Shards of the Illuminati

reply to post by EnlightenUp


What would be most desirable for our orginization. Is such a "unplugging" by a form of National shortage of all goods for a short period of time, perhaps a month. no longer or panic truly begins to set in, but long enough that any waning voices of assurance or promises from leaders or politicians are long broken. Providing indelible proof of their uncompassionate and greedy ways.

- Maban

reply to post by EnlightenUp

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
I take it this $700 billion bailout is sourced by the $2.3 T loan from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia?

Not initially. The bailout was simply no more than a consolidation of bad debts and credits, simply ignoring them until they could be eventually paid off. More recently that money has been put to such uses but not in any large scale or official manner. Doing so would become public and show a sign of weakness; not only to the people, but enemies of the state. This allows them to classify it as an aspect of National Security.In turn much of this money will be used for defense budget spending and national emergencies. Furthermore this money is likely to be pt to use as funds of war, or for petroleum based products. Effectively acting as a Saudi investment in either returns of investment via petroleum purchases, or stabilization forces in the middle east. Never mind the 7% interest which also need be considered.

Was Treasury Secretary Paulson's request for carte blanche authority in the matter an attempt to reduce the likelihood that the loan becomes common knowledge?

that is a possibility,however because of the channels this money flowed through it is unlikely. It is more likely that he wishes such power so he can simply move funds to maintain appearances while they reshuffle the deck.

- Maban

"Follow the yellow brick road..."
"Follow the yellow brick road..."
"Follow the yellow brick road..."

When you blow up like Tin Cup.

reply to post by Cadbury


Perhaps Velvet Underground had it right:

I'm sticking with you
'Cos I'm made out of glue
Anything that you might do
I'm gonna do too

You held up a stage coach in the rain
And I'm doing the same
Saw you're hanging from a tree
And I made believe it was me

I'm sticking with you
'Cos I'm made out of glue
Anything that you might do
I'm gonna do too

People going to the stratosphere
Soldiers fighting with the cong?

But with you by my side I can do anything
When we swing
We hang past right or wrong

I'll do anything for you
Anything you want me too
I'll do anything for you
Oohoh I'm sticking with you
Oohoh I'm sticking with you
Oohoh I'm sticking with you

Originally posted by Cadbury

When you blow up like Tin Cup.

Estoy retardado. Explicate por favor.

What does that mean?

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Estoy retardado. Explicate por favor.

What does that mean?

What does what mean? What I said or what you said?

Originally posted by Cadbury

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Estoy retardado. Explicate por favor.

What does that mean?

What does what mean? What I said or what you said?

You're a strange rabbit, err, beaver, whatever. Haven't we done this sort of exchange before?

Anyhew, what what you said means.

Originally posted by Maban
reply to post by EnlightenUp

 

What would be most desirable for our orginization. Is such a "unplugging" by a form of National shortage of all goods for a short period of time, perhaps a month. no longer or panic truly begins to set in, but long enough that any waning voices of assurance or promises from leaders or politicians are long broken. Providing indelible proof of their uncompassionate and greedy ways.

What about the uncompassionate and greedy who exist throughout the social strata? Do you think that shortages for a month wouldn't provide them with more than adequate opportunity to exploit and profit from the situation? If we had learnt the lessons from history and most particularly those from the Nazi regime we should understand that shortages only exacerbate corruption at all levels in a economy driven by capital. A prolonged period of shortages, even for as short a time as a month, would lead to a feeding frenzy of criminality from the bottom up.

To be effective I think the shortages would have to be more far reaching, longer lasting, but I doubt that even then any 'unplugging' would be very widespread.

You have to consider how many people exist around the poverty line and what access they have to food supplies. Even in inner city and suburban areas, groups of people can be dependent on a local store. The most vunerable and under represented in our societies would be the most likely to suffer. They generally have less access to education, which is what I meant by education helping some to 'awaken', others though are going to be up to their necks in doo-doo before they know there is even a problem...given a month it could be dog eat dog. If there is a shortage of bread...which stores do you think are going to get dibs. Those that can pay or those that can't?

In a month a lot of people could die. Admittedly they will most likely be the poor, the elderly, the 'vunerable'...but still is it worth it for a handful of people to come 'unplugged'? Again education, those of us for whom such a wake up call may tip us over, have already the education and enquiry, to go that little bit further and pull out the plug ourselves. Do you see what I mean? Is it alright that those who live in relative ignorance should suffer the most and reap least reward?

