Leading Vaticanista: At Rome there is no pope!

English Introduction by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Aldo Maria Valli, one of the leading Vaticanista in Italy, expounds his personal view that at Rome no one is acting like a pope, which he expresses with the hyperbole, “At Rome there is no pope”, confounding the second act of being (which is acting, or ministerium) with the first act of being (which is authority or office or munus). — click the image to read the article in Italian.

He expressly denies that Bergoglio is Peter, and argues that Bergoglio’s manner of acting like a Globalist shows that he has never intended to assume the Petrine ministry.

Valli like many others allowed the MSM tell him what happened on Feb. 13, 2013, so he does not consider that Benedict XVI is indeed still the pope. But what he says here rings true, because at last after 8 years, he has realized that Bergoglio is not exercising the Petrine Ministry.

Here is the English translation:

Rome Without A Pope: Jorge Mario Bergoglio is There, but not Peter 

By Aldo Maria Valli

Rome is without a pope. The thesis that I intend to support can be summarized in these five words. When I say Rome, I am not referring only to the city of which the pope is the bishop. When I say Rome, I mean the world; I mean the present reality.

The pope, although physically present, in reality is not there, because he does not do what the pope does. He is there, but he does not perform his duty as successor of Peter and vicar of Christ. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is there; Peter is not.

Who is the pope? The definitions, depending on whether one wants to highlight the historical, theological, or pastoral aspect, may be different. But, essentially, the pope is the successor of Peter. And what tasks were assigned by Jesus to the apostle Peter? One the one hand, “Feed my sheep” (Jn 21:17); on the other hand, “Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19).

This is what a pope should do. But today, there is no one who carries out this task. “And you, once you have turned back, strengthen your brothers in the faith” (Lk 22:32). So says Jesus to Peter. But today Peter does not shepherd his sheep and he does not strengthen them in the faith. Why? Someone answers: Because Bergoglio does not speak about God, only about migrants, ecology, the economy, and social questions. But this is not so. Actually, Bergoglio does speak about God, but what emerges from the whole of his preaching is a God who is not the God of the Bible but an adulterated God, a God, I would say, who is weakened, or better still, adapted. Adapted to what? To man and his demand to be justified in living as if sin did not exist.

Bergoglio has certainly placed social themes at the center of his teaching and, with sporadic exceptions, appears prey to the same obsessions of the dominating culture of the politically correct, but I believe that this is not the profound reason why Rome is without a pope. In wanting to highlight social themes, it is possible to have an authentically Christian and Catholic perspective. The question, with Bergoglio, is another one: it is that his theological perspective is deviated. And this is for a very specific reason: because the God of whom Bergoglio speaks is not one who forgives but rather one who removes all blame.

In Amoris Laetitia we read: “The Church must accompany with attention and care the weakest of her children” (Ch. 8, para. 291). I’m sorry, but that’s not how it is. The Church must convert sinners.

Once again in Amoris Laetitia, we read that “the Church does not disregard the constructive elements in those situations which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage (para. 314). I’m sorry, but those words are ambiguous. In situations that do not correspond to her teaching, there will also be “constructive elements” (but in what sense?); however, the mission of the Church is not to give validity to such elements but rather to convert souls to divine love, to which one adheres by observing the commandments.

In Amoris Laetitia we also read: “Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal” (para. 303). Once again there is ambiguity. First: there is not an “overall demand” of the Gospel, to which one can more or less adhere. There is simply the Gospel with its very specific contents; there are the commandments with their clarity. Second: God never – I repeat, never – can ask someone to live in sin. Third: no one can claim to have “a certain moral security” about “what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits.” These muddled expressions have only one meaning: legitimizing moral relativism and playing games with the divine commandments.

This God committed more than anything else to freeing man from blame, this God in search of mitigating circumstances, this God who refrains from commanding and prefers to understand, this God who “is close to us like a mother singing a lullaby,” this God who is not a judge but who is “closeness,” this God who speaks of human “frailty” and not of sin, this God bent on the logic of pastoral accompaniment” is a caricature of the God of the Bible. Because God, the God of the Bible, is so patient, but not lax; he is so loving, but not permissive; he is so considerate, but not accommodating. In a word, he is a Father in the fullest and most authentic sense of the term.

