# Liberty Movement > Grassroots Central >  Controlled Opposition - A must read for everyone in the liberty movement

## FrankRep

*Controlled Opposition*

by Arthur R. Thompson, CEO, The John Birch Society


One of the oldest ruses regularly employed by conspirators is to assume control of your opposition, and where none exists, create it.  

Over history there have been groundswells of opposition against conspiracies that, had the conspirators not gained control of them, would have led to the defeat of those conspiracies.  

Any conspiracy fears that opponents will organize in an effective manner to oppose and expose it so decisively that its creators would have a hard time recovering. This is true if it is low-level criminal activity, or a large political conspiracy, a minor coup, or a Master Conspiracy of Insiders.  

This is why the Insiders have long feared The John Birch Society. For the first time in history, their conspiracy was not able to forestall the formation and growth of real opposition. As a result, the conspirators resorted to another standard tactic they had used to eliminate past opposition: the smear. As our veteran members recall, the Insiders launched numerous smear attacks against us in our early years.

Yet because of the manner in which we are organized, they could not defeat us. They likewise could not destroy our Society by infiltration (certainly not nationally although they did hurt us in some places locally). Here again, the manner in which we were organized prevented large-scale destruction.  

The main harm the smears accomplished was to drive a wedge between our members and our natural constituency in order to slow down our growth and get people to leave our ranks who could not stand “the heat in the kitchen.” Many good people decided not to join our ranks, not because they disagreed with us, but because they feared public opinion. And, regrettably, a few high profile members did leave our ranks for this reason.  

The other method the Insiders have employed involved creation of new organizations, ostensibly to oppose Insider designs — to gather concerned Americans into ineffective groups and/or activity. One of the newest examples is the neoconservative movement that ignores the Constitution and always promotes new foreign entanglements as the solution to just about every problem from a slowed-down economy to terror attacks.

Since the election of Barack Obama, who has never shied away from close personal friendships with communists and terrorists, and who seems to be adopting their agenda, large numbers of Americans have become alarmed. Consequently, a number of new organizations have come on the scene to capture this wave of dissent and use it for enlisting people into ineffective activity.

In a few instances, these groups have leaders who come right out of the ranks of the Council on Foreign Relations.  In the case of Newt Gingrich, one has to marvel that the man who took control of the conservative groundswell in the early 1990s and misdirected it into supporting big government and foreign entanglements such as NAFTA, is back once again, paddling in front of the wave to steer it as before. This time his reemergence seems to be part of a bid for the Presidency.

We are seeing again the problem we have always had with politicians. They always know their audience, saying whatever it takes to gain support, avoiding anything that would turn the audience off. I have always recommended that it is more important to note what a politician doesn’t say or avoids talking about. This will help in ascertaining the true philosophy of any person.  

If a man makes some small statement that perks up our ears where we might have previously disagreed with him or his organization, we tend to forgive the past disagreement and throw them our support, later to be disappointed because we did not pay more attention to what wasn’t said.  

This is true of a few of the new personalities and groups that have arisen recently.

*We are very interested in witnessing the attempt of these few to steer grassroots efforts into promoting Newt Gingrich and a constitutional convention. Their main tactic for promoting change is a public demonstration.*

Another reason the Insiders fear The John Birch Society is that with a sustainable opposition (now nearly 51 years old) the experience of our members presents a problem for them. Our seasoned veterans know the plays and the players.

The reason newly awakened patriots get thwarted at public meetings and conventions is that they do not know the players and their plans. I have seen large majorities of attendees and delegates go down in defeat time after time because they did not realize their own leaders sold them out.  

Novices would not listen to their more experienced compatriots (Birchers) who tried to tell them what was going to happen if they placed their faith in false leadership.  After all, these leaders were saying all the right things, thought the newer activists. Experience shows that actions speak louder than words. Inexperience tends to hear only the words.  

One question that we need to ask is who are the new leaders who have placed themselves at the front of any movement? Are they individuals we have never heard from before and have not seen in the trenches all these decades? While some are sincere, others seem to drop out of the blue telling us that they are the leaders. And the media is quite happy to agree.

It was a disappointing experience for our veterans in past situations to live through and watch large-scale movements arise that owed their existence to the effective educational efforts of the Society, only to see them become co-opted by false leadership with the help of the media.  

It has not been unusual that clergymen and others came out of nowhere with massive media attention to start organizations. Most of the national media gave these leaders coverage that rallied good people to support them. While giving the appearance of criticism, the media coverage played the recruiter for some Christian Right organizations, for instance.

Literally millions either joined in some capacity or were heavily influenced by these groups and their leaders.  At times, they even sounded like Birchers, noting the dangers of the New World Order and related issues. _In some instances they were initially financed by the very forces they claimed to oppose._  What happened was that they got in front of the wave created by our influence and directed it into the arms of the promoters of the New World Order by backing the George Bushes and CFR members in Congress.

I know. I was there. I saw it. What was obvious to me at the time was not obvious to novices. I am afraid the same thing is happening again.  

I know that I will trouble some readers by pointing this out and I ask that no one take it personally. Also, please do not attack the messenger. I mention all of this only to better prepare you for the future, so you can help educate others about the important work that needs to be done beyond public events. In order to do this you may have to get involved in a local non-Birch group to try to influence its members to be more aware than they would be without your advice and education.

The Insiders use public demonstrations to promote their agenda by pointing to the people they have turned out in picket lines or rallies, then broadcasting this nationally to convey the idea that there is a groundswell of support for or against a program the Insiders want or want to stop.  

Many times, these demonstrations have been very small. But as one veteran JBS member once said, “Fifty people in a demonstration isn’t very many, but when you multiply it by 50 million TV sets, it amounts to a lot of people.” The controlled media have a knack for making what they support look big. 

They also have a knack for making what they do not support look insignificant, or radical — if they report at all. Any public demonstration is nearly worthless without the approval of the controlled media.  Demonstrations provide other residual benefits to the conspiracy as well.

If you are trying to radicalize many people, starting them out demonstrating will be step one. When nothing happens as a result of the demonstration, clever planners will resort to more unusual events to try to make things happen. In the case of the Left, this ultimately morphs into violence. Out of this comes more bizarre activity, and more extreme people, and a cadre of terrorists.  

This is what occurred in the 1960s and 1970s in the United States.  

Out of the demonstrations in that time period came a substantial number of terrorists who claimed that the only way to change things was through violence. They  knew full well that their activities could be used as an excuse by government to increase controls over the general population. They spawned searches and seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment, stopped the right to freely assemble, and impacted other aspects of our Bill of Rights.

The same scenario works with some on the Right. And we do have examples of some on the Right who have become very radical. They too have been used by the Insiders to accomplish the same end result. They are also used to tar-brush people who are opposed to the Insiders’ New World Order. Timothy McVeigh, who was portrayed as “right wing,” comes to mind.

The bombing in Oklahoma City blew apart more than the Murrah Building. It almost halted the rising groundswell of opposition to the Clinton  aministration. The anti-Clinton movement was as large, if not larger, than the current Tea Party movement, the End the Fed rallies, and other recent phenomena. The Oklahoma City bombing made opposition to Clinton and his policies seem like terrorism, deflating the average citizen’s desire to participate.

As veteran readers of The New American are aware, there is much evidence about the OKC bombing which points to elements within our own government being involved. Now with the recent Missouri and the Department of Homeland Security report detailing the dangers of right-wing terrorism, our American law enforcement community is being prepared for such an event. If the Insiders can pull it off, this could well burst the bubble of recent resistance to the march toward socialism.

I have had some experience in this arena as well.  

In the 1960s, we had a very active JBS organization in Seattle. My chapter almost always recruited members by working with friends and family. On one occasion, we had a new member come into our ranks who was recruited at a public meeting — a stranger to us. We were happy for his membership and particularly his enthusiasm for our efforts.  After a short time, however, it became obvious that he was a little too enthusiastic and wanted us to get involved in doing things that were unethical. We parted company.  

One year later, we discovered what this man was up to when the headlines in the Seattle newspapers announced that a bank robbery team comprised of “patriots” had been foiled in its attempt to rob banks to finance the right-wing movement. The whole affair was a sting operation which set these men up for a fall by the fellow who had come to us to try, apparently, the same thing within my chapter.  He turned out to be a government informant, working for the government the entire time. The anti-Birchers got their headlines, making it appear that patriots were the problem, not the radical socialists who were constantly stirring up trouble.

There is much occurring today that leads me to suspect that the same thing could be happening again. This time law enforcement is being encouraged to believe just about anything about good people who are standing up for the Constitution. We know that danger does not come from the right except when infiltrators can make it seem so.

Our members are not the kind of people who would listen to any agent provocateur let alone get involved with one. This is still the case — and we have to keep it that way by being careful about whom we involve in our local chapters.

We have opened up our organization to try to grow rapidly because time is of the essence given what we see happening in government every day. There have been some people recently who have come into our Internet system where we simply could not abide their language or behavior and have had to eliminate their access to us.  We thank those who point these people out to us.  

The agent provocateur will not always be obvious. Not until he does his work to try and destroy the group he has ingratiated himself into will he become apparent — and perhaps not even then.

I tell you this so you will understand what we may be in store for and to help you steel yourself for the long haul. Our growing influence today is such that the Insiders will not be able to ignore us for long.

It will not come as any surprise to us if we see some major violent event staged with the blame placed on people who stand up for the Constitution. This could happen in order to take the air out of the current rise of indignation by good Americans to what is happening.  

Regarding demonstrations by good people, let’s realize that they tend to neutralize the participants. If the outcome is that nothing happens, there are usually one of two results: the participants become radicalized, or they go home and never get involved again. For they become convinced that nothing they do will work.  

The liberal media has influenced many to believe that the demonstrations themselves affect change. They have not seen the Insider organization behind all of it and the fact that the street activity is simply show business, the excuse used by the Insiders to gain what they want. In addition, the American people believe that there is public support for the Insider agenda and many accept it.  

People who object to any Insiders’ agendum allow it to continue because they don’t know they have to get involved in an effective organization to stop it. They have to engage in effective pursuits, like educating and meeting with the opinion molders in their communities. And they have to align themselves with an organization that has a proven track record of not only telling the truth, but piling up successes.

Many successes can be credited to The John Birch Society, even when the media make it appear that some other group caused it.  

There have been many Society initiatives over the years that have been successful to one degree or another without the American people understanding that there was an issue in the first place and that the Society had successfully dealt with it. Veteran members know that we have won battles that never appeared on the radar of the American public.  Two examples would be the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) fight where we were essentially alone in stopping this merger in the Western Hemisphere, and the placing of brakes on the constitutional convention (con-con) process. In the latter case, we have recently seen that our work in this area and in the number of states where we worked to rescind their con-con calls were completely off the radar of even our closest allies. This was due to the fact that some of our most effective work is not done in the public eye, but in the quiet offices of our state representatives and other local officials. 

In other cases, we started movements that became so noticeable because of the heavy activity of our members, that the Insiders could no longer ignore our efforts and, instead, tried to shut down our campaigns by denigrating them in the media.

Examples would be the impeachment of President Clinton, the blocking of the North American Union, and the swing of the opinion of the American people against the United Nations. In none of these victories did demonstrations play a role. Demonstrations polarize; they do not educate. They tend to be confrontational, not lending themselves to an atmosphere of friendly intercourse and exchange.  

Only by a concerted action program that gets you in front of opinion molders with educational material on whatever issue can now be successful. You must follow this course because you don’t have effective control of the education process, the media, and most of the government.

We have none of these advantages, so we have to do it the hard way. Let’s face it. Most people do not like work, let alone hard work. Except for the organizing effort, demonstrations for most people amount to simply showing up and going home. The end.  

Demonstrations are also open invitations for the strangest individuals to show up with signs, costumes, and extreme literature to make the crowd look less than normal. These are the folks that the media gravitates to, trying to show their audiences that our side is kooky.  They do not show mom and dad with the kids at the demonstration on TV; they show the oddballs. Then the other moms and dads at home, even if they agree with the sentiment of the demonstrators, do not associate with them in any way.

Often, the signs that we smile at and appreciate are the very ones that repulse those who do not understand enough. They are, therefore, counterproductive. 

Opinion molders, especially, are very sensitive about the way a message is put across. Many times one will agree with the cause but disagree with how the message is presented. 

With demonstrations, there is the possibility of violence. This can either be planned by certain provocateurs among the demonstrators or caused by counter-demonstrators. This is also welcome fodder for the media.

The usual result is that without corresponding media publicity and educational efforts aimed at opinion molders, demonstrations will, after an initial seeming success, become smaller and smaller because people get tired of participating — especially if they see no change. 

Finally, what if all this time and effort were channeled instead into going door to door with educational materials; contacting the local opinion molders; or working within community and civic organizations? This increases a person’s influence beyond friends and family. In the long run, this is more productive in effecting change. 

Will demonstrations continue? Absolutely, because of the world we live in. Should we shun them? No. But let us understand that they can be both destructive and productive. If they are arranged by good people, then let us use them to educate and build permanent, effective organization. For organization is what is needed to combat the highly organized conspiracy we must expose and rout.


*John Birch Society*
http://www.jbs.org/

----------


## Conservative Christian

Great article! Thanks, Frank!

----------


## LittleLightShining

Reeeeally good. Thanks for posting this. Quite a few points in here hit home for me.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

That was a great article..so do you think that Judge Napolitano is controlled opposition because he is pushing the con con?  tones

----------


## nayjevin

> That was a great article..so do you think that Judge Napolitano is controlled opposition because he is pushing the con con?  tones


there's always a chance, but all the big names in liberty seem to respect him fully, from what I've seen.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

Well I like him a lot...I just finished his book "The Constitution in Exile"...he seems to be pairing up with Glenn Beck ...who I am pissed at for the moment for trying to link "right wing extremeists" and Radical Islam..AND for some things he said about the Confederacy...and vomiting on the souths' Constitution in the Confederate Museum.  Tones

----------


## specsaregood

> with Glenn Beck ...who I am pissed at for the moment for trying to link "right wing extremeists" and Radical Islam..AND for some things he said about the Confederacy...and vomiting on the souths' Constitution in the Confederate Museum.  Tones


don't let glenn beck's silver tongued words beget your affection for he is like a cheating lover...he will entice you and whisper sweet nothings in your ear...then hop into the sack with your mortal enemy and plan your destruction behind your back... Specs

----------


## Danke

I don't think demonstrations are such a bad thing.  Like the Tea Parties and End the Fed rallies, they show just how many other like-minded individuals are out there.  Can be motivational.  Good for networking and fund raising too.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> there's always a chance, but all the big names in liberty seem to respect him fully, from what I've seen.


Trust principles; not people.

----------


## paulitics

> Well I like him a lot...I just finished his book "The Constitution in Exile"...he seems to be pairing up with Glenn Beck ...who I am pissed at for the moment for trying to link "right wing extremeists" and Radical Islam..AND for some things he said about the Confederacy...and vomiting on the souths' Constitution in the Confederate Museum.  Tones


Beck is two faced tones.   I really think he hates our guts.   The same day after he had RP on his show and was nice, he went on his friends show saying how much of a whackjob he and all his supporters are.   If and when there is a terrorist attack like 911 and say this person is associated with campaign for liberty or RP, etc, he will be the first one calling for RP supporters arrest and detainment. He doesn't respect most of the constitution, like the 4th amendment, habeus corpus, etc, and he can't be trusted in a crisis.  He initially supported the bailouts.  Don't forget that.  He is a fraud.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

Fox news is hammering this latest event and trying to tie it to the abortion doctor murder..THIS is clearly controlled opposition...to villify patriots. tones

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

THEY are setting these events up and they are EVIL as hell for killing innocent people in their WICKED game.  tones (they killed 3000 in their last evil scheme)

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

bump

----------


## Danke

> bump


What is the point bumping a thread 33 minutes after you (or anyone for that matter) posted in it?

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> THEY are setting these events up and they are EVIL as hell for killing innocent people in their WICKED game.  tones (they killed 3000 in their last evil scheme)


I suspect you're right.  ~hugs~

HB34

----------


## FrankRep

> That was a great article..so do you think that Judge Napolitano is controlled opposition because he is pushing the con con?  tones


I think Judge Napolitano is just unaware of how dangerous a Con-Con is. 

We need to get John F. McManus on Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano.

An appearance on Freedom Watch would give Mr. McManus an opportunity to present the downsides of a constitutional convention (Con-Con) to Judge Napolitano, who has been promoting a Con-Con.

Click here:
http://freedomwatch.uservoice.com/pa...john-f-mcmanus

3rd place!

----------


## anaconda

> That was a great article..so do you think that Judge Napolitano is controlled opposition because he is pushing the con con?  tones


If you were a NWO operative would you plant a Ron Paul so that the the zealous patriots were always easily identifiable?

----------


## amonasro

> If you were a NWO operative would you plant a Ron Paul so that the the zealous patriots were always easily identifiable?


How do you plant a Ron Paul? Grow him in a tube? Brainwash him with liberty?

----------


## anaconda

> How do you plant a Ron Paul? Grow him in a tube? Brainwash him with liberty?


"Plant" in this context means to imbed:

ThesaurusLegend:  Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Verb	1.	*imbed - fix or set securely or deeply*; "He *planted* a knee in the back of his opponent"; "The dentist implanted a tooth in the gum"
embed, *implant, plant*, engraft
infix, insert, introduce, enter - put or introduce into something; "insert a picture into the text"
pot - plant in a pot; "He potted the palm"
nest - fit together or fit inside; "nested bowls"
bury, sink - embed deeply; "She sank her fingers into the soft sand"; "He buried his head in her lap"

----------


## FrankRep

> If you were a NWO operative would you plant a Ron Paul so that the the zealous patriots were always easily identifiable?


Those plants will eventually expose themselves with their words or actions. You kick them out of position.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

I bumped the thread because I thought it was important...why are YOU coming to a thread you obviously have no interest in?  Just to rock the boat?  tones

----------


## andrewh817

type in "Why it's Hard to take Alex Jones Seriously" on Youtube

Good intentions do not always produce good results.......... but at least Alex Jones always says to not take his word for it and research the issues yourself.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

This could be the most ironic thread ever posted on RPF, because JBS was setup as controlled opposition.

If I had the money, I'd offer $10K to anyone who could prove that anyone in the extended media or in the public eye is NOT controlled.  I haven't found one yet, and I don't care what names or organizations you bring up.  They all are!

The public is on its own, and the sooner they realize it the better off we'll be.

----------


## FrankRep

> This could be the most ironic thread ever posted on RPF, because JBS was setup as controlled opposition.


Strong words. Since I am a JBS member, show me how the JBS is controlled opposition.

----------


## Danke

> Strong words. Since I am a JBS member, show me how the JBS is controlled opposition.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Strong words. Since I am a JBS member, show me how the JBS is controlled opposition.


I can't break through the cognitive dissonance for you, you must do it yourself.   You will simply fight anything I say, that's what always happens.

Right now, your thoughts regarding the scope of the conspiracy are limited, which JBS helps to perpetuate through containment of thought.  Bottom line, they are just another organization offering a tailored product to yet another target market.  

Think really big picture. Think dialectics.  Think about the need to provide a fiat-democracy to society.  When you can start to view the world in these terms, you will find the data points to support your vision.  Until then, you won't be able to see it no matter what I or anyone else says.

----------


## Sandman33

> Beck is two faced tones.   I really think he hates our guts.   The same day after he had RP on his show and was nice, he went on his friends show saying how much of a whackjob he and all his supporters are.   If and when there is a terrorist attack like 911 and say this person is associated with campaign for liberty or RP, etc, he will be the first one calling for RP supporters arrest and detainment. He doesn't respect most of the constitution, like the 4th amendment, habeus corpus, etc, and he can't be trusted in a crisis.  He initially supported the bailouts.  Don't forget that.  He is a fraud.


Agreed...well put.

----------


## FrankRep

> I can't break through the cognitive dissonance for you, you must do it yourself.   You will simply fight anything I say, that's what always happens.
> 
> Right now, your thoughts regarding the scope of the conspiracy are limited, which JBS helps to perpetuate through containment of thought.  Bottom line, they are just another organization offering a tailored product to yet another target market.  
> 
> Think really big picture. Think dialectics.  Think about the need to provide a fiat-democracy to society.  When you can start to view the world in these terms, you will find the data points to support your vision.  Until then, you won't be able to see it no matter what I or anyone else says.


You better do some research on the JBS before you start attacking us.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You better do some research on the JBS before you start attacking us.


Give me a freaking break!

I'm so tired of hearing this kinda $#@! from every person who is a member of some organization or is supporting the latest superstar activist.  Falling for the same traps over and over and over again.  

Yeah, everything is a goddamn Communist or Marxist conspiracy.  But they never ever talk about who is behind them except to give you the Illuminati buzzword.

Why exactly do you think organizations are created? 

Anyway, nothing I can do to bring your head out of this sandpit.  You'll fight everyone so you can stay in this cave.  It's just the way the psychology works.

Watch, I guarantee that JBS will be setup to be another target group soon.  Just like the von Brunn OP targets "911 Truthers" and "Conspiracy Theorists" and "Anti Semites"... it won't be too long before they assemble an OP for a crazy JBS member to do something awful, then your entire "group" will be targeted.  What a nice setup.  And you'll fall for it every freaking time.

----------


## FrankRep

> Give me a freaking break!Yeah, everything is a goddamn Communist or Marxist conspiracy.  But they never ever talk about who is behind them except to give you the Illuminati buzzword.


You haven't done your research. Our major enemy, so to speak, is the Council on Foreign Relations. They have a major influence over shaping foreign policy and over the election process.

