This is a Color-Spring scenario, and to make a Syria analogy, if Antifa is like ISIS/Al-Qaeda then part of BLM is like the FSA, and another part like the legitimate opposition.
What’s needed now is the further surgical bifurcation of that BLM (FSA) to root out those Antifa (ISIS) elements.
BLM has legitimate grievances. Antifa is comprised of individuals with legitimate grievances, but it has been operationally high-jacked by the NGO industrial complex and used for the Deep State’s neds by Twitter.
The uniting factor of the fake AstroTurf side of BLM and Antifa is backing by the ‘Soros/NGO Industrial Complex’.
Trump could have also labelled BLM a terrorist organization, but this would have been a wrong move on many levels. To frustrate a Color Revolution one must divide its component parts on the issues that differentiate them. BLM is closer to the real igniting issue at hand, the grievances they protest about are real grievances.
The real BLM has been opposed to the BLM gate keepers from day one. The gatekeepers within the Soros complex are those who are graduates of the black ivy league (HBCU’s) and who were encountered, vetted, and groomed by social-managers of the Deep State, through the NGO industrial complex and the DNC.
Trump’s war with Antifa terrorist Twitter is also a battle to salvage BLM.
The goal here is to seperate BLM from Antifa, just as this was the goal in Syria, to distinguish between anti-government combatants and separate them from terrorists ( to divide the terrorists from the legitimate ‘regime opponents’ dissatisfied with the reforms.)
I CANT BELIEVE THIS IS HAPPENING
He said they are placing stacks of bricks in random areas where this is no construction
IS THESE RIOTS ALL A SET UP?
Whoever is behind this need to be arrested and charged with terrorism
— Terrence K. Williams (@w_terrence) May 30, 2020
Jack Dorsey has silenced black voices using the BLM hashtag, that challenged the DNC plantation of the Soros-wing of BLM.
BLM is a legitimate movement that has an illegitimate Soros-wing that uses Democrat Party aspirant hucksters that were trained within the HBCU’s (Historically Black Colleges and Universities).
The legitimate, non-institutional BLM is grassroots, it is informal, a network of different friends-groups on Twitter and in real-world spheres in the black community, who are not invested in by Soros et al.
The fake BLM backed by Soros et al did incoherent things like call Assad a dictator, and went full-bore on Russiagate as did Shaun King. Have a field day with this. The kompromat on Shaun King is that he’s white.
Shaun King is a communal narcissist who believes he has the unique right and ability as a white man to help black people by being the voice of reason in the face of legitimate black rage.
That is a problem of movements vs. accountable organizations. A movement can exist as an organization without the accountability to its participants, but with self-declared spokespeople who are backed by Soros et al, and in combination with the MSM.
These people don’t come from out of nowhere and they are the ones that the MSM selects to interview on TV. Twitter has manipulated algorithms to give visibility to their agreed-on favorites, who so happen to be those financed by NGOs through the Soros complex.
This is why labeling Antifa as terrorist comes well timed just as there are videos emerging from legitimate (non Soros) BLM activists decrying the ‘fronting’ being done by white anarcho-liberals.
The non-black anarcho-liberals use their relative privilege and organizational backing, (knowing that if caught they will be afforded something similar to ‘rights’), to do property damage and vandalism.
Black community members are not happy with this because the media will see the BLM graffiti and the property damage, and blame the actions of white liberals on blacks. By the way, that’s a microcosm of how the Dixiecrat plantation segregates a real black voice from Trump’s middle-America base.
It’s important to separate legitimate grievances and those expressing them, from the weaponized use of those towards a planned destabilization scenario. These Color Revolution scenarios always and without exception ushers in an era of repression and austerity, while the original militants are, and feel they are, betrayed even after the ‘regime steps down’ or collapses.
While the state is a poor judge of what legitimate grievances are, building support among as much of the populace as possible is the primary goal of a government in surviving a regime-change operation.
That is why all grievances must be accepted prima facie as generally legitimate, while this is separated from the question of organizational forms and tactics, relationships with power-elites who back them, and the solutions to problems that are proposed by said organized demagogues.