The perspective assumed by Bergoglio appears instead to be that of the world, which often does not reject the idea of God entirely, but rejects the characteristics of God that are less in tune with the permissiveness that is rampant. The world does not want a true father, loving in the measure in which he is also judging, but rather it wants a buddy; or better still, a fellow traveler who lets things go and says, “Who am I to judge?”

On other occasions I have written that with Bergoglio a vision triumphs that overturns the real one: it is the vision which says that God has no rights, only duties. He does not have the right to receive worship worthy of him, nor to not be mocked, but he does have the duty to forgive. According to this vision, the reverse is true for man: man does not have any duties, but only rights. He has the right to be forgiven but not the duty to convert. As if there could be a duty for God to forgive and a right of man to be forgiven.

This is why Bergoglio, portrayed as the pope of mercy, seems to me to be the least merciful pope that one could imagine. In fact, he neglects the first and fundamental form of mercy that belongs to him and to him alone: preaching the divine law and, in so doing, pointing out to human creatures, from the height of his supreme authority, the way that leads to salvation and eternal life.

If Bergoglio has devised a “god” of this sort – which I intentionally indicate with a lower-case “g” because it is not the One and Triune God whom we adore – it is because for Bergoglio there is no fault for which man must ask forgiveness, neither personal nor collective, neither original nor actual. But if there is no fault, then there is also no Redemption; and without the need for Redemption the Incarnation makes no sense, much less the saving work of the one Ark of salvation which is the Holy Church. One wonders if that “god” is not rather the simia Dei – the ape of God – Satan, who pushes us towards damnation at the exact moment when he denies that the sins and vices with which he tempts us can kill our soul and condemn us to the eternal loss of the Supreme Good.

Rome is therefore without a pope. But while in Guido Morselli’s dystopian novel entitled Roma senza papa it was physically so, since the fictional pope went to live in Zagarolo, today Rome is without a pope in a much more profound and radical way.

I can already hear the objection: But how can you say that Rome is without a pope when Francis is everywhere? He is on TV and in the newspapers. He has been on the cover of TimeNewsweek, Rolling Stone, and even Forbes and Vanity Fair. He is on websites and in countless books. He has been interviewed by everyone, even by Gazzetta dello sport [translator’s note: the Italian daily sports newspaper that is the most widely read newspaper of any kind in Italy]. Perhaps never before has a pope been so present and so popular. I respond: that’s all true, but he is Bergoglio; he is not Peter.

It is certainly not forbidden for the vicar of Christ to concern himself with the things of the world. Quite the contrary. The Christian faith is an incarnate faith, and the God of the Christians is God who becomes man, who becomes history; thus Christianity shuns the excesses of spiritualism. But it is one thing to be in the world, and it is quite another to become like the world. By speaking as the world speaks and reasoning as the world reasons, Bergoglio has made Peter evaporate and put himself in the foreground.

I repeat: the world, our world born from the revolution of ’68, does not want a true father. The world prefers a companion. The teaching of a father, if he is a true father, is laborious, because it points out the way of freedom in responsibility. It is much more convenient to just have someone next to you who simply keeps you company, without pointing anything out. And this is just what Bergoglio does: he shows a “god” who is not a father but a companion. It is no coincidence that Bergoglio’s “church of going out” likes the verb “accompany” – just like all modernism. It is a church that is a companion on the road, that justifies everything (by means of a distorted concept of discernment) and, in the end, relativizes everything.

Jesus is quite explicit in this matter. “Woe, when all men speak well of you” (Lk 6:26). “Blessed are you when men hate you and when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man” (Lk 6:22).

Every now and then a rumor surfaces that says that Bergoglio is also thinking of resigning, just like Benedict XVI. I believe that he has nothing like this in mind, but the problem is something else. The problem is that Bergoglio has become de facto the protagonist of a process of resignation from Peter’s duties.

I have already written elsewhere that Bergoglio has now become the chaplain of the United Nations, and I believe that this choice is of unprecedented gravity. However, even more serious than his adherence to the agenda of the UN and what is politically correct is that he has given up speaking to us about the God of the Bible and that the God at the center of his preaching is a God who clears people of blame, not a God who forgives.

The crisis of the father figure and the crisis of the papacy go hand in hand. Just as the father, rejected and dismantled, was transformed into a generic companion without any claim to the right to point out the way, in the same way the pope stopped being the bearer and interpreter of the objective divine law and preferred to become a simple companion.