You should learn about them.

http://www.shopjbs.org/index.php/shadows-of-power.html

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You haven't done your research. Our major enemy, so to speak, is the Council on Foreign Relations. They have a major influence over shaping foreign policy and over the election process.
> 
> You should learn about them.
> 
> http://www.shopjbs.org/index.php/shadows-of-power.html


CFR is just one small branch of a much bigger picture.  The technique JBS is using is called "clipping" or "cropping" where they only show you small parts of the big picture and frame everything accordingly, effectively putting their members in a thought bubble.

----------


## FrankRep

> CFR is just one small branch of a much bigger picture.  The technique JBS is using is called "clipping" or "cropping" where they only show you small parts of the big picture and frame everything accordingly, effectively putting their members in a thought bubble.


Small branch of a Global Picture, you mean. We know its an International Conspiracy for Global government. 

Show us the "big picture" then.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Personally, I like the JBS and have for years; I think there are a lot of true blue patriots in that organization.  That said, I don't trust ANY organization or ANY person 100 percent.   I agree with InterestedParticipant that most groups are infiltrated that were ever any good.  I think a lot of us would be shocked at the extent of the infiltration.

That said, if we stick to principles rather than to people or organizations, we shouldn't often be fooled.  And if an organization offers some good stuff and tools that we can use to accomplish good things, well then, I'm going to take advantage of them.

Keep in mind, that it's extremely difficult to accomplish much of anything if we do not work together in some manner for specific objectives and goals.

----------


## FrankRep

> Personally, I like the JBS and have for years; I think there are a lot of true blue patriots in that organization.  That said, I don't trust ANY organization or ANY person 100 percent.   I agree with InterestedParticipant that most groups are infiltrated that were ever any good.  I think a lot of us would be shocked at the extent of the infiltration.


I would agree. Can't trust any organization 100%.

----------


## anaconda

> If I had the money, I'd offer $10K to anyone who could prove that anyone in the extended media or in the public eye is NOT controlled


Are you therefore suspicious of Ron Paul, for example?

----------


## apropos

> CFR is just one small branch of a much bigger picture.  The technique JBS is using is called "clipping" or "cropping" where they only show you small parts of the big picture and frame everything accordingly, effectively putting their members in a thought bubble.


I'm not a member of any organization, so I don't have any particular loyalties to this or that group. If you claim to have genuine insight into the Big Picture, let's hear about it.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Personally, I like the JBS and have for years; *I think there are a lot of true blue patriots in that organization*.  That said, I don't trust ANY organization or ANY person 100 percent.  * I agree with InterestedParticipant that most groups are infiltrated that were ever any good*.  I think a lot of us would be shocked at the extent of the infiltration.
> 
> That said, *if we stick to principles rather than to people or organizations, we shouldn't often be fooled*.  And if an organization offers some good stuff and tools that we can use to accomplish good things, well then, I'm going to take advantage of them.
> 
> 
> Keep in mind, that *it's extremely difficult to accomplish much of anything if we do not work together in some manner for specific objectives and goals*.


"I think there are a lot of true blue patriots in that organization."

Precisely why these organizations are created, so as to attract these types so they can be manipulated and controlled and identified/attacked, if necessary.
"I agree with InterestedParticipant that most groups are infiltrated that were ever any good."

It's beyond "infiltration"... we're talking establishing and marking groups and entire movement.  Little is infiltrated because that would presuppose that alternate interests were successfully able to start such groups.
"if we stick to principles rather than to people or organizations, we shouldn't often be fooled."

Bull$#@!.  People have no freaking idea what's accurate or not and live in a world where they are fooled 24/7.  Some are just fooled with different trickery than others.
it's extremely difficult to accomplish much of anything if we do not work together in some manner for specific objectives and goals"

All groups and movements are manipulated and controlled.  Only way to do this is through leaderless individuals all operating in accordance with the laws of the Kingdom.





> Small branch of a Global Picture, you mean. We know its an International Conspiracy for Global government. 
> 
> *Show us the "big picture" then*.


There are some things you need to figure out for yourself for them to be believed and accepted (ie. to break through your own cognitive dissonance).  No one can "show" you this.  You need to start questions ALL of your assumptions and ALL of the limits to your thinking.  The revelations will come quickly once you break through these chains.





> I'm not a member of any organization, so I don't have any particular loyalties to this or that group. If you claim to have genuine insight into the Big Picture, let's hear about it.


Do you subscribe to any particular memes (ie "Slogans") that are promulgated by the patriot movement, like "911 was an inside job"?  If so, you will be targeted.

It's about understanding the system in its entirety, not about grasping a handful of facts or slogans psychically driven into our consciousness by controlled actors.  Can you start to revisit all major events in history and see how they all fit together?  Can you see that the public is nothing more than an audience to ALL that occurs, and that ALL actions are perpetrated by the same source, whether it appears to be establishment or opposition?  Watch this video.

YouTube - Assassination of Beal

All the audience (ie public) is expected to do is watch and applaud on
queue. That's it! All the elements of the 'show' (actors et. al.) is left up to
the controllers. Public participation is not a variable in the equation.

Everything freaking thing is manufactured for you.  When you understand that, you will begin to see things as they really are and will be able to analyze organizations, individuals and "events" on your own.

----------


## FrankRep

> Small branch of a Global Picture, you mean. We know its an International Conspiracy for Global government.
> 
> Show us the "big picture" then.





> There are some things you need to figure out for yourself for them to be believed and accepted (ie. to break through your own cognitive dissonance).  No one can "show" you this.  You need to start questions ALL of your assumptions and ALL of the limits to your thinking.  The revelations will come quickly once you break through these chains.


What is the Matrix? 

I'm listening. How is the John Birch Society Controlled Opposition and what is the truth about Global Government?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> What is the Matrix? 
> 
> I'm listening. How is the John Birch Society Controlled Opposition and what is the truth about Global Government?


JBS is controlled because they contain their members thinking (as described in quoted post below), they can persuade their members thinking (hence, set traps on the other side of the dialectic), and they provide a target group that can be leveraged by the establishment for any purpose.



> CFR is just one small branch of a much bigger picture.  The technique JBS is using is called "*clipping*" or "*cropping*" where they only show you small parts of the big picture and frame everything accordingly, effectively putting their members in a thought bubble.


In terms of next steps, find out who started CFR, where it originated from.  Who is behind it.  

Then, maybe look into 4GW (4th Generational Warfare) and see who is behind that and what purpose it will serve (ie. what is the dialectic it creates and who are the primary actors on each side of that dialectic).

Look into "events" that have occurred over the last 40 years and see how intelligence agencies fit into the picture:  Jonestown; Oklahoma City, Columbine, Virginia Tech, 911, Katrina, Lennon's shooting, Reagan's shooting.... the list goes on and on and on.  Look for patterns.

Think about all of these observations in terms of dialectics, which are leverage to create a given end.  Think about the same people controlling all sides of the dialectic, and why they would want to do this, and what were the outcomes they sought to achieve.

You need to break free from herd thinking, which you have been programmed to do.  As I've stated before, no one can do that for you, and remaining in a group is going to do nothing but keep you locked into group think.  Only way to be an individual is on your own.

*On Edit:*  Here's a thought, the entire series of the Prisoner TV Show are now online and can be watched for free.  Invest some time and see if you can understand the significance of that series and #6's efforts to be "unmutual".  There is much to be learned in this series, and this can help one see the World (ie villiage) as it really is.

http://www.amctv.com/originals/the-p...-1960s-series/

----------


## FrankRep

> JBS is controlled because they contain their members thinking (as described in quoted post below), they can persuade their members thinking (hence, set traps on the other side of the dialectic), and they provide a target group that can be leveraged by the establishment for any purpose.


By your reasoning, Ron Paul must also fit into the Hegelian Dialectics as well.

Give me some real facts.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> By your reasoning, Ron Paul must also fit into the Hegelian Dialectics as well.
> 
> Give me some real facts.


We've already reached the following major stumbling blocks.... 

First, is the expectation that someone must give facts, or anything else for that matter, to another... that one is entitled to something from another.
Second, that facts are the most important element in this process.

My response is that one must do this work oneself or stay within the confines created for them, and that "facts" are far less relevant than understanding "technique" (or the techniques employed to maintain social control).

Further, facts can be disputed and can create an area for disagreement and time wasting.  This leads to dismissal of another, based on trivialities.  The focus must be on understanding the techniques employed.

Controlled opposition is just one technique, but to understand how far reaching it it one must be able to recognize the techniques of a controlled opposition operative, whether group or individual actor.

----------


## ItsTime

They think they can control this but once the $#@! is out of the cow you cant put it back in. All this Glen Beck $#@! is going to backfire on them when people really want the things he is saying.

----------


## FrankRep

> We've already reached the following major stumbling blocks.... 
> 
> First, is the expectation that someone must give facts, or anything else for that matter, to another... that one is entitled to something from another.
> Second, that facts are the most important element in this process.
> 
> My response is that one must do this work oneself or stay within the confines created for them, and that "facts" are far less relevant than understanding "technique" (or the techniques employed to maintain social control).


I must conclude that your attack on the John Birch Society, with no evidence, is unfounded and erroneous.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> AND for some things he said about the Confederacy...and *vomiting on the souths' Constitution in the Confederate Museum.  Tones*


Ummmm, wut?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I must conclude that your attack on the John Birch Society, with no evidence, is unfounded and erroneous.


And so will you remain in your manufactured bubble.  Albeit your bubble is different from the mainstream's bubble, but it is manufactured nonetheless and escape is thwarted through your own inaction and fear.  Hence, you learn absolutely nothing except what is served to you.  God did not make us to be like this.

----------


## FrankRep

> And so will you remain in your manufactured bubble.  Albeit your bubble is different from the mainstream's bubble, but it is manufactured nonetheless and escape is thwarted through your own inaction and fear.  Hence, you learn absolutely nothing except what is served to you.  God did not make us to be like this.


Do you consider Christianity, or God in general, as a bubble as well?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Do you consider Christianity, or God in general, as a bubble as well?


I favor a direct relationship between the individual and God, albeit, religious institutions at the local level can help foster community which can be an extremely healthy force.

Bottom line, if you're in the JBS bubble, there is no way you'll be able to see or expose the bubble.  Until you're willing to take steps on your own, you will never know.  But if you were  a social engineer designing Huxley's Brave New World, where people do not see the controls in-place, then would you not include a JBS-like organization in your framework?

Go read about the Tavistock Method, learn about the Frankfurt Institute and its principal academics, understand how Bernays fits into the design of social structures, read Gen. Michael Aquinos thesis on Mind War.  Does JBS talk about any of this?  If not, why not?  These are all critical elements in the design of our society and how the public thinks.

----------


## FrankRep

> Bottom line, if you're in the JBS bubble, there is no way you'll be able to see or expose the bubble.  Until you're willing to take steps on your own, you will never know.  But if you were  a social engineer designing Huxley's Brave New World, where people do not see the controls in-place, then would you not include a JBS-like organization in your framework?
> 
> Go read about the Tavistock Method, learn about the Frankfurt Institute and its principal academics, understand how Bernays fits into the design of social structures, read Gen. Michael Aquinos thesis on Mind War.  Does JBS talk about any of this?  If not, why not?  These are all critical elements in the design of our society and how the public thinks.


I agree you shouldn't lock yourself in a bubble of like-minded people and like-minded organizations, but you just seem to be attacking organizations in general. I would call that an over generalization just lumping everyone together.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I agree you shouldn't lock yourself in a bubble of like-minded people and like-minded organizations, but you just seem to be attacking organizations in general. I would call that an over generalization just lumping everyone together.


I can't discuss with you the problems of a given bridge design until you have had some introduction to physics, material engineering and structural analysis techniques.  Like bridge design, we cannot engage in a meaningful discussion about controlled opposition groups until all parties in the discussion have exposed themselves to the techniques in-play and gained some understanding of the system.  

Until some willingness to move toward this understanding is displayed and acted upon by the interested parties, we're wasting our time.

If you review the thread I've pointed you toward several areas of research and understanding.  If you can start by gaining a real understanding of dialectics, how they are used and why they are important, then I think you will start to see the need for a JBS-type organization.  

Ball is in your court on whether you attempt to venture outside the comfort zones.

----------


## FrankRep

> If you review the thread I've pointed you toward several areas of research and understanding. If you can start by gaining a real understanding of dialectics, how they are used and why they are important, then I think you will start to see the need for a JBS-type organization.


Great, you just turned a 360.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Great, you just turned a 360.


Whatever.... I'm done playing games here.  You're obviously content where you are and therefore will never grow or see beyond the JBS-framework of containment.

When some JBS member goes "postal" and the JBS comes under establishment attack (hence, public attack), perhaps you'll remember this thread and take it more seriously.  For the group's role is only to contain its members, waste their time on ineffective action, and become used as a target group when the time is convenient for the establishment.

Later!


P.S.  Have you ever even research who Larry McDonald was associated with, what other groups he was part of and who were on the boards of directors of these other groups.  I bet you haven't.  Can you say, OSS?

----------


## tangent4ronpaul

> P.S.  Have you ever even research who Larry McDonald was associated with, what other groups he was part of and who were on the boards of directors of these other groups.  I bet you haven't.  Can you say, OSS?


Where did Larry McDonald come up?  I scanned the thread and couldn't find his name mentioned before.

I do recall that he ran a rather obscure right wing publishing house in the '60's or '70's that went under and as best as I can tell he would have been in diapers or at most 10yo when OSS was around.  He did, however do an excellent book about some of the technology that came out of that organization.  So praytell, what do you know about him and his associations?  Very curious!  

-t

----------


## FrankRep

> Where did Larry McDonald come up?  I scanned the thread and couldn't find his name mentioned before.
> 
> I do recall that he ran a rather obscure right wing publishing house in the '60's or '70's that went under and as best as I can tell he would have been in diapers or at most 10yo when OSS was around.  He did, however do an excellent book about some of the technology that came out of that organization.  So praytell, what do you know about him and his associations?  Very curious!


Larry McDonald could be considered the first "Ron Paul" in Congress in the late 70s and was president of the John Birch Society (before he was killed). In fact, Ron Paul first consulted Larry McDonald before running for congress.

----------


## Crash Martinez

Right.  So Ron Paul - who likewise doesn't seem to hold any great grudges against JBS, though he probably also wouldn't trust them 100% - _is_ one of these "controlled opposition" sellouts?  Or is he ignorant of the "really super hyper-big ass picture" too?

Sorry, I don't buy that.

----------


## Deborah K

From OP article: 


> In order to do this you may have to get involved in a local non-Birch group to try to influence its members to be more aware than they would be without your advice and education.


I've always believed this is the surest way to bring people around to the truth.  If you can't beat em - infiltrate!  Works both ways....

I like the JBS.  Been meaning to join.  Their research into the NAU was very impressive.  I also enjoyed the speech Dr. Paul gave, during his campaign, at their 50th anniversary.  http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=849

----------


## FrankRep

*Ron Paul congratulates the John Birch Society on 50th anniversary.*


Congressman Ron Paul has endorsed the John Birch Society in a statement recently received from his office. *Dr. Paul stated, "The John Birch Society is a great patriotic organization featuring an educational program solidly based on constitutional principles. I congratulate the Society in this, its 50th year.* I wish them continued success and endorse their untiring efforts to foster 'less government, more responsibility, and--with God's help--a better world.'" 

*John McManus, president of JBS responded, "We graciously accept Dr. Paul's endorsement.* He continues to demonstrate what an elected official should be doing ... obeying the Constitution. We thank him for his continuous commitment to protect the freedoms of all Americans. There's a reason why he consistently rates toward the top of the Freedom Index, our congressional scorecard rating legislators' votes published twice a year in the New American Magazine. 


http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Ron+Pa...y.-a0178674408

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Where did Larry McDonald come up?  I scanned the thread and couldn't find his name mentioned before.
> 
> I do recall that he ran a rather obscure right wing publishing house in the '60's or '70's that went under and as best as I can tell he would have been in diapers or at most 10yo when OSS was around.  He did, however do an excellent book about some of the technology that came out of that organization.  So praytell, what do you know about him and his associations?  Very curious!  
> 
> -t


It was called Western Publishing.  It should also be remembered that Larry McDonald was related to General George Patton.  I was a big fan.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

I understand totally about the Hegelian Dialectic...and I agree that any organization that becomes a force is probably infiltrated and compromised.  I like the JBS a lot...that's not to say I completely trust them..I don't trust the Libertarian Party totally because I dont' trust the Cato Institute at all.  I believe that to be infiltrated and c;ompromised because they did a whack job thing and turned against Ron Paul.  That was clearly the Dialectic at work.  The C4L..well same thing..I like a lot of what they say;..but I tend to be suspicious of that..I am suspicious of EVERY organization or group think entity these days..but it doens't mean I stay away from them..I just keep my eyes and ears open.  Take the good things and throw away what I believe to be junk.  No group will be perfect...but we can still do a lot of good.  I had somebody tell me that G Edward Griffin was controlled opposition for goodness sake... If we aren't careful we can find ourselves completely paranoid and shut off from everyone and everything...which is definately in effective.  Tones

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

Oh...lol and part of the dialectic too...(see above)  circular logic...tones

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I understand totally about the Hegelian Dialectic...and I agree that any organization that becomes a force is probably infiltrated and compromised.  I like the JBS a lot...that's not to say I completely trust them..I don't trust the Libertarian Party totally because I dont' trust the Cato Institute at all.  I believe that to be infiltrated and c;ompromised because they did a whack job thing and turned against Ron Paul.  That was clearly the Dialectic at work.  The C4L..well same thing..I like a lot of what they say;..but I tend to be suspicious of that..I am suspicious of EVERY organization or group think entity these days..but it doens't mean I stay away from them..I just keep my eyes and ears open.  Take the good things and throw away what I believe to be junk.  No group will be perfect...but we can still do a lot of good.  *I had somebody tell me that G Edward Griffin was controlled opposition for goodness sake*... If we aren't careful we can find ourselves completely paranoid and shut off from everyone and everything...which is definately in effective.  Tones


But "*G*" is!

It's a network, a system, an array of actors and movements and groups.... all to contain your "thinking."  And it's working quite well.

Cognitive Dissonance is your biggest enemy right now.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

well I like him..I do agree with one thing..he has that group Freedom Force International...which is supposed to be an activist gr;oup...but it doens't seem like they DO an;ything.  I have learned not to put all my eggs in one basket..I just take the information in.  I go out and get active on my own and find ways.  We just got our local patriot group to agree to be more active.  They started out good and some of the business men didn't want to step out..well..what's the sense in having a group if you don't STEP OUT..and do something?  We must do it.  TOnes

----------


## FrankRep

> But "*G*" is!
> 
> It's a network, a system, an array of actors and movements and groups.... all to contain your "thinking."  And it's working quite well.
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is your biggest enemy right now.


Again, lets see some proof that G. Edward Griffin is controlled opposition or an insider.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

_"People that can't think dialectically aren't really 
human beings at all,  they just look like human beings"_



*Aristotle*


*http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...57&postcount=1*

----------


## Deborah K

> Again, lets see some proof that G. Edward Griffin is controlled opposition or an insider.


He won't be able to.  Ed has been exposing the truth for more than 40 years.  He is one of the most knowledgable and classiest men I've ever known.  I had the distinct pleasure of working with him during the revolution march and got to know him a little bit afterward.  He is in no way controlled opposition.  Anyone who thinks that hasn't done their due diligence.  You can't be controlled opposition while you're exposing the intentions of tptb:

The Chasm:  http://www.freedomforceinternational...recalling1.pdf

Secret Organizations and Hidden Agendas:  http://www.freedomforceinternational...recalling2.pdf

Days of Infamy: http://www.freedomforceinternational...recalling3.pdf

The War on Terrorism:  http://www.freedomforceinternational...recalling4.pdf

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> He won't be able to.  Ed has been exposing the truth for more than 40 years.  He is one of the most knowledgable and classiest men I've ever known.  I had the distinct pleasure of working with him during the revolution march and got to know him a little bit afterward.  He is in no way controlled opposition.  Anyone who thinks that hasn't done their due diligence.  You can't be controlled opposition while you're exposing the intentions of tptb:


The techniques he uses, amongst many, are called containment and diversion, and they are way beyond your ability to observe.  So, yeah, I would expect that 99.9999% here would be totally bought-in to his "program."  These guys are professionally trained... do you really think you'd ever be able to figure it out on your own?

By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.

----------


## Deborah K

> The techniques he uses, amongst many, are called containment and diversion, and they are way beyond your ability to observe.  So, yeah, I would expect that 99.9999% here would be totally bought-in to his "program."  These guys are professionally trained... do you really think you'd ever be able to figure it out on your own?
> 
> By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.


Why are you here, in this forum, if you are so superior to all of us brain-washed koolaid drinkers?  Why would you waste your time?

----------


## FrankRep

> By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.


Thankfully G. Edward Griffin did interview Norman Dodd. Lets watch it.

The Hidden Agenda - Merging America Into World Government


The major tax-exempt foundations, since at least 1945, have been operating to promote an agenda that has little to do with charity, good works, or philanthropy. The real objectives include the creation of a world-wide collectivist state which is to be ruled from behind the scenes by those same interests which control the foundations. This story is told by Norman Dodd who, in 1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations, known as the Reece Committee, in recognition of its Chairman, Congressman Carroll Reece. Mr. Dodd speaks from experience with the leaders of the great foundations of that period, some of whom were amazingly frank about their goals. This interview, conducted by G. Edward Griffin, has captured a rare piece of history and illustrates the continuity between the past and present drive for a "New World Order.

----------


## Deborah K

> The techniques he uses, amongst many, are called containment and diversion, and they are way beyond your ability to observe.  So, yeah, I would expect that 99.9999% here would be totally bought-in to his "program."  These guys are professionally trained... do you really think you'd ever be able to figure it out on your own?
> 
> By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.