There are different levels of dependency. Varying shades. And time, in such cases, is relative, that month may be a minor blimp for some, for others the straw that broke their backs. I am not sure you have factored in all the parametres. The benefits seem somewhat limited in scope given the potential for disaster for at least an equal number of individuals.

That said, I have no suggestions of my own to create such an end. But I don't really abide by the ends justifying the means, and there seems a hint of that here.

Almost all of us are 'bound' to the state apparatus, very few of us, for example, are able to live without paying tax in some form or other. Tax is inescapable for the majority of us. Unless you completely disappear up a mountain or into a cave, you will always have to pay some form of tax. And, even if you do that, you will still be running up a tax bill somewhere, you are only hiding, not disappearing entirely.

Where the dependency arises is the lack of realisation in that as tax payers, voting tax payers, we have the right and, if you will, duty to participate in ensuring that the money that we contribute to the running of the country that we live in is 'spent wisely'. This extends to all our income, from how we earn it, spend it, invest it and store it. If we choose ethically and actively we can drive change 'peaceably'. But that is obviously a very long term goal and it requires co-operation on a global scale. In an ideal world eh? But that shouldn't stop those that 'know better' from doing that, from little acorns after all.

I don't know whether a mass 'unplugging' is even necessary, perhaps the opposite. Participation. Once we have got democracy working properly then maybe we can start aspiring to the next level...I don't know.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
You're a strange rabbit, err, beaver, whatever.

The strangest on record...

Haven't we done this sort of exchange before?

I think so, Sir. Yes.

Anyhew, what what you said means.

To be honest I don't even remember typing it. Although, if I had to fashion a guess, I think it's something to do with Maban, the colour of yellow, and the two films Tin Cup and the Wizard Of Oz.

All quite strange, really. But is it all quite meaningless?

reply to post by Cadbury


I was only missing the Tin Cup part since I never saw that. Now it makes more sense.

Thank you.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp

I was only missing the Tin Cup part since I never saw that. Now it makes more sense.

Thank you.

Thou art welcome. I apologise for the confusion in the first place. I had no idea what I was typing, or why.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Well; if you follow that quote in context, I was comparing and contrasting the differences between a total collapse and a short term "unplugging," stating that an "unplugging" is far more preferable (to our orginization and the world) than that of a total collapse, because of the very reasons you stated. I agree wholly, and am not an advocate for any "unplugging." I was merely comparing "doomsday" type scenarios.

I would go further to agree explicitly that a mass "plugging-in" is needed to wake people up slowly, rather than shocking them to consciousness by a disaster or scarcity.

- Maban

[edit on 26-9-2008 by Maban]

Originally posted by Maban
Well; if you follow that quote in context, I was comparing and contrasting the differences between a total collapse and a short term "unplugging," stating that an "unplugging" is far more preferable (to our orginization and the world) than that of a total collapse, because of the very reasons you stated. I agree wholly, and am not an advocate for any "unplugging." I was merely comparing "doomsday" type scenarios.

In my defence, you did take it out of context by placing it as a seperate post. My concern was that someone may read your post and think that it was a sound idea. Stranger things have happened. They may take that idea and assuming, quite understandably, that the Shards had considered the pros and cons, may attempt to implement said scenario. I have only attempted to show why I think that that would be a wholly unwise means of attempting such an end. You never know you see.

But lets not nit pick.

Originally posted by Maban
I would go further to agree explicitly that a mass "plugging-in" is needed to wake people up slowly, rather than shocking them to consciousness by a disaster or scarcity.

So how? I'm not entirely sure but I think that there has to be something in between. I don't think cross generation change has been working for some time either, the Fabian school is far too subtle, things change over time which has an effect on the impact of any intended change. Much effort for a negligible return. Again, I don't know and would be interested in any insight that you (or others) may have. I do though, personally feel that we need to look at what exactly the disease is and stop treating the symptoms. Easier said than done?

reply to post by KilgoreTrout
Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

In my defense, you did take it out of context by placing it as a separate post. My concern was that someone may read your post and think that it was a sound idea. Stranger things have happened. They may take that idea and assuming, quite understandably, that the Shards had considered the pros and cons, may attempt to implement said scenario. I have only attempted to show why I think that that would be a wholly unwise means of attempting such an end. You never know you see.