In this way, Peter evaporated just when we most needed him to show us God as an all-around Father: a loving Father: not because he is neutral, but because he is judging; a merciful Father: not because he is permissive, but because he is committed to showing the way to the true good; a compassionate Father: not because he is relativist but because he is eager to show the way to salvation.

I observe that the protagonism in which the Bergoglian ego indulges is not a novelty, but goes back in large part to the new conciliar anthropocentric formulation, beginning with which popes, bishops, and clerics placed themselves before their sacred ministry, their own will before that of the Church, their own opinions before Catholic orthodoxy, and their own liturgical extravagances before the sacrality of the rite.

This personalization of the papacy has become explicit ever since the Vicar of Christ, wanting to present himself as “one like us,” renounced the use of the plural humilitatis with which he demonstrated that he was speaking not in a personal capacity but together with all his predecessors and the same Holy Spirit. Let’s think about it: that sacred “We” which made Pius IX tremble in proclaiming the dogma of the Immaculate Conception as well as Saint Pius X in condemning modernism, could never have been used to support the idolatrous cult of the Pachamama, nor to formulate the ambiguity of Amoris Laetitia or the indifferentism of Fratelli Tutti.

Concerning the process of personalization of the papacy (to which the advent and development of mass media gave an important contribution), we must recall that there was a time in which, at least up to and including Pius XII, it did not matter much to the faithful who was the pope, because in any case they knew that whoever he was he would always teach the same doctrine and condemn the same errors. In applauding the pope they applauded not so much the one who was on the holy throne at that moment but rather the papacy, the sacred regality of the Vicar of Christ, the voice of the Supreme Pastor, Jesus Christ.

Bergoglio, who does not like to present himself as the successor of the prince of the Apostles, and who has put the title “Vicar of Christ” into the background in the Annuario Pontificio, implicitly separates himself from the authority that Our Lord has conferred on Peter and his successors. And this is not a mere canonical question. It is a reality whose consequences are very serious for the papacy.

When will Peter return? How long will Rome remain without a pope? It is useless to ask. The designs of God are mysterious. We can only pray to the heavenly Father, saying: “Your will be done, not ours. And have mercy on us sinners.”

First published on February 20, 2021, at radioromalibera.org

Publicly remonstrating with Cardinal Sarah

Why do So Many refuse to see it?

A Commentary by David Webster

Dr. Taylor Marshall’s commentary on this blasphemy, a bit down on the twitter page, …

though correctly concluding that God (the true God) cannot possibly contaminate himself with our sin, completely fails to understand what false prophet Bergoglio means by the word “contaminate” in reference to who he calls “God,” as his “God” could only be Satan, whose Jesuit ethics is “the end justifies the means”. Citing Bergoglio’ statement that ” ‘God’ cannot sin” he wrongly concludes Bergoglio is merely caught in a contradiction or a misuse of a word when its who Bergoglio believes is “God” is the real issue  Why is Marshall so blind to what this false prophet is saying?

What Bergoglio is saying is that while “God” (who he obviously confuses with Satan/Lucifer) cannot personally act in sin, he, (as his end always justifies him), nevertheless gives mankind a different standard and tolerates his sin with no need for repentance and conversion, and simply overlooks it. That indeed is a very real contamination of his “God” but its justified and even lauded because its for a good cause!   That indeed is Bergoglio’ very consistent ” theology” of an all merciful “God,” where there is no Hell or eternal death, a true spin off of Satan/Lucifer’s “Thou shalt not die” to Eve!

Marshall, sad to say, has a serious lack of spiritual discernment, which he has refused to acknowledge and thus continues to call the apostate, antiChrist, antipope Fraudcis “The Holy Father!”

CATHOLICS NEED TO ASK THEMSELVES, WHO IS THE GREATER THREAT? THE THIEF THAT ENTERS THE HOUSE TO STEAL AND DESTROY OR THE ONE WHO UNLOCKS THE DOOR AND LETS HIM IN AND THOSE WHO LET THEIR OWN HOUSE BE LOOTED?

On the larger context of Bergoglio’ message which was his using Jesus contact with a leper (whom Jesus heals!)  in an attempt to push his perverted view of a contaminated compromising “God” (i.e. Satan): Our Lord neither approves of this man’s leprosy or tolerates it, He destroys it!