I'm going to send him an email as per your request, but my guess would be that he couldn't get anyone to air it.  I've tried like hell to get him on Glenn Beck, with the help of 'Restore the Republic', to no avail.  He's considered fringe, so how the hell can he also be considered controlled opposition?

Btw, what was Ed's so called excuse for sitting on the interview that you deem to be so lame?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Why are you here, in this forum, if you are so superior to all of us brain-washed koolaid drinkers?  Why would you waste your time?


So let me see if I can interpret this post. Basically what you are saying is that you have a comfortable paradigm which includes some actors and organizations who you believe are working in your interest.  I would say that you perceive that there are many others here who share your same paradigm and to that effect you believe you have a make-shift group, or consensus on who to trust and believe, what to trust and believe, and who NOT to trust.

Then, someone comes along, a libertarian, and begins to question that paradigm, begins to bring up examples where various operators and organizations, within your paradigm, employ techniques that are typical of establishment actors.

Instead of engaging in self-evaluation and additional research, as suggested by the paradigm-breaker, you question their reason for being here, as if "here" is defined by the paradigm that you live in and only discussions that fit your paradigm may take place.

I suggest taking some time and following the research leads that I have provided, learn about the techniques that are used, ask meaningful questions that are designed to learn rather than designed to "trap" the messenger.

As far as *"G"* is concerned, you definitely won't get a straight answer, and you certainly won't be given any meaningful queues without being there in person to watch the biological response and get it on camera.

The bottom line is that the paradigm that you live-in will get us no where, as evidenced by history.  The only way to break our enslavement is to break this manufactured reality, and that is not given to you on a silver platter by book writers and "alternative" media, you have to work for that on your own using what Paulo Freire calls "Conscientization"... this is the goal that you must strive for as it will allow you to see all without input from any external source.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I'm going to send him an email as per your request, but my guess would be that he couldn't get anyone to air it.  I've tried like hell to get him on Glenn Beck, with the help of 'Restore the Republic', to no avail.  He's considered fringe, so how the hell can he also be considered controlled opposition?
> 
> *Btw, what was Ed's so called excuse for sitting on the interview that you deem to be so lame?*


*Containment !!!*

P.S.  I never called the interview "lame," those are your words not mine.  My statements have all been around the 20year delay of the interview's release.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Thankfully G. Edward Griffin did interview Norman Dodd. Lets watch it.
> 
> The major tax-exempt foundations, since at least 1945, have been operating to promote an agenda that has little to do with charity, good works, or philanthropy. The real objectives include the creation of a world-wide collectivist state which is to be ruled from behind the scenes by those same interests which control the foundations. This story is told by Norman Dodd who, in 1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations, known as the Reece Committee, in recognition of its Chairman, Congressman Carroll Reece. Mr. Dodd speaks from experience with the leaders of the great foundations of that period, some of whom were amazingly frank about their goals. This interview, conducted by G. Edward Griffin, has captured a rare piece of history and illustrates the continuity between the past and present drive for a "New World Order.


You miss some of the most important elements of the interview, which if released shortly after it was conducted could have made a significant difference in disruption the establishment's plans...




> Probably the one key historical event which proves without a doubt the conspiratorial goal of the "traitors" to *merge our country into an unconstitutional international socialist system (called for by Lenin and Stalin, with the financial backing of Wall Street, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and many multinational corporations)* was the meeting Norman Dodd had with Rowan Gaither, the President of the Ford Foundation during Mr. Dodd's tenure as the Research Director for the Reece Committee in 1953. This Congressional committee was established to investigate the activities of the left-leaning foundations.
> 
> http://www.newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt9.htm
> 
> 
> "Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves. 
> 
> Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have had experience either with the OSS during the war, or with European economic administration after the war.  We have had experience operating under directives.  The directives emanate, and did emanate, from the White House.  Now, we still operate under just such directives.  Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?
> 
> ...

----------


## FrankRep

> *Containment !!!*
> 
> P.S.  I never called the interview "lame," those are your words not mine.  My statements have all been around the 20year delay of the interview's release.


Why did he record it in the first place?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Why did he record it in the first place?


To keep Dodd from being interviewed by an "unauthorized" source who would have released this information in a timely way.  It's an intervention in order to control the information.  This is a common technique.

Look, it's about Total Information Dominance (look up this concept).  TID means controlling ALL information, even opposition information.  So, you can bury it, or rewrite history (his-story), or mix it with some false information to create confusion, etc.

Why did Walter Chronkite recently receive the World Federation Association award (a globalist organization)?  and why in his acceptance speech did he say come hell or highwater he wanted world government?

----------


## Deborah K

> By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.


Here's your answer:




> G. Edward Griffin to me 
> show details 1:06 PM (51 minutes ago) Reply
> 
> The truth is that there was no general interest in this interview until several years after I recorded it. Also, it costs money to edit and release a video, even a simple one like that one. Money has always been tight at American Media, but it was particularly so during those early days. If this guy thinks I sat on the interview, I wonder why he thinks I recorded it in the first place and why I released it at all. I could have just skipped it in the beginning or, having recorded it, I could have buried it completely, if that was my mission. This person makes no sense at all, and I am amazed that anyone pays attention to him. 
> 
> You may post this if you wish.
> 
> Ed Griffin

----------


## Deborah K

> To keep Dodd from being interviewed by an "unauthorized" source who would have released this information in a timely way.  It's an intervention in order to control the information.  This is a common technique.
> 
> Look, it's about Total Information Dominance (look up this concept).  TID means controlling ALL information, even opposition information.  So, you can bury it, or rewrite history (his-story), or mix it with some false information to create confusion, etc.
> 
> Why did Walter Chronkite recently receive the World Federation Association award (a globalist organization)?  and why in his acceptance speech did he say come hell or highwater he wanted world government?


This is ridiculous.  First, you're whining because he supposedly "sat" on it.  Now, your story is that he did the interview in order to control the information.  Then why "sit" on it????   You can't have it both ways.

----------


## Deborah K

> So let me see if I can interpret this post. Basically what you are saying is that you have a comfortable paradigm which includes some actors and organizations who you believe are working in your interest.  I would say that you perceive that there are many others here who share your same paradigm and to that effect you believe you have a make-shift group, or consensus on who to trust and believe, what to trust and believe, and who NOT to trust.
> 
> Then, someone comes along, a libertarian, and begins to question that paradigm, begins to bring up examples where various operators and organizations, within your paradigm, employ techniques that are typical of establishment actors.
> 
> Instead of engaging in self-evaluation and additional research, as suggested by the paradigm-breaker, you question their reason for being here, as if "here" is defined by the paradigm that you live in and only discussions that fit your paradigm may take place.
> 
> I suggest taking some time and following the research leads that I have provided, learn about the techniques that are used, ask meaningful questions that are designed to learn rather than designed to "trap" the messenger.
> 
> As far as *"G"* is concerned, you definitely won't get a straight answer, and you certainly won't be given any meaningful queues without being there in person to watch the biological response and get it on camera.
> ...


If your goal is to be the savior of the sheeple in this and other forums, perhaps you should start your quest by providing evidence of the accusations that you are flailing against  Ed Griffin - for starters.  You can't go around making wild accusations about people- claiming they are "controlled opposition" without some evidence.    And sending us to research your claims is lazy and disingenuous.  That's like a prosecuter claiming a man is guilty and expecting the man or the jury to find the evidence to prove it.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Here's your answer:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				The truth is that there was no general interest in this interview until several years after I recorded it. Also, it costs money to edit and release a video, even a simple one like that one. Money has always been tight at American Media, but it was particularly so during those early days. If this guy thinks I sat on the interview, I wonder why he thinks I recorded it in the first place and why I released it at all. I could have just skipped it in the beginning or, having recorded it, I could have buried it completely, if that was my mission. This person makes no sense at all, and I am amazed that anyone pays attention to him.


I addressed G's points in an earlier reply, anticipating what he would say.




> To keep Dodd from being interviewed by an "unauthorized" source who would have released this information in a timely way.  It's an intervention in order to control the information.  This is a common technique.
> 
> Look, it's about Total Information Dominance (look up this concept).  TID means controlling ALL information, even opposition information.  So, you can bury it, or rewrite history (his-story), or mix it with some false information to create confusion, etc.


He did the interview and sat on it to keep the information contained for 20 years.  And to say there was no interest was BS, a little look around and he would have found Charlotte Iserbyt who was exposing similar information in her book Dumbing  Us Down, and this interview would have strengthened her work tremendously.

Anyway, this is just one datapoint, one that I am able to share because it's so damn obvious.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> This is ridiculous.  First, you're whining because he supposedly "sat" on it.  Now, your story is that he did the interview in order to control the information.  Then why "sit" on it????   You can't have it both ways.


*Sitting on it means to control it.   * 

Please, if you want to keep your head in the sand, you are entitled to do so, but at least try to keep the conversation focused on issues that are somewhat relevant.

----------


## Deborah K

> I addressed G's points in an earlier reply, anticipating what he would say.
> 
> 
> He did the interview and sat on it to keep the information contained for 20 years.  And to say there was no interest was BS, a little look around and he would have found Charlotte Iserbyt who was exposing similar information in her book Dumbing  Us Down, and this interview would have strengthened her work tremendously.
> 
> Anyway, this is just one datapoint, one that I am able to share because it's so damn obvious.


And I addressed your response.  You can't have it both ways.  Why, on the one hand, would you complain about his "sitting" on the interview, then on the other, claim that he did the interview to control the information?  If his goal was to control the information, then why sit on the interview?  

Then, you assume that Griffin somehow had the power to keep Dodd from being interviewed by anyone else.  Give me a break.

----------


## Deborah K

> *Sitting on it means to control it.   * 
> 
> Please, if you want to keep your head in the sand, you are entitled to do so, but at least try to keep the conversation focused on issues that are somewhat relevant.



Then why interview him at all?  You're going around in circles because you're cornered.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> If your goal is to be the savior of the sheeple in this and other forums, perhaps you should start your quest by providing evidence of the accusations that you are flailing against  Ed Griffin - for starters.  You can't go around making wild accusations about people- claiming they are "controlled opposition" without some evidence.    And sending us to research your claims is lazy and disingenuous.  That's like a prosecuter claiming a man is guilty and expecting the man or the jury to find the evidence to prove it.


I can prove my case to another who understand IO (Information Operations).  It's like trying to demonstrate that a complex superstructure is inherently unstable to someone who has no awareness of engineering models and no desire to do some basic learning about them.  If you are unwilling to do at least rudimentary learning on your own than we cannot engage in a conversation because every sentence I use will require an entire separate lesson plan.

I've pointed to research material in this thread. I know that I and others have presented research material on psychological warfare and Information Operations in other threads many times since this forum began.  Until you want to invest some time to at least learn the language and understand the basics, then we simply cannot have a conversation.

The proof is in the techniques that are used.  As they are subtle, one must learn how to observe them.  Until then, you will exist relying on others to tell you who and what to believe.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> *Then why interview him at all?*  You're going around in circles because you're cornered.


As I said before, it's called *Total Information Dominance*.  Research it!

And stop wasting my time about one individual minor actor.  This is a system, a network.  Look at it holistically.

----------


## Deborah K

> I can prove my case to another who understand IO (Information Operations).  It's like trying to demonstrate that a complex superstructure is inherently unstable to someone who has no awareness of engineering models and no desire to do some basic learning about them.  If you are unwilling to do at least rudimentary learning on your own than we cannot engage in a conversation because every sentence I use will require an entire separate lesson plan.
> 
> I've pointed to research material in this thread. I know that I and others have presented research material on psychological warfare and Information Operations in other threads many times since this forum began.  Until you want to invest some time to at least learn the language and understand the basics, then we simply cannot have a conversation.
> 
> The proof is in the techniques that are used.  As they are subtle, one must learn how to observe them.  *Until then, you will exist relying on others to tell you who and what to believe*.


You mean others....like you?


So basically you're claiming that I am too ignorant to understand any evidence that you could provide that would prove Ed Griffin is controlled opposition.  

Yeah.....right.

----------


## Deborah K

> As I said before, it's called *Total Information Dominance*.  Research it!
> 
> And stop wasting my time about one individual minor actor.  This is a system, a network.  Look at it holistically.


So, assuming you're right, for the sake of argument.  I'm supposed to believe that Mr. Griffin, who lives a relatively modest existance, is perfectly happy doing the evil bidding of tptb simply because he is a "useful idiot"?  He loves his master?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You mean others....like you?
> 
> 
> So basically you're claiming that I am too ignorant to understand any evidence that you could provide that would prove Ed Griffin is controlled opposition.  
> 
> Yeah.....right.


No, I'm not telling you what to believe.  I keep urging you to do research in areas that will enable you to figure it out for yourself.  There's a big difference between what I am doing and what controlled actors are doing.

Further, it has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with a way of thinking and perception, what Paulo Freire calls "Conscienzation".  It is NOT dependent on ones intellect.

----------


## Deborah K

> So, assuming you're right, for the sake of argument.  I'm supposed to believe that Mr. Griffin, who lives a relatively modest existance, is perfectly happy doing the evil bidding of tptb simply because he is a "useful idiot"?  He loves his master?


No response to this?  I'd like to hear your explanation as to why Ed Griffin would be a willing participant?  What's in it for the "useful idiot"?  Btw, any idea where that phrase comes from?

----------


## RonneJJones

> No, I'm not telling you what to believe.  I keep urging you to do research in areas that will enable you to figure it out for yourself.  There's a big difference between what I am doing and what controlled actors are doing.
> 
> Further, it has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with a way of thinking and perception, what Paulo Freire calls "Conscienzation".  It is NOT dependent on ones intellect.


Can you suggest some specific material where I may get started?

I don't know about anyone else here, but I didn't realize that the Dodd video sat for 20 years.   I saw it for the first time last year and it about knocked me over.  I can't imagine why anyone would sit on that material given its gravity.  That's kind of a shock.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> No, I'm not telling you what to believe.  I keep urging you to do research in areas that will enable you to figure it out for yourself.  There's a big difference between what I am doing and what controlled actors are doing.
> 
> Further, it has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with a way of thinking and perception, what Paulo Freire calls "Conscienzation".  It is NOT dependent on ones intellect.


Actually, you made some pretty grievous claims in this thread and you seem to refuse to back them up.  What you have done however, is smear both the JBS and G. Edward Griffin, without one ounce of proof.

Time to put up.

Thanks in advance.

----------


## Deborah K

> Can you suggest some specific material where I may get started?
> 
> I don't know about anyone else here, but I didn't realize that the Dodd video sat for 20 years.   I saw it for the first time last year and it about knocked me over.  I can't imagine why anyone would sit on that material given its gravity.  That's kind of a shock.


Post #74 




> Quote:
> *Originally Posted by InterestedParticipant * 
> By the way, the next time you talk to "G", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.
> 			
> 		
> 
> *Here's your answer:*
> 
> 
> ...

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Then why interview him at all?  You're going around in circles because you're cornered.


I think he answered that.   And that part is plausible, imo.  If one wanted to control both sides of an argument, you would make sure you had control of the information.  By Griffin interviewing Dodd, Dodd would think that he had at least gotten out the information and if someone else approached him to do same, he would likely turn them away, because it had already been done.  Then, those wanting to control could edit or sit on the information that they now had in their hands.

At least, that's what I'm taking his point to be.

Note:  I'm not saying I agree, because I don't know.

EDIT:  Actually, this is the same type of thing that Carroll Quigley (Clinton's mentor) discussed in Tragedy and Hope, with regard to both major political parties being controlled.  When the people get tired of one of the parties, the parties are switched out, but the same agenda continues.  We think there has been a change, when in reality nothing has changed.

----------


## akihabro

> Beck is two faced tones.   I really think he hates our guts.   The same day after he had RP on his show and was nice, he went on his friends show saying how much of a whackjob he and all his supporters are.   If and when there is a terrorist attack like 911 and say this person is associated with campaign for liberty or RP, etc, he will be the first one calling for RP supporters arrest and detainment. He doesn't respect most of the constitution, like the 4th amendment, habeus corpus, etc, and he can't be trusted in a crisis.  He initially supported the bailouts.  Don't forget that.  He is a fraud.


Exactly the reason I didn't accept his crocodile tears and join 912 project.  Hopefully people use that site to get together and take matters into their own hands and don't follow puppet beck.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Can you suggest some specific material where I may get started?
> 
> I don't know about anyone else here, but I didn't realize that the Dodd video sat for 20 years.   I saw it for the first time last year and it about knocked me over.  I can't imagine why anyone would sit on that material given its gravity.  That's kind of a shock.


I'd start with Charlotte Iserbyt and her book, *Deliberate Dumbing Down of America*.  Charlotte appears to be one of a handful, if that, of people who do not misrepresent significant elements of the conspiracy, or reframe the issues to confuse the audience, or omit critical factors that can leave one to misguided conclusions.  Charlotte has written a number of excellent short articles and posted them on her website as well as at Newswithviews.com.  Additionally, her son runs *AmericanDeception.com* that contains an excellent library of pertinent materials.  Also, I know there are a few others here who follow Charlotte and I have discovered threads that present and discuss her work, so you may want to start by searching RPF.  Finally, Charlotte's footnotes reference other sources of excellent material, such as *William Fosters* *Toward a Soviet America*.




> Actually, you made some pretty grievous claims in this thread and you seem to refuse to back them up.  What you have done however, is smear both the JBS and G. Edward Griffin, without one ounce of proof.
> 
> Time to put up.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I will start another thread that introduces the larger issue of Controlled Opposition operatives and how they work, as this thread has become mired in the defense of certain operatives who have risen to "Idol" status, and hence, the discussion has lost focus and therefore its significance.  I do not want to get into childish squabbles about the authenticity of one's favorite personality, for then we are simply dealing with emotionality.  What is important to understand is the subtle techniques that are used by controlled opposition in order to gain an audience's trust and ultimately its loyalty, thereby influencing the audience's thinking and perception of reality as they lose their ability to critically evaluate their world on their own.

Finally, I will say that I am more than amazed that no one seems to appreciate the significance of the delay of the release of the Norman Dodd interview.  Let's rollback in history to understand where we were when these revelations were exposed.

First, let's review perhaps Dodd's most important revelation, which was that the President of the Ford Foundation, a definite insider, said that they sought to *"alter life in the United States, [so] that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."*

Second, it is important to recall that this interview was conducted in 1982:
well before the Berlin Wall came down;well before Communist governments collapsed, including the Soviet Union;well before the end of the Cold War;around the time Reagan was discussing the Starwars space weapon initiative (SDI)well before Reagan and Gorbachev met at the 1986 summit in Reykjavik that resulted in the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (eliminating nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges)during the time while Reagan was waging covert wars against Central America (telling Americans he was fighting against the Communist threat), resulting in more than 70,000 political killings in El Salvador, more than 100,000 in Guatemala, and 30,000 killed in the contra war in Nicaraguaat the time, this was the height of *Reagan's “evil empire” campaign*, saying that America's Judeo-Christian traditions compared to the Soviet Union's totalitarian leadership and lack of religious faith are at the heart of the fight between the two nations.


YouTube - President Ronald Reagan - "Evil Empire" SpeechWell before Reagan's "*Tear Down This Wall*" speech on June 12 1987

YouTube - "Tear Down This Wall" Reagan speech June 12 1987


Now, think about what you would have thought if you found out in the 1980's that the American establishment was planning to merge the US & Soviet systems?  Tell me how confused you would have been to hear that right in the middle of Reagan pounding his fists regarding the threat of communism.  

Just take a look at this Los Angeles Times article by Eleanor Clift from 1986, *Reagan Asks for Support for Defense Plan*, *President Says Soviet Threat Requires Buildup*.  The article reports, "In a nationally televised address from the Oval office, Reagan said continued high levels of defense spending were essential if he is to forestall the Soviet threat around the world and win concessions from Soviet Leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev."  Hence, Dodd was basically telling the world that the he was told that the Soviet system was to be merged with the US System around the same time Reagan is prosecuting a war in Central American “communists” and calling-on the American people to spend massive amounts of money to build-up our defenses  This is huge!

How can anyone say that this information was not important at the time, or that there would have been no interest.  It would have changed everything and showed Reagan's call for a buildup to be nothing more than a scam on the American people.  Anyone who is the least bit interested in truth and the plight of the American public would have worked around the clock to distribute such information.

I just don't get how anyone can merely scoff at someone who expresses concern over this 20+ year delay in releasing this key interview.  Further, I don't see how anyone who promotes themselves as an activist would tell others not to listen to someone who is expressing such concern.

In Summary, releasing Dodd's information in the 1980's, especially prior to 1989 (7 years after the interview), could have made a major difference in how American's perceived events around them.  I simply don't know anyone can argue this point, and I don't know how anyone can sleep at night knowing that they possessed such information but did not release it!

----------


## RonneJJones

> I'd start with Charlotte Iserbyt and her book, *Deliberate Dumbing Down of America*.  Charlotte appears to be one of a handful, if that, of people who do not misrepresent significant elements of the conspiracy, or reframe the issues to confuse the audience, or omit critical factors that can leave one to misguided conclusions.  Charlotte has written a number of excellent short articles and posted them on her website as well as at Newswithviews.com.  Additionally, her son runs *AmericanDeception.com* that contains an excellent library of pertinent materials.  Also, I know there are a few others here who follow Charlotte and I have discovered threads that present and discuss her work, so you may want to start by searching RPF.  Finally, Charlotte's footnotes reference other sources of excellent material, such as *William Fosters* *Toward a Soviet America*.


Thanks, I'll check these references out.