Well, this is a Q&A thread. I would have hoped that any which such concern would directly ask me, certainly I have not displayed any deceptive tactics thus far? What distresses me even now, is the allusion that people think the Shards to be manipulative, yet as I have said time and time again, we stabilize. How would collapsing or allowing the collapse of the economy or government uphold our mandate to stabilize humanity? What have I said to disprove this statement of intent?

I understand that these are merely illustrations of your own reservations/concerns with such an action. But, you are welcome to simply ask for clarification, and I will be happy to provide it.

Originally posted by Maban
I would go further to agree explicitly that a mass "plugging-in" is needed to wake people up slowly, rather than shocking them to consciousness by a disaster or scarcity.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
So how? I'm not entirely sure but I think that there has to be something in between. I don't think cross generation change has been working for some time either, the Fabian school is far too subtle, things change over time which has an effect on the impact of any intended change. Much effort for a negligible return. Again, I don't know and would be interested in any insight that you (or others) may have. I do though, personally feel that we need to look at what exactly the disease is and stop treating the symptoms. Easier said than done?

Agreed. The disease are those aspects of human nature which we view en mass, to be indelible and everlasting, which were never part of human nature to begin with. Far too many see human nature as "fixed," unmovable or unchangeable in any means. To do so is either foolish, or changing gods creation by their mentality.

What everyone need to realize is that human nature is simply the average of many individuals characteristics. Attributes such as greed, lust, or jealousy are merely characteristics of an individual, characteristics that can be changed with both thought and actions. By changing these thoughts and action in yourself, you are changing your own nature. Many people changing these characteristics within themselves is equivalent to changing the average, which in turn changes the nature of "human nature." What we need to do, is overcome the insurmountable, and push aside the immovable. We have constructed so many invisible boundaries around us, we limit ourselves and our potential out of primitive aspirations for maintaining "tradition" or "faith," in something which is clearly no more.

We need to be willing to embrace change and the unknown, and move to understand ourselves better, because we are the only force capable of making a change in this world. That change can be started by changing ourselves, our characteristics. If we face every day with compassion, respect, curiosity, and wonder, without fear, jealousy, or anger, we can change human nature; no matter how indelible it is supposed to be.

I ask those who argue otherwise to consider this. When children are born they are amoral, neither immoral or moral. they are in time shaped by their own minds and their environments, so how can "human nature" predispose them to greed, lust, or jealousy. These are learned traits, not endemic ones. If anything "Human Nature" is curiosity, wonder, and a longing for understanding; these very traits can be easily observed in any infant.

- Maban

[edit on 26-9-2008 by Maban]

Originally posted by Cadbury

All quite strange, really. But is it all quite meaningless?

I watched it a second time. I have refined my perception.

He loses the battle but he doesn’t lose the war.

And, he achieves brilliance, immortality for his courage (think Achilles!).

You really do need to read ‘The Once and Future King’. Roy is White’s Lancelot.

How is this relevant? Very.

Those that burn the brightest, burn for half as long. People like Tin Cup should always ‘blow up’. They have to be the whirlwind, it is what they are.



So?

[edit on 28-9-2008 by KilgoreTrout]

Originally posted by Maban
Well, this is a Q&A thread. I would have hoped that any which such concern would directly ask me, certainly I have not displayed any deceptive tactics thus far? What distresses me even now, is the allusion that people think the Shards to be manipulative, yet as I have said time and time again, we stabilize. How would collapsing or allowing the collapse of the economy or government uphold our mandate to stabilize humanity? What have I said to disprove this statement of intent?

I understand that these are merely illustrations of your own reservations/concerns with such an action. But, you are welcome to simply ask for clarification, and I will be happy to provide it.

I didn’t bring it up, but, since you did, I’d like to go back to the matter of your ‘mandate to stabilize humanity’. I know that you have stated that this involves interceding in coups, engagement with mercenaries, words in the right ears…that sort of thing. A few questions then, for clarification.

How is does what you do not constitute manipulation, by your definition? And how do you decide who receives your help and who doesn’t? Where exactly has the balance been in the last 200 odd years since the formation of the Illuminati? Really, if you look at it from my perspective, the world hasn’t got any better since you guys have been around, in fact wouldn’t you say that it has got worse?

