Prosecuting the NWO

The New World Order (NWO) is a secretive elite that orchestrates global events to manipulate and control the world according to their own interests. This cabal, comprising powerful ruling families and nobility, exerts significant influence over global affairs, including conflicts and population control strategies.

The Cabal, behind the current efforts to start world war 3, has over the past 80 years shifted its tactics from traditional (kinetic) warfare to biological warfare. Biological warfare provides them with plausible deniability, allowing them to carry out harmful actions without being easily held accountable. The Cabal has established and manipulated legal structures, organizations, and institutions to protect themselves from facing liability for their actions.

The Case for ExtraJudicial Justice

Extrajudicial justice involves actions taken outside the bounds of traditional legal systems, often without the oversight or due process typically required by law. Below is a framework for making this case:

In the context of powerful entities like a "cabal" controlling global governments, intelligence agencies, militaries, corporations, NGOs, and institutions such as the World Bank, IMF, BIS, WHO, and UN, it's crucial to present the argument carefully:

1. The Limits of Traditional Justice:

• Corruption and Control: If the entities in question have infiltrated and exert control over global institutions, traditional legal avenues may be compromised. Legal systems, courts, and enforcement agencies might be under the influence of these powers, rendering them ineffective or biased.

• Systemic Barriers to Justice: With vast resources, these entities can manipulate legal frameworks, delay proceedings, and obscure evidence, making it nearly impossible for victims or whistleblowers to seek justice through conventional means.

2. The Ethical Justification for Extrajudicial Action:

• Self-Defense Against Oppression: In situations where legal systems are corrupted or ineffective, extrajudicial justice can be framed as a form of self-defense against oppressive forces. When the law fails to protect the rights and lives of the people, they may feel morally justified in taking direct action.

• Protection of Human Rights: If the "cabal" is committing or facilitating crimes against humanity, such as genocide, mass surveillance, or biological warfare, there could be an ethical imperative to stop these actions by any means necessary, including extrajudicial methods.

3. Historical Precedents:

• Resistance Movements: Throughout history, resistance movements have often operated outside the law when facing authoritarian regimes or occupying forces. Examples include the French Resistance during World War II or various liberation movements in colonized nations.

• Revolutionary Justice: In some cases, revolutions or uprisings have resulted in the overthrow of corrupt governments, with new leaders or movements taking extrajudicial actions to restore justice and order.

4. Practical Considerations:

• Minimizing Harm: Advocates of extrajudicial justice must consider strategies that minimize harm to innocent parties while effectively targeting those responsible for systemic corruption or crimes.

5. Risks and Counterarguments:

• Potential for Abuse: Extrajudicial justice carries the risk of being used for personal vendettas or power grabs, which can lead to chaos and further injustice. Safeguards must be considered to prevent this.

• Moral and Legal Consequences: Engaging in extrajudicial actions can lead to moral dilemmas and legal consequences, including international condemnation or retaliation. This aspect must be weighed carefully against the perceived necessity of such actions.

6. Conclusion:

• Necessity in Extreme Circumstances: The case for extrajudicial justice hinges on the argument that in extreme circumstances, where legal and institutional corruption is so pervasive that justice is unattainable, unconventional methods may be the only recourse to protect human rights, sovereignty, and freedom.

• A Last Resort: Extrajudicial justice should be considered a last resort, used only when all other avenues for achieving justice have been thoroughly exhausted or rendered impossible by the corruption of the very systems designed to uphold the law.