As far Dodd's characterization of what was really going on versus what the public saw with Reagan... it's kind of mind blowing really.  Two totally different worlds.  In hindsight, knowing what we know now, I wonder if Reagan actually believed the BS he was selling to the public?

----------


## Volitzer

The New World Order’s 25 Tenets:

1) Men are inclined to evil rather than good.

2) Preach Liberalism.

3) Use ideals of freedom to bring about class wars.

4) Any and all means necessary should be used to reach their goals as they are justified.

5) Believe their rights lie in force.

6) The power of their resources must remain invisible until the very moment that they have gained the strength so that no group or force can undermine it.

7) Advocates a mob psychology to obtain control of the masses

8 ) Promotes the use of alcohol, drugs, moral corruption, and all forms of vice to systematically corrupt the youth of the nation.

9) Seize citizens’ private property by any means necessary.

10) The use of slogans such as equity, liberty, and fraternity are used on the masses as psychological warfare.

11) War should be directed so that the nations on both sides are placed further in debt and peace conferences are designed so that neither combatant retain territory rights.

12) Members must use their wealth to have candidates chosen to public office who would be obedient to their demands, and would be used as pawns in the game by the men behind the scenes. The advisors will have been bred, reared, and trained from childhood to rule the affairs of the world.

13) Control the press, and hence most of the information the public receives.

14) Agents and provocateurs will come forward after creating traumatic situations, and appear to be the saviors of the masses, when they are actually interested in just the opposite, the reduction of the population.

15) Create industrial depression and financial panic, unemployment, hunger, shortage of food, use these events to control the masses and mobs. and use them to wipe out those who stand in the way.

16) Infiltrate Freemasonry which is to be used to conceal and further objectives.

17) Expound the value of systematic deception, use high sounding slogans and phrases, advocate lavish sounding promises to the masses even though they can’t be kept.

18) The art of street fighting is necessary to bring the population into subjection.

19) Use agents as provocateurs and advisers behind the scenes, and after wars use secret diplomacy talks to gain control.

20) Establish huge monopolies towards world government control.

21) Use high taxes and unfair competition to bring about economic ruin by controlling raw materials, organized agitation among the workers, and subsidizing competitors.

22) Build up armaments with police and soldiers who can protect and further New World Order interests.

23) Members and leaders of the one world government will be appointed by the director of the New World Order.

24) Infiltrate into all classes and levels of society and government for the purpose of teaching the youth in the schools theories and principles known to be false.

25) Create and use national and international laws to destroy civilization.

----------


## Volitzer

This about sums it up.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> As far Dodd's characterization of what was really going on versus what the public saw with Reagan... it's kind of mind blowing really.  Two totally different worlds.  In hindsight, knowing what we know now, I wonder if Reagan actually believed the BS he was selling to the public?


What I don't get here is that Griffin was a member of JBS, which was started around 1959.  So, did Griffin *NOT* tell JBS about the Dodd interview and its contents, as JBS had membership around the country in the 1980's, and was running local meetings and possessed distribution channels for other material that is was producing.  If Griffin would have told JBS the contents of this interview, at least its transcript, could have gotten out.  If Griffin *DID* tell JBS about the interview, or if JBS execs knew about it through some other means, then why did JBS *NOT* distribute the transcripts or a summary of its key findings?

The technique that I am alluding to here is called *Gatekeeping*.  This is where information is deliberately contained and secured so that the information can be moderated, filtered, or sanitized before its release; or the release delayed; or perhaps totally censored.

What I am saying is that if there was no good reason to keep the information contained, but numerous important reasons for it to be released and widely distributed through an existing JBS network, then what possible reasonable explanation could there be other than Gatekeeping?

We've had someone here ask Griffin that question, and his reply has been posted in this thread.  Perhaps one of the JBS members here can also pose that same question to JBS execs (When did you or JBS know about the Dodd interview and when did you decide to release its information?)

I think its only fair for people who follow these movements to know whether they are Gatekeepers or not.




> The New World Orders 25 Tenets.


Thanks for that list.

----------


## FrankRep

> What I don't get here is that Griffin was a member of JBS, which was started around 1959.  So, did Griffin *NOT* tell JBS about the Dodd interview and its contents, as JBS had membership around the country in the 1980's, and was running local meetings and possessed distribution channels for other material that is was producing.  If Griffin would have told JBS the contents of this interview, at least its transcript, could have gotten out.  If Griffin *DID* tell JBS about the interview, or if JBS execs knew about it through some other means, then why did JBS *NOT* distribute the transcripts or a summary of its key findings?


It's common JBS knowledge that the Tax free foundations are corrupt. Norman Dodd's interview was awesome, but it's only a confirmation of the common knowledge.

G. Edward Griffin: "The truth is that there was no general interest in this interview until several years after I recorded it."

This still rings true right now. Most people out there just don't care, except for the truth seekers who love liberty.

InterestedParticipant, you're freaking out about something minor.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> It's common JBS knowledge that the Tax free foundations are corrupt. Norman Dodd's interview was awesome, but it's only a confirmation of the common knowledge.


This is a minor point.  

The much larger point is that the White House was collaborating with Wall Street to merge the Soviet and US systems.  And this was known at the time that Reagan was spouting-out the "evil empire" propaganda.

This is no small matter.

----------


## FrankRep

> This is a minor point.  
> 
> The much larger point is that the White House was collaborating with Wall Street to merge the Soviet and US systems.  And this was known at the time that Reagan was spouting-out the "evil empire" propaganda.
> 
> This is no small matter.


We knew this in the late 50s.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> We knew this in the late 50s.


What we had was testimony in the Reece Committee that was buried.  Dodd was obviously trying to get the information out as he was in the last years of his life.  He obviously trusted that this interview would result in wider and timely dissemination of  this information.  But the information was buried.

Look, controlled opposition groups and actors are not successful unless their techniques are subtle and undetectable.  If their tactics are NOT subtle then they risk exposure.  To simply scoff at my discussion and dismiss this enormous data point is to be absolutely blind to one of their main functions, and that is to control the distribution of sensitive information.  

If one is unable to grasp the significance of this discussion, then one will almost never uncover a controlled opposition actor and is at high risk of falling victim to their techniques.

There are many other techniques utilized as well, but they are far more subtle than this obvious example I have brought to the attention of this forum, which merely seems to scoff or ignore its significance.  No wonder we are so easy to control.

----------


## FrankRep

> What we had was testimony in the Reece Committee that was buried.  Dodd was obviously trying to get the information out as he was in the last years of his life.  He obviously trusted that this interview would result in wider and timely dissemination of  this information.  But the information was buried.


People could just read the Normon Dodd reports

Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations (1954)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3768227/Do...undations-1954

The Dodd report to the American people (Unknown Binding)
by Norman Dodd
http://www.amazon.com/Dodd-report-Am...5347053&sr=1-4

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> People could just read the Normon Dodd reports
> 
> Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations (1954)
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/3768227/Do...undations-1954
> 
> The Dodd report to the American people (Unknown Binding)
> by Norman Dodd
> http://www.amazon.com/Dodd-report-Am...5347053&sr=1-4


How would they have known about them in the 1980's?

Perhaps if Griffin & JBS didn't sit on the interview, people would have contacted the Library of Congress and inquired into the reports.  But because the release of the interview was delayed 20 years, people didn't know about the committee, it's report, or the significance of its findings.

One reason why controlled opposition groups are established is so that people will become committed to the group more than the truth, and then the pyschological forces associated with cognitive dissonance creates a barrier that the individual must overcome in order to turn away from the group dynamic.  These techniques were developed by the Tavistock Institute and can be found in discussion of the *"Tavistock Method"* (search it!).

----------


## FrankRep

> Perhaps if Griffin & JBS didn't sit on the interview, people would have contacted the Library of Congress and inquired into the reports.  But because the release of the interview was delayed 20 years, people didn't know about the committee, it's report, or the significance of its findings.


Normon Dodd, himself, could have written a detailed book about it and done some interviews with journalists and reporters to get the word out.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Normon Dodd, himself, could have written a detailed book about it and done some interviews with journalists and reporters to get the word out.


In your effort to blindly defend your "group" and mitigate your cognitive dissonance you fail to acknowledge the actions of those in control of your "group."

It is NOT relevant that Norman Dodd did or did not write a book.  What is relevant in this discussion is the actions of JBS & Griffin... and they sat on this critical information.

There is absolutely nothing you can say or do now that will justify or explain this away.  It cannot be dismissed.  It exposes a major contradiction.

----------


## FrankRep

> In your effort to blindly defend your "group" and mitigate your cognitive dissonance you fail to acknowledge the actions of those in control of your "group."
> 
> It is NOT relevant that Norman Dodd did or did not write a book.  What is relevant in this discussion is the actions of JBS & Griffin... and they sat on this critical information.
> 
> There is absolutely nothing you can say or do now that will justify or explain this away.  It cannot be dismissed.  It exposes a major contradiction.


You're attacking Griffin and the JBS on a silly point about one video. You're disregarding all the many years of hard work they've done since the 1950s in exposing the corruption going on in the world and in the United States.

You can have the last word. This will be my last reply.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You're attacking Griffin and the JBS on a silly point about one video. You're disregarding all the many years of hard work they've done since the 1950s in exposing the corruption going on in the world and in the United States.
> 
> You can have the last word. This will be my last reply.


I will refer interested readers to my signature block.

----------


## sevin

> Bottom line, if you're in the JBS bubble, there is no way you'll be able to see or expose the bubble.  Until you're willing to take steps on your own, you will never know.  But if you were  a social engineer designing Huxley's Brave New World, where people do not see the controls in-place, then would you not include a JBS-like organization in your framework?


Is this kinda like The Matrix Reloaded where Neo finds out that what he thought was the free city of Zion is actually just a way to control those who would fight the matrix?

BTW, this thread rocks. 

I'm not too sure about you, InterestedParticipant, but your point of view is very interesting and I'm enjoying watching this discussion. I've bookmarked those links you posted.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Is this kinda like The Matrix Reloaded where Neo finds out that what he thought was the free city of Zion is actually just a way to control those who would fight the matrix?
> 
> BTW, this thread rocks. 
> 
> I'm not too sure about you, InterestedParticipant, but your point of view is very interesting and I'm enjoying watching this discussion. I've bookmarked those links you posted.


Well, I'm not sure I would use a Hollywood Movie for any understanding, as they are merely mechanisms of Cultural Control.  But yes, it is of a similar concept to the Matrix Zion reference.

What I am trying to communicate, more than anything, is that society is engineered to control the masses such that the masses do not realize that they are being controlled.  One doesn't have to go to conspiracy books or listen to Patriot radio to find this out.  All one has to do is read the writings of the establishments own academics and institutions.  The hard part is learning how to read their double speak, as they almost write in a code that is specifically designed to be interpreted differently by the public.

In any event, it is not difficult to find the material anymore, it's everywhere.  Tavistock Institute and the Frankfurt School on Social Research designed much of the cultural controls that are in place now, such as Political Correctness (i.e. creating and using victim groups to alter society).  Tavistock created, and perhaps still creates, many of our TV shows and Movies, like Norman Lear's All in the Family with Archie Bunker.  Standford Research Institute (SRI), University of Michigan, Harvard all have departments that churn out issue papers to shape the thinking of intellectuals.  The list goes on and on and on.... it's a huge system designed for massive social control, and it is all around us and it is a normal part of our society.

As far as foundations and fake opposition groups, well, I can't think of a single large foundation or nonprofit organization that is NOT fake... or controlled.  Just read Rene Wormser's Foundations, Their Power and their Influence.

Also, I cannot think of a single media operative who has audience and is not controlled.  Now, I'm not just talking mainstream media as they would like for you to believe, I am talking extended media, such as all the patriot radio stations that forum members here listen to.

The bottom line is, that the public is on its own.

P.S. If people here are so convinced that JBS & Griffin are not operatives, then please suggest to me organizations and operatives who they think ARE controlled opposition.  Can you think of any that aren't totally obvious?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Did you see this post?  Shows that the White House was pushing for Global Government with business leaders in 1972

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196427

----------


## Feenix566

{see next post}

----------


## Feenix566

> Well, I'm not sure I would use a Hollywood Movie for any understanding, as they are merely mechanisms of Cultural Control.  But yes, it is of a similar concept to the Matrix Zion reference.
> 
> What I am trying to communicate, more than anything, is that society is engineered to control the masses such that the masses do not realize that they are being controlled.  One doesn't have to go to conspiracy books or listen to Patriot radio to find this out.  All one has to do is read the writings of the establishments own academics and institutions.  The hard part is learning how to read their double speak, as they almost write in a code that is specifically designed to be interpreted differently by the public.
> 
> In any event, it is not difficult to find the material anymore, it's everywhere.  Tavistock Institute and the Frankfurt School on Social Research designed much of the cultural controls that are in place now, such as Political Correctness (i.e. creating and using victim groups to alter society).  Tavistock created, and perhaps still creates, many of our TV shows and Movies, like Norman Lear's All in the Family with Archie Bunker.  Standford Research Institute (SRI), University of Michigan, Harvard all have departments that churn out issue papers to shape the thinking of intellectuals.  The list goes on and on and on.... it's a huge system designed for massive social control, and it is all around us and it is a normal part of our society.
> 
> As far as foundations and fake opposition groups, well, I can't think of a single large foundation or nonprofit organization that is NOT fake... or controlled.  Just read Rene Wormser's Foundations, Their Power and their Influence.
> 
> Also, I cannot think of a single media operative who has audience and is not controlled.  Now, I'm not just talking mainstream media as they would like for you to believe, I am talking extended media, such as all the patriot radio stations that forum members here listen to.
> ...


There's one key fact that you're not factoring into your thought process: everyone involved thinks they're doing the right thing. Union leaders actually think that they're doing what's best for society. Military contractors think they're doing what's best for our soldiers, our country, and the world. The AARP thinks it's doing what's best for old people, and the world in general. Zionists think they're doing what's best for the middle east. The Federal Reserve board members think they're providing the world with a stable financial infrastructure.

All these groups base their thought processes on the underlying assumption that the special group they're advocating for is morally superior to whatever opposition they're facing. For example, the UAW leaders sincerely believe that auto workers are morally superior to management, because they're the ones who perform the actual task of putting together automobiles. Members of the Federal Reserve think that bankers are doing the world a favor by lending them fake money. Zionists think that Jews are morally superior to Arabs. The AARP thinks that old people are morally superior to everyone else because they're old.

It's not a mind control game. It all stems from the simple fact that these political pressure groups sincerely believe that they're doing the world a favor by advocating for the interests of morally superior people. And they've managed to convince the rest of the world that they're right, mainly because there isn't anyone telling them otherwise.

This void of logical opposition isn't caused by some huge conspiracy to keep libertarians off the air. It's simply caused by the fact that no one has a personal vested interest in explaining to the masses that they're being ripped off. Political pressure groups are much more motivated than people like us who believe that everyone is entitled to equal treatment under the law. That's the problem.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> There's one key fact that you're not factoring into your thought process: everyone involved thinks they're doing the right thing. Union leaders actually think that they're doing what's best for society. Military contractors think they're doing what's best for our soldiers, our country, and the world. The AARP thinks it's doing what's best for old people, and the world in general. Zionists think they're doing what's best for the middle east. The Federal Reserve board members think they're providing the world with a stable financial infrastructure.
> 
> All these groups base their thought processes on the underlying assumption that the special group they're advocating for is morally superior to whatever opposition they're facing. For example, the UAW leaders sincerely believe that auto workers are morally superior to management, because they're the ones who perform the actual task of putting together automobiles. Members of the Federal Reserve think that bankers are doing the world a favor by lending them fake money. Zionists think that Jews are morally superior to Arabs. The AARP thinks that old people are morally superior to everyone else because they're old.
> 
> It's not a mind control game. It all stems from the simple fact that these political pressure groups sincerely believe that they're doing the world a favor by advocating for the interests of morally superior people. And they've managed to convince the rest of the world that they're right, mainly because there isn't anyone telling them otherwise.
> 
> This void of logical opposition isn't caused by some huge conspiracy to keep libertarians off the air. It's simply caused by the fact that no one has a personal vested interest in explaining to the masses that they're being ripped off. Political pressure groups are much more motivated than people like us who believe that everyone is entitled to equal treatment under the law. That's the problem.


It's pretty obvious that you have not studied the Frankfurt School of Social Research and are simply speaking from what appears to be a logical perspective. It's obvious that you are intelligent, but one MUST understand their techniques to see the picture, I don't think it can be deduced through logic no matter how intelligent the observer. 

But some questions that one should ask themselves...
How do you think all those groups were peeled off?How do you think all of their frames of reference were created?Why do some humans think they are better than others?Where are the forces that create these social conditions coming from?
I'd argue that you're not thinking big enough.

But with respect to these groups that you mention, their leadership is filled with sociopathic personalities.  That's how its run, that's how the followership is manipulated and controlled.  That's why the followership thinks they are doing the right thing.  It's all in the framing of the issues, the framing of reality... and this framing is socially engineered.

With respect to the Federal Reserve Board, they know exactly what they are doing, there is no false pretense there.  You are assuming that all actors:
have benevolent intentions;and that these benevolent intentions are directed toward the public.
Well, those assumptions are FALSE!  Their constituency is NOT the public, their constituency is an International establishment of elite actors.  It is this constituency that the FED has loyalty toward, and it is this group that seeks control over the public.  We're the damn enemy!

As far as keeping Libertarians off the air, that was never my argument.  What I am saying is that it is important to create groups who's thinking can be assimilated, and then to use media, and other group management techniques, to control these groups.  It is the individual that is much more difficult to control.  The Tavistock Model discusses just this, how to manipulate the group, which is what is used today through group leaders and change agents, amongst other methods.  So, to the contrary, it is necessary to group Libertarians, and then to place actors on radio to manipulate and manage their thinking.

I would agree with you that NO one has "a personal vested interest in explaining to the masses that they're being ripped off."  But why is this the case?  I would argue that this is the case because anyone who has this vested interest is not supported by the foundations, is not given any media airtime by anyone in the extended media (including patriot radio) and is ruthlessly attacked if they actually gain any traction.  The only actors and groups that are allowed to succeed are groups that are either controlled or surreptitiously serve the establishments agenda.  That's all.  Everything else is suppressed.

But to you point that this is NOT a conspiracy.  Well that simply could not be further from the truth.  This conspiracy of the elite against the public has been going on throughout history, it is nothing new.  The only thing that has changed is the technology that the elite have at their disposal and the advancement of their techniques, such that the public cannot even detect them anymore.  The social science is so damn good that people don't even recognize it, or know it exists.

P.S. The Matrix movies fulfilled a number of cultural purposes depending on the target audience. But on one level, it was meant to mock the public, that being one of the roles of the "entertainment industry."  It's called mocking-the-victim, which confirms the psychopath's power over them.  Just reread the discussions between Winston and O'Brien in 1984, toward the end of the book/movie... that provides real insight.

----------


## Deborah K

> I think he answered that.   And that part is plausible, imo.  If one wanted to control both sides of an argument, you would make sure you had control of the information.  By Griffin interviewing Dodd, Dodd would think that he had at least gotten out the information and if someone else approached him to do same, he would likely turn them away, because it had already been done.  Then, those wanting to control could edit or sit on the information that they now had in their hands.
> 
> At least, that's what I'm taking his point to be.
> 
> Note:  I'm not saying I agree, because I don't know.
> 
> EDIT:  Actually, this is the same type of thing that Carroll Quigley (Clinton's mentor) discussed in Tragedy and Hope, with regard to both major political parties being controlled.  When the people get tired of one of the parties, the parties are switched out, but the same agenda continues.  We think there has been a change, when in reality nothing has changed.




If Dodd was hell-bent on getting his story out there, I doubt he would have just sat back and accepted that Griffin was going to sit on it.  If I were Dodd and a few months had passed, and nothing had been aired, or somehow disseminated, I would have taken other measures to get the word out.

I think this whole claim that JBS and Griffin are "controlled opposition" is just paranoia run amok.  

Griffin is ignored by the MSM.  I know this because I have been trying for months to get him interviewed.  He believes 9-11 was inside, he also believes there are cures for cancer that big pharma stamps out.  There is no way this man is C.O.  Anyone who has watched "An idea whose time has come" and thinks this man is C.O. is just paranoid beyond tin foil usage.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> If Dodd was hell-bent on getting his story out there, I doubt he would have just sat back and accepted that Griffin was going to sit on it.  If I were Dodd and a few months had passed, and nothing had been aired, or somehow disseminated, I would have taken other measures to get the word out.
> 
> I think this whole claim that JBS and Griffin are "controlled opposition" is just paranoia run amok.  
> 
> Griffin is ignored by the MSM.  I know this because I have been trying for months to get him interviewed.  He believes 9-11 was inside, he also believes there are cures for cancer that big pharma stamps out.  There is no way this man is C.O.  *Anyone who has watched "An idea whose time has come" and thinks this man is C.O. is just paranoid beyond tin foil usage*.


Interesting "analysis."

Dodd was approximately 83 years old at the time of this interview, do you really think he had the energy to follow-up with "G" to see if he was getting out the interview or had plans to sit on it.   It's a pretty weak argument to suggest that it was somehow Dodd's responsibility to get the Griffin interview distributed.

Anyway, you are trying to excuse the behavior of someone who was sitting on a bombshell of information.  As I've already shown in this thread, Reagan was traveling the world talking about the Soviet Evil Empire and "G" gets thrown in his lap a highly respected man, who while working for Congress, gets told the Soviet Union and the USA are to be merged.  If we are to be merged, then how can we be enemies, unless one or both pieces of information are false.  So what does Griffin do with this bombshell, he sits on the information for 20 years.  