And, please do not take these questions with animosity, because in all honesty none is intended. I just want the answers, whatever they are. The rest we can take from there.

To give you a little idea about my perspective, because I know you struggle, ConspiracyNut23 sent me this documentary a week or so ago. It is very good, if you haven’t already (and I suspect you have), I recommend that you watch it. Change the names and the faces, it is no different in many ways to what happened in the Russian Revolution. Corporate interests vying for control while the people are manipulated into turning on each other and creating anarchy. Same in Germany. Everywhere you look from the turn of the 20th century (earlier too, but on a less globally impactive scale) to the modern day you find the work of hidden hands.

You state that the Shards or Illuminons have learnt the necessary lessons from history, then you talk about the rise of Communism in shades of rose and don’t get me wrong, I like your idealism, but it sometimes seems a little misplaced. The Russian Revolution, like the revolt that overthrew Chavez, was engineered, funded and assisted by Corporate interests. As was the coup, as was the October Revolution, the rise of fascism, the fall of fascism…and so on and so forth. Hidden hands groping the hell out of the 'World Island'. Which lessons did the Shards learn from this period if not these?

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I didn’t bring it up, but, since you did, I’d like to go back to the matter of your ‘mandate to stabilize humanity’. I know that you have stated that this involves interceding in coups, engagement with mercenaries, words in the right ears…that sort of thing. A few questions then, for clarification.

How is does what you do not constitute manipulation, by your definition?

Well, I never said it wasn't "manipulation," not by any means; I have no delusions about this. I have emphasized "stabilization," not noninterference. We calssify "stabilization" as the msot attainable state of public safety, secuirty,and freedom globally. You are all still alive, you still possess free will and core freedoms; granted some have tried to unsecussfully take them away, but nothing dire has transpired, so have we not upheld our duties thus far?

I do affirm, that we do manipulate, we manipulate the manipulators. You may think it wrong and only promotes self perpetuation, then so be it. But, it is by far the most effective and low collateral damage tool which allows us to effectivly stabilize radical shifts, and thwart some of the more nefarious agendas.

And how do you decide who receives your help and who doesn’t?

Help? Well, we assist those whom we see to be capable of promoting the most "good" for the people en mass. From key leaders, to average people, we help those whom can do the most good. There are simply too many "good" causes out there to aid them all. We may be a large organization, we may hold much influence, but we are not like the Illuminati many think us to be, especially in regards to influence and change. Unlike many paranoid and scrutinizing eyes would assume, we are not all powerful, nor all seeing. We simply can't help everybody and snap our fingers to make everything better; if we could, we would, but we simply don't possess that kind of ability.

Where exactly has the balance been in the last 200 odd years since the formation of the Illuminati?

Balance,what balance. There has been no balance from the last 200 years whatsoever, but there has been stability, fragile, and unstable stability may it be, but stability none the less. No single man nor group as claimed totalitarian control over the people, and the people still possess many freedoms, rights and privileges, as far as my Shard and I am concerned, thinks have remained stable. I never claimed we created stability, however we do attempt to attain it, but it is indeed ever fleeting in times like these.

Really, if you look at it from my perspective, the world hasn’t got any better since you guys have been around, in fact wouldn’t you say that it has got worse?

Do I sense an err of accusation and anger? Again I will reemphasize our role, we "try" to make things better through influence, avoiding direct action. We stabilize, and prevent the world from collapsing in on itself, but we cannot control the world. In analogy, we are not the driver of the car on a winding mountain road, we do not define the road which you must take, we are merely the guardrails preventing you from driving off into cataclysm and self destruction. We are not here to make your lives comfortable, or perfect, we are here to ensure your lives still exist and are given as many opportunities for success and happiness that we can influence, while doing everything in our power to maintain your rights, freedoms, and future. What more can you ask of us?

And, please do not take these questions with animosity, because in all honesty none is intended. I just want the answers, whatever they are. The rest we can take from there.

I understand this,and have learned that your er for accusations is merely your natural tone. furthermore, I would like to state that there may be questions, that I merely do not have answers for, and do the best I can to answer them regardless.