BERGOGLIO IS AN ANTICHRIST SON OF SATAN AND WE STILL HAVE MOST OF OUR PRIESTS OFFERING THE MASS IN UNION WITH HIM!

WE ALSO HAVE MANY OF THE LAITY WHO THINK THEY CAN CHANGE THE MASS BY MENTALLY SUBSTITUTING BENEDICT’S NAME!!!

BOY, ARE WE IN TROUBLE!!

Bergoglio’s strange kisses of boys

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

From the beginning of his rule of the Vatican, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has shocked and dumbfounded Catholics for the strange way he kisses boys and male babies. He has been seen to kiss them on the lips, or holding them in a strange dominating sort of way.

Here is a collection of such photos:

The strangest photos of all were those of him kissing babies during his first trip to Brasil, but they seem to have been taken off the web.

 

Do you not know of what spirit you should be?

Finally, brethren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power. Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace: In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God).

— St. Paul the Apostle, Letter to the Ephesians 6:10-17.

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Masonic culture in which we have been immersed and formed is the fundamental cause of our misunderstanding what our Christian duties are and in the increasing carnality and senselessness of the form of  life which is being proposed and imposed on us.

For man cannot be enslaved by the flesh until he abandons the spirit.

And thus since Vatican II we have been bombarded with the doctrines of the world, the flesh and the devil, to make us forget the nobility of our status, grace and calling as adopted sons of God. To make us forget that we are not dogs and that we are not gods.

On the contrary we are called to live on high, where Christ Jesus reigns at the right hand of the Father.

At the Right Hand of the Father, in Heaven. Not in the exalted power centers of this world where idols are worshiped.

For as the Apostle teaches,

For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.

This vocation as a Christian calls us to have a vision of things which transcends the merely material but does not divorce itself from reality.

We are not pure spirits and we should reject any attempt to make us spiritual without Christ Jesus.

The world of social media and the internet is designed to do just that. To give us 24/7 a huge dose of psycho bait so that we do nothing else but remain connected to the Matrix of deceit, deluded into thinking that life is thought, pure spirituality, without action or concern for others.

We are not angels, and it is unnatural for us to strive to be such, if that striving means we abandon the moral law which regards how we should live and strive in the physical word, with our bodies and souls, and ignore the pressing corporal and spiritual needs which can only be attended to in the real world.

Thus the Matrix inclines us to be passive and disconnected, while pretending to offer us new activities and connections. It results therefore in a whole population which is personally isolated from everyone else, which cannot even start a conversation with another, since all are polarized in their own cyber realities.

But above all it takes from us the time which we would spend with others, where true charity, education and concern takes place.

This is especially true in the final Armageddon which seems to be rapidly approaching. No army can win if it is not united. Therefore, there can be no true opposition to the enemies of the Church, to the enemies of Humanity, or to the Antichrist, unless we organize in the real world and form bonds of loyalty and collaboration which defy the Narrative control which imprisons so many who live in the Matrix.

And for this, we must keep our minds on high, with Christ Jesus at the Right Hand of the Father, that is, we must Pray Continually, as the Apostle urged us:

By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints: And for me, that speech may be given me, that I may open my mouth with confidence, to make known the mystery of the gospel. For which I am an ambassador in a chain, so that therein I may be bold to speak according as I ought.

— St. Paul the Apostle, Letter to the Ephesians 6:18-20.

We should pray for the grace to resist, for the grace to be enlightened so we can see the deceits of our age, discern the trustworthiness or duplicity of men, turn aside from the offers of the world, the flesh and the devil, and reckon the things which lead to Heaven as the things to be desire above all else: prayer, penance, mortification, fasting, abstinence, the reading of the Saints and Scriptures, the earnest supplication for the graces of God, before the thrones of Jesus, Mary, Joseph and all the Saints and Holy Angels.

Let us not pray as those who have succumbed, but as those who wish to rebel, who are at war, who aim to conquer the enemies of Jesus Christ. Let us pray with compassion, not bitterness; with a paternal or material desire to draw sinners and souls back to Jesus Christ, and for the grace and virtues to be effective in this apostolate of salvation.

Only to act thus is to be of the true spirit of Christ.