I then bring this up as an issue and your response is that anyone who bring this up "is just paranoid beyond tin foil usage."  I find your position untenable and outrageous. Look, you said you worked with Griffin so you obviously have an emotional bond so  you feel obliged to protect him.  But this is certainly something that he should be answerable for, and I still have heard nothing satisfies the 2-decade delay of such important information.

Finally, I'm more than disgusted with the multiple attempts in this thread to find fault with Dodd.  That poor man went through enough, having been blackballed by the financial industry for his work with the Reece Commission.  The man always did the right thing, even when it meant great personal sacrifice.  He attempted to get the information out by granting an interview prior to his death, only to be once again betrayed, this time by the interviewer.

----------


## Deborah K

> How would they have known about them in the 1980's?
> 
> Perhaps if Griffin & JBS didn't sit on the interview, people would have contacted the Library of Congress and inquired into the reports.  But because the release of the interview was delayed 20 years, people didn't know about the committee, it's report, or the significance of its findings.
> 
> One reason why controlled opposition groups are established is so that people will become committed to the group more than the truth, and then the pyschological forces associated with cognitive dissonance creates a barrier that the individual must overcome in order to turn away from the group dynamic.  These techniques were developed by the Tavistock Institute and can be found in discussion of the *"Tavistock Method"* (search it!).


Did it ever occur to you that your study of this method has made you paranoid?




> I will start another thread that introduces the larger issue of Controlled Opposition operatives and how they work, as this thread has become mired in the defense of certain operatives who have risen to "Idol" status, and hence, the discussion has lost focus and therefore its significance. I do not want to get into childish squabbles about the authenticity of one's favorite personality, for then we are simply dealing with emotionality. What is important to understand is the subtle techniques that are used by controlled opposition in order to gain an audience's trust and ultimately its loyalty, thereby influencing the audience's thinking and perception of reality as they lose their ability to critically evaluate their world on their own.


Your attempt at diminishing the argument of others who disagree with you by claiming that they are idol worshipers or childish reveals your inability to accept the fact that not everyone is convinced by your lame accusations.  And it isn't because we are stupid, or experiencing cognitive dissonance. 

Perhaps you are just parroting what you've read elsewhere and these are not original thoughts. In which case you would do well to study the accomplishements of your victims of libel more thoroughly and give some real evidence that they are controlled opposition.  Whatever the case may be, expect that there will be those of us who do have an understanding of C.O. and yet still do not believe your accusations.

I am still waiting for you to produce your claim that  his "public excuse about this is pathetic".  (referring to why he couldn't air the interview when he produced it).

----------


## Deborah K

> Interesting "analysis."
> 
> Dodd was approximately 83 years old at the time of this interview, do you really think he had the energy to follow-up with "G" to see if he was getting out the interview or had plans to sit on it.   It's a pretty weak argument to suggest that it was somehow Dodd's responsibility to get the Griffin interview distributed.
> 
> Anyway, you are trying to excuse the behavior of someone who was sitting on a bombshell of information.  As I've already shown in this thread, Reagan was traveling the world talking about the Soviet Evil Empire and "G" gets thrown in his lap a highly respected man, who while working for Congress, gets told the Soviet Union and the USA are to be merged.  If we are to be merged, then how can we be enemies, unless one or both pieces of information are false.  So what does Griffin do with this bombshell, he sits on the information for 20 years.  
> 
> I then bring this up as an issue and your response is that anyone who bring this up "is just paranoid beyond tin foil usage."  I find your position untenable and outrageous. Look, you said you worked with Griffin so you obviously have an emotional bond so  you feel obliged to protect him.  But this is certainly something that he should be answerable for, and I still have heard nothing satisfies the 2-decade delay of such important information.
> 
> Finally, I'm more than disgusted with the multiple attempts in this thread to find fault with Dodd.  That poor man went through enough, having been blackballed by the financial industry for his work with the Reece Commission.  The man always did the right thing, even when it meant great personal sacrifice.  He attempted to get the information out by granting an interview prior to his death, only to be once again betrayed, this time by the interviewer.



Who is finding faut with Dodd????  The man is a hero.  I don't have an emotional attachment to Griffin.  I respect and admire him as a person and his work.  He doesn't deserve this trashing that you are doing of him and you should be ashamed of yourself.  You are coming to your own conclusions based on your own paranoid paradigm.  You have no evidence, and you refuse to provide any.  Case closed.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Did it ever occur to you that your study of this method has made you paranoid?


No, you are untrained at spotting the techniques of disinformation operatives.  But that's okay, so is 99.99999% of the population.

Rather than challenging me, you would be wise to ask questions and learn, as you seem to consistently work against your own best interest.

Look, you are not an objective observer here, nor do you possess the skills to make an proper analysis.  This is not some ego trip, as you continue to insinuate, just a simple objective observation that is accurate.

----------


## Deborah K

> no, you are untrained at spotting the techniques of disinformation operatives.  But that's okay, so is 99.99999% of the population.
> 
> Rather than challenging me, you would be wise to ask questions and learn, as you seem to consistently work against your own best interest.
> 
> Look, you are not an objective observer here, nor do you possess the skills to make an proper analysis.  This is not some ego trip, as you continue to insinuate, just a simple objective observation that is accurate.


p  r  o  v  i  d  e  

                     e  v  i  d  e  n  c  e ! ! ! !

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> p  r  o  v  i  d  e  
> 
>                      e  v  i  d  e  n  c  e ! ! ! !


The Cold War was biggest manufactured dialectic of the 20th Century, perhaps the largest dialectic ever manufactured.  Trillions of dollars were spent on the Cold War, and it affected every living human being during the period.

Someone receives proof that the dialectic is manufactured, and that the the end goal is radically different, which is actually a synthesis of the nations involved in this supposed Cold War.  So, what does this person do, this person who receives this information that would change the world, he waits 20 years before he releases it.

Furthermore, this is not just some member of the public who obtains and sits on this information. This is someone who promotes themselves as a journalist... but not just any kind of journalist, a journalist who specializes in reporting stories that cannot be reported elsewhere.  In fact, by the time of the interview Griffin had released numerous documentaries, working with other "activist journalists" and "researchers" such as Alan Stang, Bill McIlhany, and William Jasper.

But what's fascinating here is that Griffin's documentary's focused on exposing the Communist threat.  So, while he knew from Dodd's interview that the Communist threat was a manufactured and fake dialectic, Griffin was producing documentaries that promoted the dialectic, while simultaneous sitting on Dodd's information.

If people can't see that there is a reason to be concerned here, then they have no hope of ever emerging from the Cave that Plato discussed.

----------


## ourlongroad

> The Cold War was biggest manufactured dialectic of the 20th Century, perhaps the largest dialectic ever manufactured.  Trillions of dollars were spent on the Cold War, and it affected every living human being during the period.
> 
> Someone receives proof that the dialectic is manufactured, and that the the end goal is radically different, which is actually a synthesis of the nations involved in this supposed Cold War.  So, what does this person do, this person who receives this information that would change the world, he waits 20 years before he releases it.
> 
> Furthermore, this is not just some member of the public who obtains and sits on this information. This is someone who promotes themselves as a journalist... but not just any kind of journalist, a journalist who specializes in reporting stories that cannot be reported elsewhere.  In fact, by the time of the interview Griffin had released numerous documentaries, working with other "activist journalists" and "researchers" such as Alan Stang, Bill McIlhany, and William Jasper.
> 
> But what's fascinating here is that Griffin's documentary's focused on exposing the Communist threat.  So, while he knew from Dodd's interview that the Communist threat was a manufactured and fake dialectic, Griffin was producing documentaries that promoted the dialectic, while simultaneous sitting on Dodd's information.
> 
> If people can't see that there is a reason to be concerned here, then they have no hope of ever emerging from the Cave that Plato discussed.


Didn't Griffin, Stang, McIlhany, and Jasper all come out of the early days of JBS?

----------


## mczerone

> I can prove my case to another who understand IO (Information Operations).  It's like trying to demonstrate that a complex superstructure is inherently unstable to someone who has no awareness of engineering models and no desire to do some basic learning about them.  If you are unwilling to do at least rudimentary learning on your own than we cannot engage in a conversation because every sentence I use will require an entire separate lesson plan.
> 
> I've pointed to research material in this thread. I know that I and others have presented research material on psychological warfare and Information Operations in other threads many times since this forum began.  Until you want to invest some time to at least learn the language and understand the basics, then we simply cannot have a conversation.
> 
> The proof is in the techniques that are used.  As they are subtle, one must learn how to observe them.  Until then, you will exist relying on others to tell you who and what to believe.


People were asking to be taught: a process that requires some input of new information.  Generally this process is easiest and quickest when a person can communicate the lesson or give a specific resource, rather than some random keyword.  

I don't really care about JBS, Ed Griffin, 911Truth, UFOs, Illuminati, or any other "OMG you have to look at who is controlling things behind the scenes" theory: ultimately it boils down to "look how much research I've done on these questionable leads, it must mean something" without any proof or any suggestions on what to do about it.

I'm only interested in living a voluntary life, I don't care what secret clubs do, or what they are planning.  As long as they don't use force or fraud, what is the problem with trying to gain power and influence?  And to this point, what is the only mechanism for exerting force and fraud with legitimacy?  Government.  So the only solution?  Take away the coveted toy - don't give your consent to Government and the 'secret evil societies' will be forced to dissolve with neither a revenue stream nor a pulpit to focus the power onto the masses.

Please don't expect that people will ever come to the same conclusions that you have, especially if you refuse to teach them.  But also, please take your convictions and put them to good use: not to "expose" anything, but as motivation to declare your independence from the only fraudulent organization involved in any conspiracy theory: the government.

----------


## Carole

"In other cases, we started movements that became so noticeable because of the heavy activity of our members, that the Insiders could no longer ignore our efforts and, instead, tried to shut down our campaigns by denigrating them in the media.

"Examples would be the impeachment of President Clinton, the blocking of the North American Union, and the swing of the opinion of the American people against the United Nations. In none of these victories did demonstrations play a role. Demonstrations polarize; they do not educate. They tend to be confrontational, not lending themselves to an atmosphere of friendly intercourse and exchange."

All in all this was a very good article written with a good deal of common sense.

The above second paragraph, however, I would question. Although the impeachment may have embarrassed Clinton, it did nothing to expose his ultimate faulty agenda and was a waste of time and money that reduced the ability of many Americans to take some members of Congress seriously. Clinton seems to have come out the better in that effort. 

The denigration of the United Nations must always be a worthy cause even though it is so obvious over the decades what an empty suit it has been and how much damage it has done in so many ways with its agendas. Still, there IS a great deal in that organization that needs to be exposed, things I am sure few Americans know of, nor understand.

The NAU, of course, needs to be exposed for what it truly is, however, and in that I find no fault, but in the past fifteen or so years since its existence has come to light for many, likely first through NAFTA, it appears that very FEW Americans have a clue about it. Where is the progress? I must say that many of us who have been aware of it have gleaned our information completely on our own. What exactly has JBS actually done please? I stand to be corrected if I wrongly suggest that I can see nothing you have done on that front.

With NO sarcasm intended, please enlighten me.

Lastly, over the decades, I think I could have appreciated JBS more had I seen evidence that it had been able to protect its own interests better, and influence the political scene, done more to disqualify before the elections all those poor candidates who have been paraded before the American people and who had nothing resembling a philosophy of liberty, freedom, and adherence to the Constitution. 

Forgive me if I seem harsh. Oh, but then I AM angry.  

I thank you and JBS for the good things you have accomplished. Obviously, I need to catch up on my reading.   Again, it was a very good article with lots of good information.

----------


## Carole

Totally DITTO!!!!!  So glad to find someone else who GETS it!!!

There will be two classes of people - the HAVES  (elites)and the HAVE NOTS (slaves). We are being regressed daily toward an old European feudal system.

Won't it be fun when we own nothing and must work for our supper?

Thanks for the post.

----------


## Carole

Truly, psychoanalysts have done a whole lot to screw up the world.

I have found that I am much more an individualist, a loner even, and have always felt uncomfortable tyring to accomplish anything useful in a group setting. In fact, I do not like working in a group. 

There will be no place for me in the NWO.

----------


## Deborah K

> The NAU, of course, needs to be exposed for what it truly is, however, and in that I find no fault, but in the past fifteen or so years since its existence has come to light for many, likely first through NAFTA, it appears that very FEW Americans have a clue about it. Where is the progress? I must say that many of us who have been aware of it have gleaned our information completely on our own. What exactly has JBS actually done please? I stand to be corrected if I wrongly suggest that I can see nothing you have done on that front.


Here is an article from JBS regarding the NAU:  http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-...tractive-union

In the Oct. 02, 2006 issue of their magazine: The New American,  several articles were written on the North American Union.  There used to be a pdf file for it but I can't seem to locate it.  However, I have that particular issue in front of me.

I would say that JBS has done an excellent job of getting the word out about the NAU over the past few years.  I would also say that Dr. Paul seems to support them as well as can be seen here:

http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=849

----------


## FrankRep

> Here is an article from JBS regarding the NAU:  http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-...tractive-union
> 
> In the Oct. 02, 2006 issue of their magazine: The New American,  several articles were written on the North American Union.  There used to be a pdf file for it but I can't seem to locate it.  However, I have that particular issue in front of me.
> 
> I would say that JBS has done an excellent job of getting the word out about the NAU over the past few years.  I would also say that Dr. Paul seems to support them as well as can be seen here:
> 
> http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=849


*The New American*

Merger in the Making: North American Union Edition of The New American, Oct. 15, '07, 48pp

http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/...n-oct/download


From Scribd:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/878151/The...an-NAU-Edition

----------


## Deborah K

> Did you see this post?  Shows that the White House was pushing for Global Government with business leaders in 1972
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196427


It started well before that:  http://www.channelingreality.com/NAU/NAU_Timeline.pdf

page 5 has the timeline

----------


## Deborah K

Thanks FrankRep

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Didn't Griffin, Stang, McIlhany, and Jasper all come out of the early days of JBS?


Yes, and all continue to perpetuate the Communism vs. Capitalism dialectic, which is obviously a false frame, as shown by Norman Dodd, the 1934 Carnegie report and the 1972 White House.

----------


## FrankRep

> Yes, and all continue to perpetuate the Communism vs. Capitalism dialectic, which is obviously a false frame, as shown by Norman Dodd, the 1934 Carnegie report and the 1972 White House.


Communism vs. Capitalism dialectic is common knowledge. The people you are attacking have trying to teach the public about this manipulation. 

The Capitalist Conspiracy: An Inside view of International Banking Written and narrated by G. Edward Griffin (1960's)

The Capitalist Conspiracy

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> It started well before that:  http://www.channelingreality.com/NAU/NAU_Timeline.pdf
> 
> page 5 has the timeline


Who is Debra K Niwa (the author of this document you link to)?

----------


## Deborah K

> The Cold War was biggest manufactured dialectic of the 20th Century, perhaps the largest dialectic ever manufactured.  Trillions of dollars were spent on the Cold War, and it affected every living human being during the period.
> 
> Someone receives proof that the dialectic is manufactured, and that the the end goal is radically different, which is actually a synthesis of the nations involved in this supposed Cold War.  So, what does this person do, this person who receives this information that would change the world, he waits 20 years before he releases it.
> 
> Furthermore, this is not just some member of the public who obtains and sits on this information. This is someone who promotes themselves as a journalist... but not just any kind of journalist, a journalist who specializes in reporting stories that cannot be reported elsewhere.  In fact, by the time of the interview Griffin had released numerous documentaries, working with other "activist journalists" and "researchers" such as Alan Stang, Bill McIlhany, and William Jasper.
> 
> But what's fascinating here is that Griffin's documentary's focused on exposing the Communist threat.  So, while he knew from Dodd's interview that the Communist threat was a manufactured and fake dialectic, Griffin was producing documentaries that promoted the dialectic, while simultaneous sitting on Dodd's information.
> 
> If people can't see that there is a reason to be concerned here, then they have no hope of ever emerging from the Cave that Plato discussed.


Hind sight is always conveniently 20/20.  Griffin has stated that there was no interest in the interview.  I find that plausible because even today, with full access to the internet, which he clearly did not have access to in 1982, while I have 'shouted from the rooftops' about global governance, I still can't get my local media or cable news interested enough in exposing the agenda, even though I can provide very thorough and extensive research on the matter.  I can't get the sheeple interested either.

I am going to ask you for the third time: provide your source that permitted you to claim that Griffin's public excuse for sitting on the story was "pathetic".    

Then explain how it benefits Griffin to release it now.  Explain how a man, who lives a relatively humble existance - as compared to the elitists that he is supposedly protecting - is benefiting from all of this.  He would have to be a 'useful idiot' to be willing to comply as controlled opposition.  Your theory (which is all this is since you have no proof) doesn't add up.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Hind sight is always conveniently 20/20.  Griffin has stated that there was no interest in the interview.  I find that plausible because even today, with full access to the internet, which he clearly did not have access to in 1982, while I have 'shouted from the rooftops' about global governance, I still can't get my local media or cable news interested enough in exposing the agenda, even though I can provide very thorough and extensive research on the matter.  I can't get the sheeple interested either.
> 
> I am going to ask you for the third time: provide your source that permitted you to claim that Griffin's public excuse for sitting on the story was "pathetic".    
> 
> Then explain how it benefits Griffin to release it now.  Explain how a man, who lives a relatively humble existance - as compared to the elitists that he is supposedly protecting - is benefiting from all of this.  He would have to be a 'useful idiot' to be willing to comply as controlled opposition.  Your theory (which is all this is since you have no proof) doesn't add up.


I respectfully request that you no longer communicate with me in this forum, as I find your posts to be diversionary.  You've explained your opinion repeatedly but offer no additional substance while asking more questions that are of little marginal value.

----------


## Deborah K

> I respectfully request that you no longer communicate with me in this forum, as I find your posts to be diversionary.  You've explained your opinion repeatedly but offer no additional substance while asking more questions that are of little marginal value.


Request denied as long as you continue to attempt to derail Griffin's work.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Added to Ignore List.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> People were asking to be taught: a process that requires some input of new information.  Generally this process is easiest and quickest when a person can communicate the lesson or give a specific resource, rather than some random keyword.  
> 
> I don't really care about JBS, Ed Griffin, 911Truth, UFOs, Illuminati, or any other "OMG you have to look at who is controlling things behind the scenes" theory: ultimately it boils down to "look how much research I've done on these questionable leads, it must mean something" without any proof or any suggestions on what to do about it.
> 
> I'm only interested in living a voluntary life, I don't care what secret clubs do, or what they are planning.  As long as they don't use force or fraud, what is the problem with trying to gain power and influence?  And to this point, what is the only mechanism for exerting force and fraud with legitimacy?  Government.  So the only solution?  Take away the coveted toy - don't give your consent to Government and the 'secret evil societies' will be forced to dissolve with neither a revenue stream nor a pulpit to focus the power onto the masses.
> 
> Please don't expect that people will ever come to the same conclusions that you have, especially if you refuse to teach them.  But also, please take your convictions and put them to good use: not to "expose" anything, but as motivation to declare your independence from the only fraudulent organization involved in any conspiracy theory: the government.


Isn't it ironic that you use the word "*teach*" while I stress the word "*learn*."  This probably illustrates the problem better than anything, as I find that those who are unwilling to see the Cave, or to exit it, are the same ones who want the World handed to them on a silver platter.  I have pointed to material in this thread, I have made statements that can be follow-up, it is now the other party's job to pursue this leads and embark on a path of exploration and learning.  One cannot teach you what you have to learn.  In fact, no teacher can teach the pupil, all they can do is create an environment where the pupil may learn on their own.  Ultimately, this is your responsibility, no one elses.

But what I find most offensive in this thread is that it seems to have attracted those on this forum most unwilling to learn.  What I see here are people inside the Cave, with their fingers in their ears as they scream as the top of their lungs, so as to avoid having to absorb anything that might not fit in with their existing view of reality.

The good news is that I see many people in these forums asking reasonable questions, staying objective, researching the appropriate material and growing.  In fact, there are many more who are taking this path than who are not.  Some inevitably will be left in the Cave as more and more exit.  I'll be on the outside with those who wish to join me.

----------


## FrankRep

InterestedParticipant, your repeated attacks and accusations on everyone with no proof leads me to believe you're just a trouble maker.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant, your repeated attacks and accusations on everyone with no proof leads me to believe you're just a trouble maker.


Your attempt to make this thread about me or my posts is quite fascinating.  But it is not me or my posts that anyone should be concerned about, it is those who have extensive mindshare and abuse their positions to pretend they are one thing when they are in fact another.  

Withholding perhaps one of the most important interviews of the 20th Century for 20 years is simply not something anyone with good intentions would do.  I think even the most Cave-indoctrinated member of society can see that.  I did not do this, Griffin did this, and he apparently did it on his own.  I'm not sure why anyone here would excuse such behavior, other than those who also have mal-intentions.

Furthermore, JBS distributes an article that is supposed to assist its membership to understand controlled opposition.  However, they do not reveal all of the techniques employed, nor provide the audience with a comprehensive understanding of the field of I.O.  Hence, I am left to wonder if the information provided by JBS is useful at all.  For example, I wonder who one would discover to be a controlled opposition operative if they were to employ the lessons from the JBS article?  Is the information of any value in today's real world of sophistical social psychological techniques developed by some of the brightest minds over the last 100 years.

In general, at best, you are being under served.  At worst, you are being deliberately misled.  Either way, you will stay in the Cave where you can be controlled and pose not threat.  Further, you will attack anyone from outside the Cave who comes to help.  That is the psychology.  It's a trap, one of your own choosing, and one in which you obviously will never leave.