To give you a little idea about my perspective, because I know you struggle, ConspiracyNut23 sent me this documentary a week or so ago. It is very good, if you haven’t already (and I suspect you have), I recommend that you watch it. Change the names and the faces, it is no different in many ways to what happened in the Russian Revolution. Corporate interests vying for control while the people are manipulated into turning on each other and creating anarchy. Same in Germany. Everywhere you look from the turn of the 20th century (earlier too, but on a less globally impactive scale) to the modern day you find the work of hidden hands.

We are aware of this and see it as one of the larger threats, and do combat it.

You state that the Shards or Illuminons have learnt the necessary lessons from history, then you talk about the rise of Communism in shades of rose and don’t get me wrong, I like your idealism, but it sometimes seems a little misplaced.

Idealism is never misplaced, we are the change we wish to see in the world. idealism is never misplaced or ill suited, it is the very blueprint by which we shape the future. Without them, is it not chaos and a breeding pool for immorality and unethical actions?

The Russian Revolution, like the revolt that overthrew Chavez, was engineered, funded and assisted by Corporate interests. As was the coup, as was the October Revolution, the rise of fascism, the fall of fascism…and so on and so forth. Hidden hands groping the hell out of the 'World Island'. Which lessons did the Shards learn from this period if not these?

Our teachings were merely reinforced by these events. The lessons that the people are always first, and the governmental, corporate, and regulatory organizations in the world come second, even organizations like ourselves. Would you not agree that it is a good lesson to take away from these?

- Maban

[edit on 28-9-2008 by Maban]

Originally posted by Maban
Well, I never said it wasn't "manipulation," not by any means; I have no delusions about this. I have emphasized "stabilization," not noninterference. We calssify "stabilization" as the msot attainable state of public safety, secuirty,and freedom globally. You are all still alive, you still possess free will and core freedoms; granted some have tried to unsecussfully take them away, but nothing dire has transpired, so have we not upheld our duties thus far?

I suppose it depends upon where you’re sitting. From my perspective, British…white…employed, and any other number of factors that are favourable to said perspective, then yes, you do seem to be fulfilling that quota. For those of a similar social status to me at least. Others may beg to differ, some of the elements you mention can be highly relative.

Originally posted by Maban
I do affirm, that we do manipulate, we manipulate the manipulators. You may think it wrong and only promotes self perpetuation, then so be it. But, it is by far the most effective and low collateral damage tool which allows us to effectivly stabilize radical shifts, and thwart some of the more nefarious agendas.

I can agree that this is the most effective, if low impact, method of counteracting nefarious agendas. I would not perhaps agree that it is the most effective method, I may be more radically inclined though. I hold a certain amount of disdain for half measures, but I do appreciate why you would perhaps be so inclined, after all you do not wish to destroy a system that also supports your existence.

Originally posted by Maban
Help? Well, we assist those whom we see to be capable of promoting the most "good" for the people en mass. From key leaders, to average people, we help those whom can do the most good. There are simply too many "good" causes out there to aid them all. We may be a large organization, we may hold much influence, but we are not like the Illuminati many think us to be, especially in regards to influence and change. Unlike many paranoid and scrutinizing eyes would assume, we are not all powerful, nor all seeing. We simply can't help everybody and snap our fingers to make everything better; if we could, we would, but we simply don't possess that kind of ability.

I hope you don’t mind me saying, but you are beginning to sound more like the Rockefeller Foundation. I realise that you can’t help everyone, but what I meant was how do you decide when to fully intercede, such as in the cases where you mention acting against mercenaries? You are, after all, all given paramilitary training. I was wondering under what circumstances, hypothetically, you may be predisposed to using those more radical tactics.

Originally posted by Maban
Balance,what balance. There has been no balance from the last 200 years whatsoever, but there has been stability, fragile, and unstable stability may it be, but stability none the less. No single man nor group as claimed totalitarian control over the people, and the people still possess many freedoms, rights and privileges, as far as my Shard and I am concerned, thinks have remained stable. I never claimed we created stability, however we do attempt to attain it, but it is indeed ever fleeting in times like these.

Did you not mention balance? Hmmm…perhaps it was Illahee. No matter. Again, I think that it is a matter of perspective. Some may have had relative stability, others have lived in complete turmoil. And untold suffering.