To be of any other spirit is to be an friend of this world, and an enemy of God.

This is especially true of all those who pursue the cultivation of the flesh. For there is no wine more able to lull the mind or turn aside the spirit from the things of God, than impurity. And impurity is not caused formally by some preternatural spirit, it is simply caused by the aggregation to too much blood in certain parts of the body.

For this reason the Saints took cold showers, ate little meat, rid their homes of things impure, of mirrors and clothing which exposed rather than conceals. For this reason Scripture condemns all those who go to the gymnasium and who respect idols of the flesh, or all idols of the ancient world were designed to incite lust.

And these errors have infiltrated deeply into Christianity since the Renaissance, when many clergy hired the most carnal men to depict the Saints and Christ as if they were Greek Gods of lust, rather than chaste servants of the Father, as had been done for 1000 years in Christian art.

So now we are compelled to break radically from this world of sin. We must treat ourselves as the alcoholic treats himself. We must abandon the world, the flesh and the devil and cleanse our homes, hearts and possessions of all that draws us to put hope in or seek the riches or acquisitions of this world.

Let us not be deceived.

Let us remember that we were not made for this world, but for the world to come.

That grace is not given to us that we might not sin while persuing the world, flesh or the allurements of the devil, BUT RATHER that we might forsake all these and seek God and His Kingdom alone.

Indeed, if we persist in the pursuit of such things, we are spurning the graces of God!

This is why the true Saints of God such as St. Bernard of Claivaux or St. Bernardine of Sienna, when they preached caused crowds to join monasteries. But the false apostles, such as Jose Maria Escrivá (who began his priesthood cohabitating with a sodomite and ended it with spanking adult women on the butt) taught laymen and women to presume they can be saved without practicing the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience to Christ.

Indeed, St. John Bosco taught that 60% of Catholic men have the vocation to be religious or monks. Which is another way of saying that only 40% can be saved in the state of marriage or by living as single laymen.

I counsel and urge you all, therefore, in the Lord, to not take counsel with the world, For we must be either fighters or slaves. And in such a choice, there is placed before us Life or death, Heaven or Hell.

 

How to protest Peacefully & Effectively in a Dictatorship

FromRome.Info publishes here extracts and summaries from a Handbook on how to protest effectively and peacefully under a dictatorship.

Goals

Every protest must have a just and honest goal, which is of urgent necessity, so as to mobilize the greatest number of citizens. This is necessary because to get the government to listen they will only respond to numbers. And to protect the people from possible abuse, the more that protest the more all will be protected by one another.

Organization

But ideals do not win victory without organization. A protest must be organized, otherwise the propaganda of the government and the use of intimidation and force by police who support the regime, will effectively break up or disorganize the protest, in such a way as to make it ineffective or promote the propaganda of the government, in saying that the protesters were violent or out of control.

The preparation of the protest should include a diversification of forces. This is because to manage a protest well, different persons need to be assigned to different tasks.

For example, there should be those tasked with recording the event on camera. There should be experts in law and jurisprudence on hand to negotiate with government forces or defend protestors and see that their rights not be offended. Persons with status in the community as leaders should be placed in prominent places. Veterans of the Military and Police should wear their uniforms and be on hand to talk down the government forces and even convince them to join in the protest, or mutiny if necessary. Religious leaders should be on hand to encourage everyone to be virtuous and peaceful, and to deflate conflict and mediate between government forces and the people. Finally, some should be tasked with internal communications and internal security, so that, just as the government might want to infiltrate provocateurs, so the protestors can have agents on had to identify such individuals and expel them from the protest, if not execute a citizens’ arrest on them for acts of violence.

Right is shown in Peaceful Methods

The people show that justice and right is on their side when they adopt peaceful methods of protest, whenever possible. This will win everyone over to the side of justice and right, because in general the average person presumes that the use of violence is a sign of bad will. Violence should never be used except in self defense, and then only proportionately and as a last resort.

Having organized forces as mentioned above, conflict and obstacles are more easily avoided between the protestors and the government forces. And this is the highest objective of a peaceful protest in regard to how the protest is managed from within.