Read the material I have referenced.  The military has many documents explaining military use of I.O.  It's all public domain and there for anyone to read.  Embark upon a path that will reveal your own chains.  It's your choice.

But to accuse someone of trying to cause "trouble" because they have advanced understanding and recommend material that you have never heard of nor read is irresponsible at best, and down right insulting to the many here who are asking intelligent questions and pursuing their own learning and growth, slowly embarking from their lifelong Cave dwelling.

----------


## LibertyEagle

InterestedParticipant,  with all due respect, the JBS was writing an article, not a book.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant,  with all due respect, the JBS was writing an article, not a book.


Point taken.

However, I will counter by suggesting that one ask themselves why has the JBS not fully covered this topic?  The JBS has been in existing for 50 years, and they certainly would be able to assemble the resources and knowledge to educate their membership fully on the techniques being employed, as Tavistock and the Frankfurt Schools have been in existing since the early 1900's and these methods have been publicly know since before JBS' founding.

In today's world it is not enough to analyze what you are being told, one must understand what they are not being told and question why that is the case.

So, I ask these question, some of them repetitive.
Why was Dodd's interview withheld while our politicians were building up the Communist boogie man and the US Military Industrial Complex.Why did the JBS documentary crew continue to paint Communism as the boogie man AFTER the Dodd interview?Why has JBS not thoroughly address the art & science of disinformation techniques such that it's membership would have the ability to uncover them on their own?

I'm trying to get people to bust out of their bubble.  It's not easy, I know this.  In fact, it's traumatic for the individual.  But these are simple questions, stop rationalizing away the answers and start dealing with what is in front of you.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Well, they did do a lot of what you say you wished they had done.  I know they did, because of the books I have in my library and what I was taught by my parents.

----------


## FrankRep

> However, I will counter by suggesting that one ask themselves why has the JBS not fully covered this topic? The JBS has been in existing for 50 years, and they certainly would be able to assemble the resources and knowledge to educate their membership fully on the techniques being employed, as Tavistock and the Frankfurt Schools have been in existing since the early 1900's and these methods have been publicly know since before JBS' founding.


InterestedParticipant, have actually read every topic the JBS has ever written and given presentations about? They have decades and decades if information gathered that isn't on the Internet. That takes a large amount of manpower.

Are you volunteering to write some articles for the JBS?

----------


## Deborah K

> InterestedParticipant, your repeated attacks and accusations on everyone with no proof leads me to believe you're just a trouble maker.


No, he's not a trouble maker, he's enlightened and we're all ignorant and stuck in our caves.  

This guy is dishonest.  He accuses Griffin of giving a "pathetic" public response but provides no evidence of the so-called response.   

He continues to accuse Griffin of being controlled opposition never giving any proof, just making statements like this:




> Withholding perhaps one of the most important interviews of the 20th Century for 20 years is simply not something anyone with good intentions would do. I think even the most Cave-indoctrinated member of society can see that. I did not do this, Griffin did this, and he apparently did it on his own. *I'm not sure why anyone here would excuse such behavior, other than those who also have mal-intentions.*


So now I have mal-intentions.  Any proof of this?  Of course not.  If anyone has mal-intentions it's this guy.  He comes on threads like this one accusing Griffin and JBS of being controlled opposition with no proof other than his repetitive "you have to figure it out for yourself" responses.

Like I wrote before, that makes about as much sense as a prosecutor expecting the jury to come up with the evidence that the accused is guilty.

As long as he continues to accuse Griffin of being controlled opposition, without evidence, I'll go after him for it.  Someone needs to stand up to this bullsh&t.   Prove your claim or stfu.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant, have actually read every topic the JBS has ever written and given presentations about? They have decades and decades if information gathered that isn't on the Internet. That takes a large amount of manpower.
> 
> Are you volunteering to write some articles for the JBS?


I refuse to participate in COINTEL run operations, no matter how appealing they make themselves appear to the public.

----------


## FrankRep

> I refuse to participate in COINTEL run operations, no matter how appealing they make themselves appear to the public.


Fine. Name some organizations that aren't COINTEL.

----------


## Deborah K

> Fine. Name some organizations that aren't COINTEL.


What I don't get Frank, is why he thinks people and organizations like JBS and Griffin, who were at the forefront in alerting people to the Fed, the SPP, the CFR, etc. can possibly be counter intelligence?  I wonder if he thinks Ron Paul is C.O. since Dr. Paul has been railing on the Fed, NAFTA, etc. for many years.

I'm having a tin-foil hat moment.........what if turning the American people against the Fed was designed to eventually abolish it so that tptb can install the IMF in its place?

----------


## diggronpaul

> What I don't get Frank, is why he thinks people and organizations like JBS and Griffin, who were at the forefront in alerting people to the Fed, the SPP, the CFR, etc. can possibly be counter intelligence?  I wonder if he thinks Ron Paul is C.O. since Dr. Paul has been railing on the Fed, NAFTA, etc. for many years.
> 
> I'm having a tin-foil hat moment.........*what if turning the American people against the Fed was designed to eventually abolish it so that tptb can install the IMF in its place?*


I've been watching this thread with interest, and have resisted the urge to post.  But on this one (in red), Deb deserves the Gold Star!

Do we have Gold Stars on RPF?  If not, then we need to get them and start passing them out, because this revelation should be recognized and rewarded.  It is not easy for one to get to this point in their thinking, and it shows great progress.

Congratulations!

----------


## Carole

> Here is an article from JBS regarding the NAU:  http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-...tractive-union
> 
> In the Oct. 02, 2006 issue of their magazine: The New American,  several articles were written on the North American Union.  There used to be a pdf file for it but I can't seem to locate it.  However, I have that particular issue in front of me.
> 
> I would say that JBS has done an excellent job of getting the word out about the NAU over the past few years.  I would also say that Dr. Paul seems to support them as well as can be seen here:
> 
> http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=849


Good article but it is date April of this year. The horse has been out of the barn for nearly two decades!!!!!! It is nie to have a recent article in their magazine, but how large is therireadership. They are certainly preaching to the choir there. Did they reach a few thousand subscribers?

I am talking about the need to inform for the past twenty years, especially the past fifteen years. What did they have to say about NAFTA in the nineties?

ETC.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Good article but it is date April of this year. The horse has been out of the barn for nearly two decades!!!!!! It is nie to have a recent article in their magazine, but how large is therireadership. They are certainly preaching to the choir there. Did they reach a few thousand subscribers?
> 
> I am talking about the need to inform for the past twenty years, especially the past fifteen years. What did they have to say about NAFTA in the nineties?
> 
> ETC.


They've been railing against world government, the NAU, the NAFTA superhighway, the managed trade agreements, etc. from the very beginning.  In fact, they were talking about the plans for regionalization YEARS before the NAU ever was a blip in the MSM.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> What I don't get Frank, is why he thinks people and organizations like JBS and Griffin, who were at the forefront in alerting people to the Fed, the SPP, the CFR, etc. can possibly be counter intelligence?  I wonder if he thinks Ron Paul is C.O. since Dr. Paul has been railing on the Fed, NAFTA, etc. for many years.
> 
> I'm having a tin-foil hat moment.........*what if turning the American people against the Fed was designed to eventually abolish it so that tptb can install the IMF in its place?*


Yup.  My thoughts exactly.  In fact, the JBS recently had an article about this.  As I recall, Frank posted it here.

----------


## Carole

No offense Frank Rep, but you need to reach the masses, not just the choir.  An article in your magazine is not going to do that.

----------


## Carole

> I'm having a tin-foil hat moment.........what if turning the American people against the Fed was designed to eventually abolish it so that tptb can install the IMF in its place?


Wow! Excellent point!!!

So, abolishing the FED could not happen in a vacuum; it must be accompanied by a return to Congress of the power to mint money (hence our sovereignty) and by something (not necessarily the gold standard), that is designed to back our coin. Naturally, this would also demand that Congress can no longer spend freely because they would again be required to either tax for expenditures or show other manner of funding for their programs.

Hence, no more free lunch for Congress and they would again have to answer to the people. Smaller government would have to ensue.

In the meantime, the president is destroying our economy in order to make way for loss of sovereignty and world banking system, NAU, socio-fascism, loss of private property, etc........

----------


## LibertyEagle

> No offense Frank Rep, but you need to reach the masses, not just the choir.  An article in your magazine is not going to do that.


It's not *his* magazine.   

What are you saying?  They're just ONE of the organizations out there that are trying to spread the word.  Just like us, they're made up of people.  If we keep waiting for the leadership of some grand organization to do all our work for us, then I think we'll be waiting a very long time.  If we want the word spread, WE are going to have to do it.  We can join up with these organizations and do it through them, or we can do it on our own.  But, DO IT, we must.

----------


## FrankRep

> I'm having a tin-foil hat moment.........*what if turning the American people against the Fed was designed to eventually abolish it so that tptb can install the IMF in its place?*





> Yup.  My thoughts exactly.  In fact, the JBS recently had an article about this.  As I recall, Frank posted it here.


Here it is. 

*Confirmed: International Monetary Fund (IMF) set to be the World's Federal Reserve!*
The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF

William F. Jasper | The New American 
06 March 2009

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=182725

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Here it is. 
> 
> *Confirmed: International Monetary Fund (IMF) set to be the World's Federal Reserve!*
> The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF


And who wrote and published the book that started this slide of public discontent toward the FED?  A book that was published in 1994, only 1-year before GATT was passed and the mass exodus of American business began and the Global Economy took hold.

Think people, Think?  Connect the dots.

----------


## moostraks

> I've been watching this thread with interest, and have resisted the urge to post.  But on this one (in red), Deb deserves the Gold Star!
> 
> Do we have Gold Stars on RPF?  If not, then we need to get them and start passing them out, because this revelation should be recognized and rewarded.  It is not easy for one to get to this point in their thinking, and it shows great progress.
> 
> Congratulations!


 This is definately a case of be careful what you wish for...Playing chess means setting up your opponent to lose no matter where he turns and these folks aren't stupid.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> They've been railing against world government, the NAU, the NAFTA superhighway, the managed trade agreements, etc. from the very beginning.  In fact, they were talking about the plans for regionalization YEARS before the NAU ever was a blip in the MSM.


NAU has always been just a cover story for the moves to World Government.  It's a diversion. 

Download the pdf timeline that someone posted in this thread.  Notice how the GATT treaty is missing from that timeline.  That was deliberate, because GATT supports a move toward World Government and NOT a move toward a NAU.  These guys have been chumping you, making it look like they're fighting the good fight by fighting cardboard cutouts, just like the Brits used to do to the Germans in WWII with their cardboard planes on the ground.  Same game.

The controllers setup fake threats, and the fake-opposition fights the fake threats to make them seem real.... all along the public goes along thinking they are fighting the real threat and are being duped in the process.

I've posted references in other threads to the White House pushing for World Government in 1972 to top business leaders.  I'm curious if that's ever been presented through these channels.  I've also seen here the Carnagie 1934 plan to merge communism with capitalism.... has that been mentioned anywhere else?  If not, ask yourself why you have not learned of these things from your so called reliable and trustworthy sources?

----------


## Deborah K

> And who wrote and published the book that started this slide of public discontent toward the FED?  A book that was published in 1994, only 1-year before GATT was passed and the mass exodus of American business began and the Global Economy took hold.
> 
> Think people, Think?  Connect the dots.


Oh bur U ther!!!  Are you going to now claim that there's nothing wrong with the Fed and that they're victims of Griffin's book the Creature??

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> This is definately a case of be careful what you wish for...Playing chess means setting up your opponent to lose no matter where he turns and these folks aren't stupid.


They knew they were going to crash the FED no later than 1972, when the White House was publicly pushing for a Global Economy to major business leaders.  Any material that got any public tractions (ie publicity) was propaganda to support this goal.

----------


## Deborah K

> Here it is. 
> 
> *Confirmed: International Monetary Fund (IMF) set to be the World's Federal Reserve!*
> The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF
> 
> William F. Jasper | The New American 
> 06 March 2009
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=182725


And here I thought I was having a tin foil hat moment!  Actually, I wondered about this in this forum a while back.  I'll look it up.

We'll need to head this off at the pass.  If HR1207 passes, then Dr. Paul is going to need to expose this and present viable alternatives to abolishing the Fed.  I plan on writing him about it and calling his office.  I hope others will do the same.  We have to make a concerted effort to prevent the IMF from taking over for the Fed.

----------


## Deborah K

> And who wrote and published the book that started this slide of public discontent toward the FED?  A book that was published in 1994, only 1-year before GATT was passed and the mass exodus of American business began and the Global Economy took hold.
> 
> Think people, Think?  Connect the dots.


Ever heard of Eustace Mullins?  I doubt it because if you had, you'd know that he wrote a book called 'The Secrets of the Federal Reserve' back in 1952, over 40 years before Griffin's book!  You are clearly out to get Griffin!  I don't know what your problem is but I am now going to advise you to be careful.

----------


## diggronpaul

> Ever heard of Eustace Mullins?  I doubt it because if you had, you'd know that he wrote a book called 'The Secrets of the Federal Reserve' back in 1952, over 40 years before Griffin's book!  You are clearly out to get Griffin!  I don't know what your problem is but I am now going to advise you to be careful.


How does this forum handle threats?  I don't think I've ever seen one here before.

----------


## Deborah K

> How does this forum handle threats?  I don't think I've ever seen one here before.



It's not a threat.  It's a warning.  If someone were wrongly accusing me of being controlled opposition, and they were as relentless as this guy is, I'd take action.  Wouldn't you?  Griffin knows about this.  I'm not trying to imply that he intends to do anything about it.  I can't read his mind.  I just know what I'd be doing right about now....

----------


## LibertyEagle

> They knew they were going to crash the FED no later than 1972, when the White House was publicly pushing for a Global Economy to major business leaders.  Any material that got any public tractions (ie publicity) was propaganda to support this goal.


Yes, it's likely that they will push to move for a global FED, but that doesn't change the fact that the FED is rotten to the core.  So, what do you mean "propaganda"?  IT'S TRUE!  And if people understand why it's rotten, they're not going to like the idea of a global FED any more than they do a national FED.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> NAU has always been just a cover story for the moves to World Government.  It's a diversion.


Yes, I know and the JBS has been warning about world government LONG before the NAU was ever mentioned by the CFR.  And they were talking about the New World Order long before it came out of Bush Sr.'s mouth.




> Download the pdf timeline that someone posted in this thread.  Notice how the GATT treaty is missing from that timeline.  That was deliberate, because GATT supports a move toward World Government and NOT a move toward a NAU.  These guys have been chumping you, making it look like they're fighting the good fight by fighting cardboard cutouts, just like the Brits used to do to the Germans in WWII with their cardboard planes on the ground.  Same game.
> 
> The controllers setup fake threats, and the fake-opposition fights the fake threats to make them seem real.... all along the public goes along thinking they are fighting the real threat and are being duped in the process.





> I've posted references in other threads to the White House pushing for World Government in 1972 to top business leaders.  I'm curious if that's ever been presented through these channels.  I've also seen here the Carnagie 1934 plan to merge communism with capitalism.... has that been mentioned anywhere else?  If not, ask yourself why you have not learned of these things from your so called reliable and trustworthy sources?


Yes, this was talked about by the JBS LONG ago.  See, this is where you lose credibility.  I do believe we're being played from a number of different directions, that's why I don't put my faith in ANY organization, but you are flinging around accusations and you have no clue what you are talking about.  The JBS talked about all this stuff MANY years ago.

So either come back with some hard PROOF, or give it a rest.  Your unfounded accusations are getting REALLY old.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Fine. Name some organizations that aren't COINTEL.


I think it would be far more beneficial for you if you took the knowledge and tools that JBS have given you and try to apply them in the real world.  Obviously JBS acknowledges that Control Opposition actors exist. So if you use what they tell you, are you able to identify any of these actors?   And when I say actors, I mean people, movements and organization who present themselves as legitimate establishment opposition, but who are actually funded and operated by the establishment.  See if you can identify them, and present why you believe this to be the case.

Bottom line, are the tools & knowledge that JBS is providing you sufficient for you to protect yourself from those who present themselves as helpful but in fact mean you harm?  If these tools are not useful, or not sufficient, then what will you do about this?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> How does this forum handle threats?  I don't think I've ever seen one here before.


Here we have a clear example of what happens in today's America when someone begins to disturb the establishment's facade.  
First, the loyal dupes are sent out in an effort to win "the argument"Second, more loyal dupes are sent in an effort to usurp the conversation the bury the pertinent discussion in irrelevancy.Third, threats are presented to cease the pertinent discussion and to create fear in the mind of the discussant.Fourth, the system crack down on offending discussant.

These are all signs that help to determine whether the individual is are operating within the system or outside the intended controls and exercising independent thought and demonstrating the long lost art of critical thinking.  

What I've now learned is that it is acceptable to threaten another forum member as long as that member is not operating inside "accepted norms" as defined by this "movement" and is not idolizing authorized and pre-approved idols.

Remember this discussion.  Don't forget it, for someday you may be lucky enough to find yourself in a similar situation.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> So either come back with some hard PROOF, or give it a rest.  Your unfounded accusations are getting REALLY old.


I have provided proof in this thread, unfortunately it seems that it is not recognized as such.  

Further, if the evidence already provided is not recognized and unappreciated, then any further discussion under this topic is too granular for this audience and beyond its scope of understanding.

That fact that this audience cannot observe the techniques being used against them should frighten this audience.  For if one cannot even engage in an appropriate conversation that addresses the real science of disinformation via a real world case study, then one will never be in a position to protect themselves from manipulation.

The points that I have raised here are significant and relevant and should be addressed and discussed.  Further, the real history of these actors should be explored, and the switch from mainstream establishment roles to roles counter to the establishment.  Basic cursory historical research will reveal many questions, but this forum is obviously not the venue for an open adult conversation.

----------


## diggronpaul

http://watch.pair.com/jbs-cnp.html



> THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY
>     By Barbara Aho
> 
>     With the onset of the McCarthy era 50 years ago, any perceived threat to U.S. sovereignty from the British Round Table and its American branch shifted to an obsession with the Soviet Union. *Roy Cohn, who was legal counsel to Sen. Joseph McCarthy during the anti-Communist Senate investigations of the 1950s, would later become a member of the John Birch Society and a principle figure in the JBS intelligence gathering operation, the Western Goals Foundation. Out of the latter emerged the core group which, in 1981, formed the present Council for National Policy -- a consortium of high level political, corporate and evangelical leaders which is the primary coordinating body and funding conduit for Christian Right projects*.
> 
>     Sara Diamond's book, Roads to Dominion: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States, notes: "Before and after the formation of the John Birch Society, corporations played a major role in rallying the public to the anticommunist cause." 1. In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act granted corporations the right to distribute literature to counter labor union organizing -- a movement they blamed on the communists. To reduce the cost of producing and distributing anti-Communist materials, corporations turned to non-profit organizations such as the JBS.
> 
>         "By 1963, corporations were spending an estimated $25 million per year on anticommunist literature... Some corporations circulated print and audio-visual materials produced by the John Birch Society; other corporations produced their own in-house literature...By the early 1960s, the Nation magazine reported that there was a minimum of 6,600 corporate-financed anticommunist broadcasts, carried by more than 1,300 radio and television stations at a total annual budget of about $20 million...Leading sponsors included Texas oil billionaire H.L. Hunt and Howard J. Pew of Sun Oil. The corporate sector's massive anticommunist propaganda campaigns created a favorable climate for the mobilization of activist groups like the John Birch Society." 2.
> 
> ...

----------


## diggronpaul

(continued)



> THE WESTERN GOALS FOUNDATION
> 
>     John Birch Society founder, Robert Welch, was succeeded upon his death in 1983 by the former Congressman Larry McDonald. Lawrence Patton McDonald was a cousin of George S. Patton, Jr., the famous general who was killed in an automobile accident at the conclusion of World War II. 9. According to "Conspiracies of World War II" by J.S. Craig, "The common rumor in Germany at the time was that Patton was assassinated due to his wish to join forces with Germany and attack Russia. Patton had openly admitted that the Allies had defeated 'the wrong enemy' and repeatedly praised German industry and the discipline of its people." 10. E. H. Cookridge also recorded Gen. Patton's pro-Nazi attitude and subsequent demise in Gehlen: Spy of the Century -- an expose of the CIA's recruitment of high-level Nazi espionage agents:
> 
>             "...General Patton was dreaming of rearming a couple of Waffen SS divisions to incorporate them into his US Third Army "and lead them against the Reds". Patton had put this plan quite seriously to General Joseph T. McNarney, deputy US military governor in Germany, who had relayed Marshall Zhukov's complaint that the Third Army was too slow in disbanding and confining German units in its Bavarian sector. 'What do you think those ****** bolshies think?' said Patton. 'We're going to have to fight them sooner or later. Why not now while our army is intact and we can kick the Red Army back into Russia? We can do it with my Germans...'
> 
>             "McNarney, petrified, reported this to his political advisor, Robert Murphy, who promptly asked Patton to come and see him. Patton was not in the least subdued. 'He inquired with a gleam in his eye', Murphy later wrote, 'whether there was any chance of going on to Moscow, which he said he could reach in thirty days, instead of waiting for the Russians to attack the United States.' The outcome of this and other indiscretions was that Eisenhower relieved Patton of his command on October 2, 1945. Two months later he was fatally injured in a car crash." 11.
> 
>     Reinhard Gehlen was one of Adolf Hitler's chief intelligence officers, solely in charge of espionage against the Soviet Union. In 1945, Gehlen offered the United States his considerable experience, expertise and archives on Russia and satellite countries in return for immunity from prosecution as a war criminal. The newly established Central Intelligence Agency formed the "Gehlen Organisation" which was Gehlen's former network for anti-Soviet espionage. Located in West Germany and funded by the CIA, the Gehlen Organisation became the most powerful espionage establishment in Western Europe.
> ...

