Troublemakers and terrorists

In case we should have mass protests, with street demonstrations,
shouting, placards and slogans, we have also taken precautions.

Did you notice the recent confrontations between the demonstrators
and the forces of law and order on different occasions? Who is the
one who always wins and proves himself every time to be better
organized and more efficient?

The protesters maintain their tactics
unchanged and still use the means
available to Neanderthal man:
mostly loud shouts, sticks and stones.

Can you prevail with these means against an organized,
trained and equipped army, whose arsenal of conventional,
mechanical, chemical and other (even psychological)
resources is daily growing?

In the next clash, the forces of law and order will be even
more impressive and effective. As each confrontation is for
them an exercise which builds up its military clout.

Really, how are these conflicts caused?

Some influential and important persons want to meet somewhere,
exchange a few words and maybe have a quiet drink.

And the ungrateful mob, though it should know
that they work hard for its wellbeing, gathers outside,
makes a racket, doesn't let them think in peace and spoils
their appetite, if not their digestion.

But I wonder. Why are these meetings necessary?

Haven't their secretaries thoroughly edited everything and already
discussed the slightest detail?

With today's telecommunication facilities, if eight (or eighty, it is the
same thing) important people want to communicate with each other,
must they wait a year to be in the same room together?

Don't they have phones?

Don't they communicate daily with image and sound?

Don't they exchange fax and e-mails incessantly?

Don't they use video conferencing?

Do they really need to be in the same room to communicate with each other?

Why should they meet anyway?

Is it to cause riots, to break windows and open heads?

Unless of course the riots have their usefulness and therefore are welcome.

On the one hand the security forces exercise in real action, each time
testing the effectiveness of their new weapons and their advanced strategy,
and on the other hand the rioters are taught that they have no hope of
succeeding ever.

In the event that the protesters are stupid enough to use force,
we have also made provision for some time.

We have explained systematically for years
(long before the providential 9. 11. 2001),
and all mankind believes it, that there is no
greater threat than terrorism.

So we have the right to remove immediately anyone who opposes
us in this way, if needed by a drone attack of surgical accuracy.

Notwithstanding the fact that terrorist attacks
are doing nothing but good to us and therefore,
we should wish them to continue or to provoke them.

Whoever expresses his objection
by dynamite has no chance.

He is condemned as a terrorist,
isolated and completely eliminated.

If the opposition starts to become even louder,
say at state level, then we will send the B-2s,
we offer them a humanitarian bombing and we have
all the benefits seen so far from the liberation wars.

Back                                        Contents                                        Continue