Justice does not mean Naiveté

That one’s cause is just, however, does not mean that one should organize a protest on the basis of presuming that everyone, including government forces, is going to be honest and have good will and want to avoid conflict. Dictatorships are notorious for infiltrating provocateurs into protests so that it appears that the protestors are in the wrong and violent, when it is in fact government agents hidden among them who start the violence.

The Necessity of Security

Thus, security is the use of intelligent and preventive methods to avoid violence and conflict, infiltration and subversion.  Even the most honest and just protest by the most honest and just persons, has the right to organize its own internal and external security.

Internally, the meetings which plan the protest should be done privately in undisclosed places, and no one who attends should bring any electronic device which can be traced by the government. At the same time, all who do attend should agree to be searched for wires and anything which might indicate they are a government agent.

This means also when the protest starts, the internal security forces of the protestors need to work to identify government agents among the crowds and stop and question individuals and ask to see such proofs as they are not government agents.

Most government agents will be single males. Or single women. Anyone suspicious should be asked by the security forces of the protestors to show their identification and if police identifications or wires are found, to exclude such persons from the protest and immediately message the security forces and communication personnel of the protestors their pictures and locations so as to black list them from the protest during the whole time of the protest. The easiest way to identify a government agent is to ask where he works and call his employer to verify it, and or better call a local business nearby, at random, to verify the identity of the employer or the knowledge of the alleged worker of the area around the work place.

The most important protest leaders should be flanked at all times by volunteers who are trained in self defense and military or police tactics, so as to prevent the leadership from being injured or captured by government forces. Escape routes and safe houses in the city and neighboring regions or nations should be prepared beforehand.

Managing the Protest

One should expect that every dictatorship will plan ahead to disrupt the protest before it forms, and thus, one must plan ahead to assemble the protestors in such a way as to prevent the objectives of the government.

For this purpose it is better if most of the protestors not carry devices which can be used to tract them, so that their groupings cannot be remotely detected by the government in such a way as to bring police forces against them in strategic places.

Protestors should dress normally and all have a legitimate reason for being outside in the city doing what is normally done on such a day. That way the government, who is not able to stop the life of the city, will not be able to prevent the arrival of protestors to the locations where the protest will take place.

They should avoid arriving along streets which can be easily blocked and should be organized to arrive by every means so as to prevent the government from stopping up all points of access. In case of the forceful control by the government of one place of the city, the place of protest should be moved instantly to another.

And for this reason, it is useful if the protest is managed by a cloud of mutually equivalent control centers, so that if any go off line or are overwhelmed by government forces, the other centers can continue with communication to the protestors on the ground. Methods of communication should be used which are spontaneous and not restricted to a single platform or method, so as to prevent the government from blacking out news or control of the event.

Messaging

Getting out the message for the protest and during the protest is just as important as having a protest. Speakers need to prepare what they are going to say. Dynamic individuals who inspire the crowds of protestors need to be flanked by more organized speakers who can explain when explanations are needed or intervene with important information or clarification. The government will use psychology to attempt to disrupt, and so those who are able to remain cool in times of violence or mayhem are best suited to be speakers or assistants to the leaders of the protest.

Of course, protestors are effective if they carry signs or symbols, but whether they should or not carry such things depends on the level of civil liberties in the nation in which they protest. The more repressive the government the less this should be done. And indeed, in such cases masks can legitimately be worn to prevent persecution by the police during or afterwards from facial recognition.

Diplomacy

One of the important parts of a successful public protest on a large scale will be having citizens who are not in the protest stationed at every police and military station in the area and ready to dissuade government forces before and during the event from mobilizing. This can be done most effectively by having relatives of the police or military personnel there to plead with their own family members, and relatives of the officers even better.

Personnel who understand the just and peaceful goals of the protest and who are sufficiently educated should be assigned to represent the protestors at all the local embassies of foreign powers in the city, to encourage them to urge the dictatorship to allow the protest to go on and to assure them of the peaceful motives of the protestors. This is also necessary to prevent a response by foreign powers who might be asked by the dictatorship to look the other way or to provide military forces to be used against the people. Those great powers who have military basis in the region should be especially contacted at the start of the protest and urged not to intervene except on the side of the people.. And if any foreign power does urge the government to suppress the protest or allow it to go forward this information needs to be communicated rapidly to the protest leaders and to all the members of the protest and all the citizens of the country so that everyone knows what is really going on and who is friendly and who is not friendly.

+ + +