----------


## diggronpaul

(continued)




> FINANCING REVOLUTION
> 
>     Funding for the U.S. branch of the World Anti-Communist League has come from beer baron Joseph Coors and Texas oil billionaires Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt. In 1966, H.L. Hunt was approached for funding Vatican anti-Communist operations in Latin America, a project in conjunction with the Unification Church which he discussed in a later interview:
> 
>         "'I was approached by Paolo Cardinal Marella, who said he spoke for the Pope and asked if I would supply members of my [20,000 member] Youth Freedom Speakers' movement who spoke Spanish to be sent south [to Latin America] to engage in speechmaking and activities. I was told the Pope was thinking in terms of 11 million dollars a year support for the entire movement against communism in Spanish-speaking countries.' ........ The project was now centered in New York, at the Asian Speakers Bureau, with the Free Pacific Association, Inc., on Riverside Drive [another front for the Rev. Moon's Unification Church]." 37.
> 
>     Funding for the Western Goals Foundation was provided by corporations and wealthy John Birch Society members, a primary benefactor being Nelson Bunker Hunt. Another major funder of Western Goals was industrialist, Roger Milliken, a member of JBS and of the Board of Directors of W.R. Grace Co. Deering-Milliken and Deering-Milliken Research Corporations also funded Western Goals. 38. 
> 
> THE COUNCIL FOR NATIONAL POLICY
> ...

----------


## diggronpaul

(continued)




> THE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE
> 
>     A.K. Chesterton said in Candour, "At times Capitalism and Communism would appear to be in conflict, but this writer is confident that their interests are in common and will eventually merge for one-world control. That policy outlined previously in Woodrow Wilson's Point Six has never been dropped...
> 
>         "Capitalism and Communism, in terms of power, are merely their twin mechanisms to destroy the sovereignty of Christian nations. They will merge them into the projected super-state, where their financial power will exercise full sway and masterdom through that monopoly of atomic energy which is being sought with such feverish and fiendish persistence. They are selling us into slavery and using our material resources for their own nefarious world-wide purposes. To say that in exposing their plans for world domination we are playing the Kremlin's game is to act as an unconscious agent of Christendom's betrayal."
> 
>     Using religion to control the masses is an essential fact of World Revolution, the dynamics of which are the subject of The Union Jack. Although the author's interpretation of Bible prophecy is misguided, the sociological concepts articulated provide insight that is desperately needed if Christians would escape the dialectical trap that has been laid for them. No quarter may be given to the shock troops of agents provocateur that have been unleashed upon the Church, wearing the dual masks of patriotism and Christianity, and whose assignment is to incite Christians against their own government:
> 
>         Though their facts in most cases may be 100 per cent true, their method of USE produces an effect contrary to that supposed by the user, and his constant harangues on "what's wrong in Washington" builds a revolutionary state of mind in the American people and creates false antagonisms and loss of confidence, the effect of which will destroy the American government instead of restoring constitutional guarantees. So the patriots gain respect for their vast knowledge of facts while they use them to mold "American opinion" against America. This is British Israel at work, and it multiplies its strength by turning Americans against America by turning the truth into a lie, and at the same time reserves to itself respectability under the cloak of Christian terminology and the American Flag. It conceals itself within the very thing that it seeks to destroy...
> ...


(endnotes may be found by clicking on source link)

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I have provided proof in this thread, unfortunately it seems that it is not recognized as such.  
> 
> Further, if the evidence already provided is not recognized and unappreciated, then any further discussion under this topic is too granular for this audience and beyond its scope of understanding.
> 
> That fact that this audience cannot observe the techniques being used against them should frighten this audience.  For if one cannot even engage in an appropriate conversation that addresses the real science of disinformation via a real world case study, then one will never be in a position to protect themselves from manipulation.
> 
> The points that I have raised here are significant and relevant and should be addressed and discussed.  Further, the real history of these actors should be explored, and the switch from mainstream establishment roles to roles counter to the establishment.  Basic cursory historical research will reveal many questions, but this forum is obviously not the venue for an open adult conversation.


But, you see, you are not discussing the science of disinformation.  When someone asks you for specifics you basically tell them they have to go learn about it on their own or they won't understand.  Then, you proceed to trashing the JBS and others, without providing a shred of real evidence.

Now, that's what it looks like to me.

If you'd really like to DISCUSS and explain the science of disinformation, then start doing it.

----------


## LibertyEagle

diggronpaul,

Interesting.  Now, go do some research on the apparent owner of that website and the author of that article, Barbara Aho.

----------


## diggronpaul

> diggronpaul,
> 
> Interesting.  Now, go do some research on the apparent owner of that website and the author of that article, Barbara Aho.


I'll let others do their own research.  I know the rap against the author, but much of what she claims in this piece can be supported through separate docs.

Later I'll post the original Bellmont Brotherhood papers as well as the Blue book, these will show associations that should interest those who are objective about this matter.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> But, you see, you are not discussing the science of disinformation.  When someone asks you for specifics you basically tell them they have to go learn about it on their own or they won't understand.  Then, you proceed to trashing the JBS and others, without providing a shred of real evidence.
> 
> Now, that's what it looks like to me.
> 
> If you'd really like to DISCUSS and explain the science of disinformation, then start doing it.


I presented evidence that supported the fact that JBS & Griffin are knowingly misleading their followers through containment (ie. not presenting all the information that they have available in order to maintain a given construct of reality).  I referred to social research & academic institutions that created techniques commonly used in disinformation.  Not one person in this thread appears to have read these references, and not one person has asked a relevant objective followup question about the techniques utilized.

What I have received is as mentioned in previous posts: outright dismissal; thread usurpation; refusal to research any of the material presented; and finally threats that were ignored by moderators.

It is quite obvious that there is no interest in addressing the techniques of disinfo, especially when the case study includes actors and organizations that some here hold dear.  This is simply not an environment where one can learn about these matters, and you, the moderator, must ask and answer why that is the case.

----------


## FrankRep

> I presented evidence that supported the fact that JBS & Griffin are knowingly misleading their followers through containment (ie. not presenting all the information that they have available in order to maintain a given construct of reality).



*DID GRIFFIN HOLD BACK THE NORMAN DODD INTERVIEW (HIDDEN AGENDA)?*

Hi Ed,

Occasionally I am confronted by "whack-jobs" (on forums) who are convinced you are 'controlled opposition'. One recently asked me what your reason was for sitting on Norman Dodd's interview. He claims that your "public excuse about this is pathetic". I couldn't find anything you've stated about it. I asked him to state what your reason was, but he did not reply. I also told him - based on my experience trying to get you interviewed on cable news- that you probably couldn't get it aired, but that I'd ask you about it. By and large, everyone I've ever discussed your work with has nothing but positive comments, so I'd like to give him your answer.

Keep up the good work. We need you, now more than ever.


*REPLY:*

The truth is there was no general interest in this interview until several years after I recorded it. Also, it costs money to edit and release a video, even a simple one like that. Money has always been tight at American Media, but it was particularly so during those early days. If this guy thinks I sat on the interview, I wonder why he thinks I recorded it in the first place and why I released it at all. I could have just skipped it in the beginning or, having recorded it, I could have buried it completely, if that was my mission. This person makes no sense at all. I am amazed that anyone pays attention to him.

*Ed Griffin*


*SOURCE:*
http://www.realityzone.com/20090619.html

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> *DID GRIFFIN HOLD BACK THE NORMAN DODD INTERVIEW (HIDDEN AGENDA)?*
> 
> Hi Ed,
> 
> Occasionally I am confronted by "whack-jobs" (on forums) who are convinced you are 'controlled opposition'. One recently asked me what your reason was for sitting on Norman Dodd's interview. He claims that your "public excuse about this is pathetic". I couldn't find anything you've stated about it. I asked him to state what your reason was, but he did not reply. I also told him - based on my experience trying to get you interviewed on cable news- that you probably couldn't get it aired, but that I'd ask you about it. By and large, everyone I've ever discussed your work with has nothing but positive comments, so I'd like to give him your answer.
> 
> Keep up the good work. We need you, now more than ever.
> 
> 
> ...


Gee willy, do you think you can send a letter to Zbigniew Brzezinski and ask him if he helped create the middle east strategy of islamofascist terrorism?  I'm sure many readers here would like to know the answer to that incredibly important question.

Are you freaking kidding me.  If this is your level of fact checking then you have absolutely zero credibility and might as well be permanently relegated to the position of "Pod People."  

This post must be a joke?  If it isn't, then I certainly hope the people in this forum are more capable than this, otherwise, not only do you have absolutely no hope of rising from your servitude, you clearly will never ever have the ability to protect yourselves from deceptive controllers.

Your post is an damn embarrassment.  I hope other see this, because if you do, then chime-in now and save the reputation of this place.

The fact of the matter is that Griffin knew no later than 1982 that the Communist vs Capitalist dialectic was manufactured, but he continued to produce videos, articles etc. that perpetrated the false reality, waiting until after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall the Soviet Union to release this information.  You guys can threaten me, scream at me, diminish its significance, and make all the denials you want, but nothing can change that self-evident fact.

----------


## acptulsa

> Your post is an damn embarrassment.  I hope other see this, because if you do, then chime-in now and save the reputation of this place.


  What comes out of the horse's mouth is another piece of evidence that could (might or might not) point toward the truth.  I didn't see the place where Frank claimed it was the Gospel Truth...

----------


## paulim

> ...


I appreciate your posts in this thread. I think many quiet readers do.
Griffins answer is weak indeed: 
"I am amazed that anyone pays attention to him." What he does here is stating that by paying attention in this case a societal norm is violated. Usually an indicator that someone tries to move a discussion from the fact level to a gut level.

However, you've done much research and I would appreciate your findings on who TPTB are and how the cure could look like. In my opinion a sincere localism will make opposition uncontrollable.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I presented evidence that supported the fact that JBS & Griffin are knowingly misleading their followers through containment (ie. not presenting all the information that they have available in order to maintain a given construct of reality).  I referred to social research & academic institutions that created techniques commonly used in disinformation.  Not one person in this thread appears to have read these references, and not one person has asked a relevant objective followup question about the techniques utilized.


Here's the thing.  When you make claims about people/organizations, unless you back up your assertions with some pretty darn good facts, people are likely to take issue.  Especially when you ding an organization, the JBS, which Dr. Paul has spoken highly of for decades.  

Instead, what I saw was you making a lot of claims, but when people asked you for specifics, instead of giving them, you suggested to them that they couldn't understand unless they figured it out themselves.  The few things that you did offer seemed rather non substantive.  

Who knows, you could be right, but if so, you're probably going to have to offer more hard evidence for most to believe it.




> What I have received is as mentioned in previous posts: outright dismissal; thread usurpation; refusal to research any of the material presented; and finally threats that were ignored by moderators.


If you perceive a threat, use the flag feature  to report it to the Moderators and Admins.

----------


## FrankRep

InterestedParticipant, Ron Paul is a strong supporter of the John Birch Society and has spoken in many of their gatherings.

Is Ron Paul also apart of this "Controlled Opposition" that you label the JBS and G. Edward Griffin?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant, Ron Paul is a strong supporter of the John Birch Society and has spoken in many of their gatherings.
> 
> Is Ron Paul also apart of this "Controlled Opposition" that you label the JBS and G. Edward Griffin?


I've followed Ron for 20 years, I supported his campaign, but Ron doesn't speak for me and Ron certainly doesn't *think* for you me.  I do my own analysis and form my own opinion.  Further, Ron has pressures and constraints on him that I do not.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I appreciate your posts in this thread. I think many quiet readers do.
> Griffins answer is weak indeed: 
> "I am amazed that anyone pays attention to him." What he does here is stating that by paying attention in this case a societal norm is violated. Usually an indicator that someone tries to move a discussion from the fact level to a gut level.
> 
> However, you've done much research and I would appreciate your findings on who TPTB are and how the cure could look like. In my opinion a sincere localism will make opposition uncontrollable.


I am not sure I understand your question.  Can you please rephrase it for me. Thx.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

With regard to Griffin's point that their was insufficient public interest in the Dodd interview to publish and distribute it, I would like to remind forum participants that not only was this the period in which Reagan was pushing the Evil Empire meme, but it was also near the time when Gorby & Reagan met in Iceland for Nuke treaty talks, but most importantly, do you recall what story broke in 1986, only 4-years after the Dodd interview?  It was Iran-Contra, where Reagan/Bush were caught selling arms to the Iranians (same ones who had our hostages) so that the Contras could be funded to fight _communism_ in Nicaragua.  And what was Reagan's publicly stated reason for funding the Contras....well, he told the public that the communists could drive to Texas in only a few hours and be at Americas doorstep.

So, while the entire country was glued to their TV sets watching the Tower Commission interview Oliver North et al about their role in fighting Central American _Communists_, Griffin is claiming that there was insufficient interest in a video that exposed the Communist threat as a fraud.  The logic simply does not withhold scrutiny.

Now, there was another significant interview during this period, and that was with Yuri Besmenov, a supposed KGB defector, in 1984.  Does anyone know when this video was actually released?  I mean, do you have proof of its public release date?

----------


## paulim

> I am not sure I understand your question.  Can you please rephrase it for me. Thx.


My first question would be if you recognize patterns when you see deceptions. My second question is, if there are that many deceptions, how to fight their influence.

Yesterday I read a newspaper article about the philosophy of Leo Strauss, who said politics should invent myths of fear to propagate their hierachy. So, surely fear is one pattern. And there are surely much more and much more detailed ones. Maybe you found something in this regard.

----------


## FrankRep

> With regard to Griffin's point that their was insufficient public interest in the Dodd interview to publish and distribute it,


There still isn't a sufficient amount of public interest even on this forum.

----------


## emazur

> There still isn't a sufficient amount of public interest even on this forum.


Agreed.  BTW, Griffin's friend Dr. Stan Monteith beat him to the punch and first interviewed Norman Dodd, and this interview was aired on the radio and can be found here:
http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/tax-ex...teith/15161709
I posted about it a couple months ago but nobody was interested:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...light=monteith
The Diggers didn't much care either, of those 29 diggs, one was mine, 20 were from my libertarian digg friends and I'll bet the majority of those were "favor diggs" from people who didn't bother to watch it, the remaining 8 were probably from random people who just digg random stuff for $#@!s and giggles

----------


## Conservative Christian

InterestedParticipant (AKA "New World Order Disinformation Agent") is either willfully spreading disinformation, or is totally clueless---most likely a combination of the two.

First of all, Griffin did NOT "sit" on the interview for 20 years after recording it.

I have in my possession at this time, an old VHS video copy of the complete interview, which Ed released YEARS AGO through his "American Media" outfit. It was professionally done, and packaged in a very nice hard case.

I bought several copies at that point in time, and took them to gun shows, the meetings of various conservative and libertarian groups etc.---trying to sell them. I also showed the video at the meetings of various conservative/libertarian groups.

The video went over like a fart in church. There was virtually no interest in it. I actively promoted the video for years, and sold maybe one or two copies in all that time.

Ed Griffin quit manufacturing and promoting it, because it simply wouldn't sell. However, with the rise of the internet/www, it is now much easier to mass advertise the video---so Ed resurrected it. Even with the massive exposure on the web though, sales of the DVD version are NOT impressive.

If InterestedParticipant thinks the video is some kind of "smoking gun" that would've "routed" the new world order, if only the alleged "controlled opposition" of Ed and the JBS would've promoted it more---then he's quite simply DELIRIOUS.

Dodd provides NO documentation for his remarks in the video. It's absolutely LUDICROUS to believe that the interview would've "awakened the masses". Having personally showed the video to hundreds of people over the years, not one of them got very excited about it.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> This could be the most ironic thread ever posted on RPF, because JBS was setup as controlled opposition.
> 
> If I had the money, I'd offer $10K to anyone who could prove that anyone in the extended media or in the public eye is NOT controlled.  I haven't found one yet, and I don't care what names or organizations you bring up.  They all are!
> 
> The public is on its own, and the sooner they realize it the better off we'll be.


We're not required to try to "prove" a negative.

You're the one throwing around undocumented allegations, so the burden of proof is clearly on you.

PROVE to us that the JBS and all other conservative/libertarian groups and individuals in the public eye are "controlled opposition". Please name the controlled organizations, the individuals doing the controlling and who they ultimately work for, explain precisely how they control the organizations etc. 

We eagerly await your reply, but please don't ask us to hold our breath!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> He did the interview and sat on it to keep the information contained for 20 years.  And to say there was no interest was BS, a little look around and he would have found Charlotte Iserbyt who was exposing similar information in her book Dumbing  Us Down, and this interview would have strengthened her work tremendously.


^BS alert!

You GROSSLY over-exaggerate the video. Good information, yes----a smoking gun that would do great damage to the conspiracy, ROTFLMAO! 

By the way, Charlotte Iserbyt has recommended the John Birch Society to her readers.

"Dumbing Us Down" was widely circulated in JBS circles, which you admit was "exposing similar information", so your "coverup" hypothesis isn't faring too well. 

Pretty lame "reasoning" on your part. Thus far, your propaganda campaign against the JBS isn't doing too well.

----------


## Conservative Christian

John Birch Society president John McManus, interviewed Charlotte Iserbyt in the John Birch Society publication "The New American" (with a circulation of tens of thousands)---over NINE years ago.

Iserbyt's book "Dumbing Us Down" was freely discussed, and the magazine even gave Iserbyt's website address, as well as ordering information for the book.

Iserbyt has posted the interview on her personal website:
http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com...on_Matters.pdf

InterestedParticipant's propaganda offensive against the JBS has thus far fallen flat on its face.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> With regard to Griffin's point that their was insufficient public interest in the Dodd interview to publish and distribute it, I would like to remind forum participants that not only was this the period in which Reagan was pushing the Evil Empire meme, but it was also near the time when Gorby & Reagan met in Iceland for Nuke treaty talks, but most importantly, do you recall what story broke in 1986, only 4-years after the Dodd interview?  It was Iran-Contra, where Reagan/Bush were caught selling arms to the Iranians (same ones who had our hostages) so that the Contras could be funded to fight _communism_ in Nicaragua.  And what was Reagan's publicly stated reason for funding the Contras....well, he told the public that the communists could drive to Texas in only a few hours and be at Americas doorstep.
> 
> So, while the entire country was glued to their TV sets watching the Tower Commission interview Oliver North et al about their role in fighting Central American _Communists_, Griffin is claiming that there was insufficient interest in a video that exposed the Communist threat as a fraud.  The logic simply does not withhold scrutiny.
> 
> Now, there was another significant interview during this period, and that was with Yuri Besmenov, a supposed KGB defector, in 1984.  Does anyone know when this video was actually released?  I mean, do you have proof of its public release date?


One of the problems is that most people do not believe things unless they see it on MSM.  It's very sad.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> I think he answered that.   And that part is plausible, imo.  If one wanted to control both sides of an argument, you would make sure you had control of the information.  By Griffin interviewing Dodd, Dodd would think that he had at least gotten out the information and if someone else approached him to do same, he would likely turn them away, because it had already been done.  Then, those wanting to control could edit or sit on the information that they now had in their hands.
> 
> At least, that's what I'm taking his point to be.
> 
> Note:  I'm not saying I agree, because I don't know.
> 
> EDIT:  Actually, this is the same type of thing that Carroll Quigley (Clinton's mentor) discussed in Tragedy and Hope, with regard to both major political parties being controlled.  When the people get tired of one of the parties, the parties are switched out, but the same agenda continues.  We think there has been a change, when in reality nothing has changed.


His hypothesis and allegations still fall flat. 

As another poster already pointed out, Stanley Monteith also interviewed Dodd, and attempted to get the word out. However, there was virtually no interest in it. 

There's nothing in the interview that would convince somebody who did NOT believe in a conspiracy, that there was in fact a conspiracy.

Carrol Quigley's book "Tragedy & Hope" was FAR more damaging to the conspirators than the Dodd interview, because he was able to go into the greater detail that a book allows, and Quigley was an "Insider" himself! His new world order establishment credentials are unquestioned, and he fully APPROVED of what the conspirators were trying to do.

The John Birch Society has sold and distributed more copies of "Tragedy & Hope" than any organization or individual in world history, and the book is still CURRENTLY available on their website.

InterestedParticipant's propaganda and arguments are melting faster than the Wicked Witch of the West!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Now, there was another significant interview during this period, and that was with Yuri Besmenov, a supposed KGB defector, in 1984.  Does anyone know when this video was actually released?  I mean, do you have proof of its public release date?


Yuri Bezmenov was on the John Birch Society's national speakers bureau tour in the 1980's, and spoke at numerous locations around the country, fully sponsored by the JBS. 

I personally heard him speak at a John Birch Society speech in Greenville, SC in the 1980's---which attracted a crowd of well over a hundred people, STANDING ROOM ONLY.

The JBS sold and distributed more copies of his video than any other organization on the planet. 

Keep trying to smear the JBS, little buckaroo! Thus far you're batting about ZERO FOR FIFTY!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> To keep Dodd from being interviewed by an "unauthorized" source who would have released this information in a timely way.  It's an intervention in order to control the information.  This is a common technique.
> 
> Look, it's about Total Information Dominance (look up this concept).  TID means controlling ALL information, even opposition information.  So, you can bury it, or rewrite history (his-story), or mix it with some false information to create confusion, etc.
> 
> Why did Walter Chronkite recently receive the World Federation Association award (a globalist organization)?  and why in his acceptance speech did he say come hell or highwater he wanted world government?


The name is spelled CRONKITE, and the organization he got the award from was the World FEDERALIST Association.

