One person is the designated snitch. They spoon feed the secret police chosen details regularly.
The FBI takes down lawful political groups or militias, the snitch who was previously a 'witness' for prosecution, turns it around and destroys the regime's case.
Whoever it is has to be willing to fall on their sword, a completely ballsy motherfucker to the point of not caring for their own life.
Also this strategy could irrevocably legally destroy the agencies in the process, and lead to a lot of fuckhead marxist FBI agents losing their jobs/pensions. Would be grate to see a few of them have their entire lives and families destroyed for corruption. They deserve it.
Been telling people a while now, with all the domestic spying, illegal political disruption, one-sided prosecution, and uneven enforcement of the law--the only use for a militia from the get go is the explicit goal of entrapping and destroying the careers and livelihoods of agents and their out of control criminal organizations masquerading under color of law.
If the proud boys don't resort to this strategy, then they're fucking stupid. This would be my goto in their shoes. Like from the beginning or founding of an organization. "let see how many federal agents and informants we can drag in, catch on camera, and systematically utterly destroy using lawfare."
Bonus points if anyone can entrap people affiliated with judaism/marxist/antifa/blm in america, the ccp, saudi arabia, british intelligence cut outs, or other FARA-violating motherfuckers.
Keep it peaceful, keep it legal, but always remember:
First it creates fear, which increases the likelihood of whistleblowers. It's basically the inversion of "everyone is a fed!" Every agent now has to fear exposure, much like every tech worker has to fear the person they're talking to is a project veritas journalist.
Second it fans the flames and destroys their credibility, not incidentally, but directly. It openly raises questions about their methodology, and opens avenues for anyone in congress or the senate with a hair across their ass to leverage such events against the intelligence community which has been sticking its boot on the neck of the legislative for years.
Third it remoralizes, rather than demoralizes, the millions of american, their politics, and culture, and political rights to organization, that have been persecuted by regime intelligence for years. It gives them a 'fight', they at least have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.
I did not say that there would not be risk, and I didn't say that people wouldn't face terrible costs and terrible odds.
Only that it is a real, workable strategy against an actual enemy of the u.s, an agency that has systematically destroyed any semblance of law, peace, or civility in this country.
prototype 0 points 2.1 years ago
First it creates fear, which increases the likelihood of whistleblowers. It's basically the inversion of "everyone is a fed!"
Every agent now has to fear exposure, much like every tech worker has to fear the person they're talking to is a project veritas journalist.
Second it fans the flames and destroys their credibility, not incidentally, but directly. It openly raises questions about their methodology, and opens avenues for anyone in congress or the senate with a hair across their ass to leverage such events against the intelligence community which has been sticking its boot on the neck of the legislative for years.
Third it remoralizes, rather than demoralizes, the millions of american, their politics, and culture, and political rights to organization, that have been persecuted by regime intelligence for years. It gives them a 'fight', they at least have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.
I did not say that there would not be risk, and I didn't say that people wouldn't face terrible costs and terrible odds.
Only that it is a real, workable strategy against an actual enemy of the u.s, an agency that has systematically destroyed any semblance of law, peace, or civility in this country.