’t be called that and should instead be referred to as “workplace violence;” to do otherwise would be Islamophobic. Think that the U.S. Constitution should prevail over lesser laws and executive whims? Be referred to as a “Tea Party Terrorist.” Consider the U.N.’s Agenda 21 to be a means of promoting totalitarian global governance? Be characterized as “extremist groups, pro-propagandists [and] far-right fear-mongers.” Oppose unconstitutional  gun control efforts? Be labeled a “gun supremacist” or a killer. Mention that Black violence against Whites is generally not reported by the “legitimate” media? Be labeled a “racist” or a “white supremacist.”

It’s all for about the little children

In The Impact of Science on Society, published in 1952, Bertrand Russell wrote,

I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology … Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called ‘education.’ Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part … It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment. [Emphasis added.]

The subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship … The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. [Emphasis added.]

Remember the Hitler Youth?

Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen. [Emphasis added.]

It’s pernicious and it’s happening — demands that all be politically correct, that some submit to mandatory sensitivity training, and characterization as “racist” of doctored statements that, in full context, are not. It’s happening in our schools and in the media with governmental blessings. The process seems likely to continue and to become more useful as We the Sheep become increasingly acclimated.

UPDATE, May 5th

Here’s a link to a pertinent article at The Rutherford Institute titled Martial Law, Detention Camps and Kangaroo Courts: Are We Recreating the Third Reich? It begins with this:

Despite what some may think, the Constitution is no magical incantation against government wrongdoing. Indeed, it’s only as effective as those who abide by it. However, without courts willing to uphold the Constitution’s provisions when government officials disregard it and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, it provides little to no protection against SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions, and the like. [Emphasis added.]

Unfortunately, the courts and the police have meshed in their thinking to such an extent that anything goes when it’s done in the name of national security, crime fighting and terrorism. Consequently, America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government’s interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution. [Emphasis added.]

The article then cites many examples in support of its thesis. Here’s one:

FEMA’s role in creating top-secret American internment camps is well-documented. But be careful who you share this information with: it turns out that voicing concerns about the existence of FEMA detention camps is among the growing list of opinions and activities which may make a federal agent or government official think you’re an extremist (a.k.a. terrorist), or sympathetic to terrorist activities, and thus qualify you for indefinite detention under the NDAA. Also included in that list of “dangerous” viewpoints are advocating states’ rights, believing the state to be unnecessary or undesirable, “conspiracy theorizing,” concern about alleged FEMA camps, opposition to war, organizing for “economic justice,” frustration with “mainstream ideologies,” opposition to abortion, opposition to globalization, and ammunition stockpiling. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

Fast forward to 2009, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two reports, one on “Rightwing Extremism,” which broadly defines rightwing extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” and one on “Leftwing Extremism,” which labeled environmental and animal rights activist groups as extremists. Both reports use the words terrorist and extremist interchangeably. That same year, the DHS launched Operation Vigilant Eagle, which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.” [Emphasis added.]

Just an absurd right-wing conspiracy theory, or recognition of an unpleasant reality? Since the United States of Obama would never, ever do anything wrong, it must be the former. Right? I don’t think so.

FURTHER UPDATE, May 5, 2014

According to a post at Flyover-Press titled Is Mainstream Media Now The Most Significant Threat To Freedom,

So before mainstream media kills off too many of us with their lies and propaganda to rationalize violence against liberty and freedom lovers, many of whom they maliciously name-call “conspiracy theorists” and “domestic terrorists”, let us take a strong stand against them and focus on exposing their nature. I believe we are now in a crisis of epic proportions. We’ve seen how tyrants of the past used propaganda to destroy their enemies and silence their opposition. And now we are seeing this same propaganda disseminated on-cue by these agents of death against selected enemies of the state. (i.e. Michael Hastings)

For this reason we should rethink our overall strategy in our battle for truth, liberty, and freedom so as to target the mainstream media on a mass scale and from the ground up. Many say the mainstream media is dying and, according to the ratings, they are finally slowly dying but it’s not happening fast enough to ensure the safety of liberty lovers. Their voices are still very loud and as mentioned millions of young Americans really do blindly believe mainstream media news.

Thankfully, it appears that being informed, aware, vigilant, and intuitive are characteristics seen in those who think critically and independently which in turn goes hand in hand with not listening to mainstream media propaganda. It shouldn’t surprise us then that mainstream media has one goal right now and that is to promote and perpetuate the new world order agenda. Perhaps proving and exposing this should be the main focus within the liberty movement.

It’s a problem, but since the MSM routinely supports whatever actions the Federal Government takes or refuses to take, that seems to be a root problem.