I realise that you may not have claimed to say you had created stability, but you do admit that that is one of your goals. No single man or group, has, of yet, tried to take full control on a global scale. With the possible exception of the ComIntern no ideology has ever made such a proclamation and even in that case it was more black propaganda than anything else. The only movement ever to reach that far is Corporationism.

Originally posted by Maban
Do I sense an err of accusation and anger? Again I will reemphasize our role, we "try" to make things better through influence, avoiding direct action. We stabilize, and prevent the world from collapsing in on itself, but we cannot control the world. In analogy, we are not the driver of the car on a winding mountain road, we do not define the road which you must take, we are merely the guardrails preventing you from driving off into cataclysm and self destruction. We are not here to make your lives comfortable, or perfect, we are here to ensure your lives still exist and are given as many opportunities for success and happiness that we can influence, while doing everything in our power to maintain your rights, freedoms, and future. What more can you ask of us?

Maybe you do see a little accusation, but no anger, frustration perhaps.

You admit that you cannot control the world, but that you try to make things better. Why not stop trying? Perhaps that’d make things better. I’m not saying it would, but you know, it is worth a thought. What troubles me, is that around the world people are suffering horribly, and because by some chance of fate and genetics I was born as I am, I am safe. As long as you keep tweaking and they keep raping the planet, I am okay. And you know, I get to thinking that that doesn’t seem too fair to me. They get screwed so that I can be safe, a chance of birth, nothing more. I’m not accusing, simply wondering if you’ve given it any thought yourself.

Originally posted by Maban
I understand this,and have learned that your er for accusations is merely your natural tone.

Yes, astute observation.

Originally posted by Maban
furthermore, I would like to state that there may be questions, that I merely do not have answers for, and do the best I can to answer them regardless.

Understood.

Originally posted by Maban
We are aware of this and see it as one of the larger threats, and do combat it.

I would be most interested in any observations you may have on the current situation in Bolivia.

Originally posted by Maban
Idealism is never misplaced, we are the change we wish to see in the world. idealism is never misplaced or ill suited, it is the very blueprint by which we shape the future. Without them, is it not chaos and a breeding pool for immorality and unethical actions?

Sometimes, the ideal is immorality and unethical actions. Again perspective. I have a favourite quote;

‘Good laws left to the interpretation of evil men are no longer good. Therefore it follows that good laws should be framed as clearly and as unequivocally as a written constitution, to obviate any possibility of deliberate misinterpretation and nullification. Such laws should be applicable to all, including poiliticians, intelligence services (foreign and domestic) and every agent of law enforcement. Exceptions lead to general contempt.’ (Ian Brady, The Gates of Janus. P37)

We can add Corporations into that list. Law is relative. So is order. For some of us, for some people, chaos may make a refreshing change.

Originally posted by Maban
Our teachings were merely reinforced by these events. The lessons that the people are always first, and the governmental, corporate, and regulatory organizations in the world come second, even organizations like ourselves. Would you not agree that it is a good lesson to take away from these?

Yes, good lesson it is just a pity how it has been put into practice. And I don’t necessarily mean by your lot. My only argument with Appleseed, for example, were the undertones of Huxley’s Brave New World. Not my idea of Utopia. I don’t want any Soma. Each to their own though. I simply think that we have or should have reached a point in our evolution as a species where we can learn by the errors of the past. I see very little evidence of that. Only more screams for dominance, one over another. I am warming to the idea that chaos isn’t such a bad idea. Perhaps the species needs a little shake up.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Showing your true flair for anarchy?

You are basically saying that Shards are (at least partially) responsible, through their good intentions and stabilization efforts, for perpetuating the vile dross infecting the planet, are you not?


[edit on 10/1/2008 by EnlightenUp]

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

I hope you don’t mind me saying, but you are beginning to sound more like the Rockefeller Foundation. I realise that you can’t help everyone, but what I meant was how do you decide when to fully intercede, such as in the cases where you mention acting against mercenaries? You are, after all, all given paramilitary training. I was wondering under what circumstances, hypothetically, you may be predisposed to using those more radical tactics.

It seems like there are far too few of them and that they are scattered so broadly that they would not make an effective offensive tactical force.

I can see their training coming into play in a defensive situation, though, but that is just my impression in reading Maban's posts.

Maban -

What is the 'worst case scenario' as far as the world goes based on your beliefs? Would it be economic, pandemic or war-related, or something completely different?