And he did NOT receive it "recently". Thanks to the John Birch Society, that reported the event immediately after it happened almost ten years ago, I'm already well aware of your factoid. 

Try to at least get ONE THING right, and please stop boring us with stories that are OLD NEWS to John Birch Society members.  

By the way, it was Hillary Clinton who introduced Cronkite that night. 

Keep trying to smear the JBS, big guy. Thus far you've only proven how LITTLE you know.

----------


## nayjevin

I find this interesting because the techniques discussed are to me, unquestionably used.  I know little about JBS except that it does appear it has suffered 'character' attacks over the years -- from what I've seen they tend to get the 'quixotic' 'kook' treatment from major media outlets.

I do believe TPTB would stop at nothing to co-opt, undermine good groups, so I'm more interested in the underlying principle than proving G Edward Griffin or JBS is or isn't CO.

IP - what is the incentive for individual infiltrators, do you think?  Cash? Sex?  Blackmail?

How about feasibility?  It takes alot of competent people complicit to TPTB's agenda in enough positions of power to compromise a majority (as I think you are claiming) of liberty organizations, right?  Where do these people come from?  Seems unlikely to me that there are enough pawns that fit the profile, but I'm open to your comments.

I noticed your reference to the sociopathic.  I have seen many examples (like McCain) of this form of puppet.  How are these folks 'bred from birth' to become the faces for these global power plays?

Thanks.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Finally, Charlotte's footnotes reference other sources of excellent material, such as *William Fosters* *Toward a Soviet America*.


The John Birch Society exposed Foster's book in the *1960's*, and actually sold the book through the mail and their chain of American Opinion Bookstores for MANY years.

Just because you just fell off the turnip truck, doesn't mean everybody else did.

Quit boring us with OLD NEWS that the John Birch Society exposed and reported on DECADES ago.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> This is a minor point.  
> 
> The much larger point is that the White House was collaborating with Wall Street to merge the Soviet and US systems.  And this was known at the time that Reagan was spouting-out the "evil empire" propaganda.
> 
> This is no small matter.


The John Birch Society starting selling and distributing Antony Sutton's "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution" on a nationwide basis, right after it was published in *1974*.

So the JBS was YEARS AHEAD of johnny-come-lately's like yourself on that topic! 

Keep trying, bub. Your smear campaign against the JBS is still batting ZERO!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> What we had was testimony in the Reece Committee that was buried.  Dodd was obviously trying to get the information out as he was in the last years of his life.  He obviously trusted that this interview would result in wider and timely dissemination of  this information.  But the information was buried.


The John Birch Society started selling and distributing Rene Wormser's 1958 book "Foundations: Their Power and Influence", on a nationwide basis DECADES ago. 

Wormser was chief legal counsel for the Reece Committee, which investigated the tax-exempt foundations in the 1950's. He was privy to all the information that Dodd was. 

The book is hundreds of pages, and provides a massive level of documentation that Dodd's brief interview with Griffin couldn't even begin to touch on.

The JBS has sold and distributed THOUSANDS of copies of the book since at least the 1960's, which was a FAR better tool for exposing the foundations than Dodd's interview. NOTHING was buried.

Thus far, all you've proven is your gross ignorance of the John Birch Society.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> How would they have known about them in the 1980's?


By reading Rene Wormser's 1958 book, "Foundations: Their Power and Influence", which the John Birch Society started distributing nationally in the *1960's*.

Do you know ANYTHING?!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> It is NOT relevant that Norman Dodd did or did not write a book.  What is relevant in this discussion is the actions of JBS & Griffin... and they sat on this critical information.
> 
> There is absolutely nothing you can say or do now that will justify or explain this away.  It cannot be dismissed.  It exposes a major contradiction.


Your statements are BRAZEN LIES.

Nothing YOU say can justify or explain away your LIES.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Did you see this post?  Shows that the White House was pushing for Global Government with business leaders in 1972
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196427


The John Birch Society has been exposing the push for world government by U.S. Government/business leaders for about FIFTY years.

Please read "The Invisible Government", by John Birch Society member Dan Smoot, which was published by the JBS in *1962*.

Also see John Birch Society member Gary Allen's *1971* book entitled "None Dare Call It Conspiracy". The JBS and its members have sold and distributed MILLIONS of copies of this classic book over the last 38 years. 

Time for you to WAKE UP, Mr. Rip Van Winkle! What you're blathering about in this thread, was first exposed by the John Birch Society DECADES AGO!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> But what's fascinating here is that Griffin's documentary's focused on exposing the Communist threat.  So, while he knew from Dodd's interview that the Communist threat was a manufactured and fake dialectic, Griffin was producing documentaries that promoted the dialectic, while simultaneous sitting on Dodd's information.


You're BUSTED! You've just been caught telling another WHOPPING LIE. 

Please see Ed Griffin's *1968* video documentary entitled "The Grand Design: A Lecture on U.S. Foreign Policy", as well as his*1972* video presentation entitled "The Capitalist Conspiracy: An Inside View of International Banking".

Mr. Griffin masterfully exposes the "manufactured and fake dialectic" you falsely accuse him of attempting to cover up.

Somebody get this BUM "InterestedParticipant" out of here!

----------


## nayjevin

BUMp

----------


## InterestedParticipant

So, I've been away from the forum for a little over a week, only to uncover the latest round of noise to hit this thread.  Everyone should take note of what happens to an *individual* who attempts to move  discussion beyond its authorized limits, for this is precisely what is occurring in this thread.  Here are some of what you will experience in such a situation:

you will be framed as someone who is looking down on others, as arrogant and therefore not socially correctyour presence in the 'group' will be openly questioned and it will be suggested that you leave the 'group'you will be threatenedyou will be referred to as a "whack job"you will be accused of being dishonest or openly called a liarthere will be demands to forcefully remove you from the 'group'the unauthorized discussion will be discredited and it will be made clear that further unauthorized talk of this kind is unacceptable to this 'group'.

When you experience any one of these, then you will know that you are perceiving the world in ways that are outside the bounds as stipulated by social engineers.  This is when u will know that u are thinking and perceiving the world on your own, as an individual, *outside 'social norms'*.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Those who are interested in this discussion, and in further understanding the social engineering techniques employed through groups and movements might want to ask themselves and the group/movement, that they support, some questions.  Here are just a few possibilities:

Does the group/movement explain what a dialectic is and how the technique is used to shape attitudes?What dialectic(s) does the group/movement operate within?Does the group/movement discuss the dialectic(s) that they operate in?How does the group/movement ensure that they do not become constrained by this dialectic frame of reference?Does the group/movement express points of view based upon other dialectical references?If the group/movement does not openly discuss these basic and essential techniques of understanding reality, then find out why this is the case.  Why do you not already understand this and how can one be expected to make decisions in their best interest without fully understanding this basic tool?

Let's get away from the minuscule trivial data points and move toward the big picture, where everything becomes crystal clear.  We live in world where everything is framed through dialectical synthesis, meaning that there is always opposition on every issue, and this opposition is brought together (synthesized) in  a carefully constructed manner.  Just because you are opposed to something does not mean you are not part of the planned synthesis.  In fact, it is likely that you are.  The question you need to ask yourself is, are you operating and thinking inside dialectical opposites that someone else has created for you, and do you have the tools to figure this out without relying on a thought leader who may have different interests than you.

If you don't possess these skills, then how in the heck are you supposed to know whether you are operating in your own self-interest or not?  And therefore, how are you really to know whether the groups/movements that you have invested in are not part of a dialectic whose synthesis in in your own disinterest?

----------


## dgr

Excuse me  are ya'll just now discovering that the behind the scenes power brokers have been pushing for globolization for decades   The Demos push the sociolism and goverment dependecy part and the GOP pushes, income and manufacturing re distribution 
The abandoment of the Panama Canal was the first clue to me, but theBush most favored nation trade status for China , the Security and Prosperit Partnership agreement and the US - EU Intergration Agreement , put the fear of God in me
the only reason Bush did not succede with the North American union is the Mexicians double crossed him for a better deal with China, so Obam is skipping the NAU and going straight for the Bankrupt the American citizen and force them to depend on the goverment. 
So what are we going to do for jobs, when ever job is outsourced because  the energy cost
make it unprofitable to be in the USA  and we will not even be able to have nationa security, let alone support it , because we won't be able to build anything without foreign parts

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Excuse me  are ya'll just now discovering that the behind the scenes power brokers have been pushing for globolization for decades


Nature is an equilibrium... a balance of infinite opposite forces.   When some forces exceed their opposites, then Nature moves to find a new equilibrium.

This is also the dialectical forces in our lives.  However, what I am arguing is that many of these forces are manufactured.  Not just the obvious forces like Fox News, but forces on ALL sides .... forces that can be deliberately deceptive and perhaps even undetectable to the audience.

For example, if you are a social engineer and you wanted to migrate the USA from its domestic Federal Reserve monetary system to an international IMF type system, how would you do it?  How could you achieve this move from one equilibrium to another so that the public would view it as a "natural" occurrence, created by organic forces that somehow just occurred in society?

Think about this concept, think about how society changes and of all the forces at-play when society is altered.  How would you know what forces are truly organic, as-in emanating from the public, and those forces that are planned and centrally controlled?

----------


## Indy Vidual

> The question you need to ask yourself is, are you operating and thinking inside dialectical opposites that someone else has created for you...


Yes I am, and I've pretty much given up all hope of ever escaping from the damage which was done to me in public schools. 


You asked earlier for an example of obvious controlled opposition. You can't get much more obvious than Michael Ruppert. First, he gained credibility, *then* he...

Well...You know...People are better off if they learn for themselves.

----------


## amonasro

> Let's get away from the minuscule trivial data points and move toward the big picture, where everything becomes crystal clear.  We live in world where everything is framed through dialectical synthesis, meaning that there is always opposition on every issue, and this opposition is brought together (synthesized) in  a carefully constructed manner.  Just because you are opposed to something does not mean you are not part of the planned synthesis.  In fact, it is likely that you are.  The question you need to ask yourself is, are you operating and thinking inside dialectical opposites that someone else has created for you, and do you have the tools to figure this out without relying on a thought leader who may have different interests than you.


You know, you bring up some interesting points, but honestly I can't waste my life figuring out where I fit into the matrix. If everything I know is controlled opposition, if everything is synthesized by some sort of uber control group, what chance do we have at getting out?  Even if you do understand and it becomes "crystal clear", what advantage do you gain? What if you are wrong and everyone else is right? You can philosophize away, but you still can't get out of that hamster wheel. The faster you run, the faster it spins.

I think your reasoning, as complex as you make it sound, is an over-simplification of human action and reaction and the resulting society that forms around it.

----------


## FrankRep

InterestedParticipant, 

What sources of information do you trust?

Which group is creating all this Controlled Opposition?

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

Interested...this forum is cliquish like all the other ones...lol.  tones

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Yes I am, and I've pretty much given up all hope of ever escaping from the damage which was done to me in public schools. 
> 
> 
> You asked earlier for an example of obvious controlled opposition. You can't get much more obvious than Michael Ruppert. First, he gained credibility, *then* he...
> 
> Well...You know...People are better off if they learn for themselves.


I agree with you on Ruppert.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You know, you bring up some interesting points, but honestly I can't waste my life figuring out where I fit into the matrix. If everything I know is controlled opposition, if everything is synthesized by some sort of uber control group, what chance do we have at getting out?  Even if you do understand and it becomes "crystal clear", what advantage do you gain? What if you are wrong and everyone else is right? You can philosophize away, but you still can't get out of that hamster wheel. The faster you run, the faster it spins.
> 
> I think your reasoning, as complex as you make it sound, is an over-simplification of human action and reaction and the resulting society that forms around it.


*So, you enjoy your servitude and captivity?* 

My argument is that to acknowledge the techniques of our captivity allows us to break from our captivity.  Is that really all that hard?  It requires critical thinking and indignance, that's all.

When we recognize their techniques, we may choose to submit to them or we can choose to live by our own dialectics .... our own reality.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant, 
> 
> What sources of information do you trust?
> 
> Which group is creating all this Controlled Opposition?


Trust is not a variable.  All information that I choose to absorb is put through my own filters, namely, what is the dialectic (or frame) that this information is presented in, how does this serve various party's goals, and what else do I know that would support the information that is presented.  No source is trusted, all information is evaluated on its own merits.  (I take seriously the Sin of Idolatry).

As far as who is doing this, well that is not nearly as relevant or important as understanding the techniques that are being employed so that the techniques do not  achieve their intended goal with me.  Overall, this is a system, the players within the system are exchangeable and expendable.   But recognizing the techniques that are employed will almost always immediately expose a player.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Interested...this forum is cliquish like all the other ones...lol.  tones


Sorta goes against the entire concept of Libertarianism, doesn't it?

I shun groups, as they can be too easily manipulated as they take-on their own identity and supersede the interests of each individual in the group/clique.

----------


## BEOWULF

Interesting Article, escept it fits the John Birch Society to a tee.  Opinion only, but after the Congressman McDonald ?  was killed/kidnaped.  JBS was infiltrated itself. 83 or 84..  but good article, especially about Newt.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Interesting Article, escept it fits the John Birch Society to a tee.  Opinion only, but after the Congressman McDonald ?  was killed/kidnaped.  JBS was infiltrated itself. 83 or 84..  but good article, especially about Newt.


JBS had high degree Freemasons, CFR members and Federal Reserve Board members on its founding board/committee....  infiltration was unnecessary.

As much love as there is here for McDonald (and I was in that camp for many years too), people should check out what other organizations he was part of and who was on the boards of those organizations with him.  To your surprise, you'll find lots of establishment players.  The mind boggles at how McDonald could truly be anti-world government and yet consistently show up on boards with people who clearly were in favor of world government.  I have not yet proven a conclusions to myself here, but I have certainly been more than surprised after some investigation.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Have we reached burn out on this thread?

----------


## diggronpaul

I vote to sticky this thread!

----------


## Deborah K

> So, I've been away from the forum for a little over a week, only to uncover the latest round of noise to hit this thread.  Everyone should take note of what happens to an *individual* who attempts to move  discussion beyond its authorized limits, for this is precisely what is occurring in this thread.  Here are some of what you will experience in such a situation:
> 
> you will be framed as someone who is looking down on others, as arrogant and therefore not socially correctyour presence in the 'group' will be openly questioned and it will be suggested that you leave the 'group'you will be threatenedyou will be referred to as a "whack job"you will be accused of being dishonest or openly called a liarthere will be demands to forcefully remove you from the 'group'the unauthorized discussion will be discredited and it will be made clear that further unauthorized talk of this kind is unacceptable to this 'group'.
> 
> When you experience any one of these, then you will know that you are perceiving the world in ways that are outside the bounds as stipulated by social engineers.  This is when u will know that u are thinking and perceiving the world on your own, as an individual, *outside 'social norms'*.





Oh Good Lord!  Would you like some cheese with that whine???  I've been bashed numerous times on this forum, and much harder than you have.

Please!  You come on here calling people idol worshipers, among other condescending remarks, just because they don't buy into your unproven theories.  




> We live in world where everything is framed through dialectical synthesis, meaning that there is always opposition on every issue, and this opposition is brought together (synthesized) in a carefully constructed manner. Just because you are opposed to something does not mean you are not part of the planned synthesis. In fact, it is likely that you are. The question you need to ask yourself is, are you operating and thinking inside dialectical opposites that someone else has created for you, and *do you have the tools to figure this out without relying on a thought leader who may have different interests than you*.


Are you claiming here that no one in a leadership role can be trusted?  You've been asked repeatedly who it is you trust, but you won't share it.  What if you had overwhelming support on this forum for your theories?  What if people clamored to you, asking questions about  your insights into Tavistock, ect.?  Wouldn't that sort of turn you into a "leader" like the one you mention above?   Do you think you would not suddenly become 'controlled opposition' in the mind of some other paranoid person?  Probably.  Everyone sees things through their own filters, because we're all individuals, and that explains why we don't agree on much. Therefore, it's ridiculous to assume that all dialectic is contrived by some master of the universe. 

I don't know what your goal is, but I don't think it's malevolent, I think at best it's a half-baked theory based on the paranoia of some other person's theories that you have adopted. You made the mistake of wrongly accusing Griffin and JBS without first giving evidence (your inaccurate connect-the-dot theories notwithstanding).  

I've been away trying to deal with a family crisis, but you have come into my thoughts now and again.  I believe you have something of import to offer to this forum.  I hope you figure out how to relay it without wrongly accusing well established orgs and individuals. I was right to warn you about doing such.  It is unethical and unlawful to libel someone.  That is not to say that JBS and Griffin are somehow infallible - as you seem to think we believe.  Just try to give the people you are attempting to share information with a little more credit.

----------


## diggronpaul

I see one of the points being that it is not about trusting anyone, or replacing one group or leader with another.  It is about being a leader of one, of yourself, and not having an idol in man's world.

Why trust anyone?  The only reason to totally rely on others is because one is unwilling to do their own thinking.  I see the push here to move toward total self reliance in thought.  That's certainly where I'm trying to move toward.

I see the evidence for this everywhere, as the public is simply being lied to, ripped off and abused everywhere you look.  I don't see anyway to stop it until we all start acting and thinking independently, and refusing to go along with so much propaganda from every corner of society.

----------


## FrankRep

> I see one of the points being that it is not about trusting anyone, or replacing one group or leader with another. It is about being a leader of one, of yourself, and not having an idol in man's world.


I don't have a problem with that statement above. However, personal attacks with absolutely no proof is the issue I'm upset about.

----------


## tonesforjonesbones

I missed all the personal attacks..but the dialectic is exactly what we're doin here...circular logic, chasing your tail and looking over your shoulder all the time.  It can make ya paranoid..that's for sure.  Tones

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I don't have a problem with that statement above. However, personal attacks with absolutely no proof is the issue I'm upset about.


I'm going after organizations and their agents who were deliberately created to counter the bogus communist threat, intentionally keeping people in a false frame for the last 50 years (mostly the extreme right).  You're angry about that?  Well, you should direct your anger at those who dupe you repeatedly, but shield it in layers of deceptions and social programming.

The primary problem here is that the perpetrators appeal to many hear, and formulate and present their message in order to make it appealing to those who commonly frequent this forum.  So, it is especially challenging for those here to see the deception.  What is worse, is that is quite clear that there are those in this thread who refuse to do any independent research on their own.  With this constraint, I see no way for those to leap the hurdle and escape this particular brand of gatekeeping.

Be mad, be upset, I really don't care.  But if you continue to refuse to embark on your own research and your own learning, then you ultimately have no one to blame for your situation of having to find leaders & organizations to follow... entities that can take you over the cliff as you cheer their accolades.  

I have given you myriad leads in this thread, and it is quite apparant that not one has been followed-up on. It is obvious you do NOT want to escape your regular dose of information, analysis and acceptable thought.  This I find abhorrent.  

Develop your own brand of thinking, real critical thought, independent of everything else... that is your only path of escape.  Otherwise, continue down your existing path of followership, where you can follow your idol organization for the next 50 years of talk & misdirection and public management.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

*"You have to be asleep to believe it."*
YouTube - George Carlin ~ The American Dream

*"They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking"*

----------


## FrankRep

George Carlin is awesome.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> George Carlin is awesome.


They own the foundations and the nonprofit organizations too.... and their key mouthpieces.

----------


## FrankRep

> They own the foundations and the nonprofit organizations too.


I've read David Rockefeller's book. He brags about it. Again, common knowledge.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I've read David Rockefeller's book. He brags about it. Again, common knowledge.


Jesus christ, there's another illusion... that it's all about Rockefeller... another front man, albeit high level.  

To all those people who are silently visiting this thread and not posting (I see the counter going up pretty fast), can you see how ones thinking can be contained so that they only see a segment of reality.  It's bizarre how the control systems of the brain work, but reality put right in front of a person can be dismissed by the person.  Just watch this video to see how this works, to see what we are all witnessing right here in this thread.

YouTube - The Obama Syndrome - Hysteria


PS. When I said all the nonprofits were controlled, I wasn't talking only Rockefeller Foundation grantees.

----------


## diggronpaul

> Jesus christ, there's another illusion... that it's all about Rockefeller... another front man, albeit high level.  
> 
> To all those people who are silently visiting this thread and not posting (I see the counter going up pretty fast), can you see how ones thinking can be contained so that they only see a segment of reality.  It's bizarre how the control systems of the brain work, but reality put right in front of a person can be dismissed by the person.  Just watch this video to see how this works, to see what we are all witnessing right here in this thread.
> 
> YouTube - The Obama Syndrome - Hysteria


I agree with you on the group dynamic.  As soon as people begin to allow themselves to be shuttled into groups or membership organizations they can quickly loose their individuality unless they are incredible strong personalities.  When they get lost in the group, groupthink quickly takes over and people start to just go along, thinking that what the group decides must be best or they wouldn't have signed-up in the first place.  The video really demonstrates this.

But to your other point, are you saying that the group dynamic can be used to convince members of an altered reality, or a partial reality that reveals only some truths?  So, a patriotic group could convince members that they have a grip on the entire problem facing the public, when in fact they only understand some subset of the problem,  a subset that renders the collective individuals ineffective.

Hmmm... interesting.

----------


## FrankRep

> Jesus christ, there's another illusion... that it's all about Rockefeller... another front man, albeit high level.


I didn't say it's all about Rockefeller, I just read his book. Lay off the coffee dude.


InterestedParticipant:

What's your opinion of Dr. Carroll Quigley and his books: "Tragedy and Hope" and "The Anglo American Establishment" ?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Here's what happens to truth tellers... people who lift the veil and expose the pervasive fraud in this make-believe system.  

YouTube - Targeted Individuals (TI's) (#32)

If you haven't experienced this yet, then you're still living inside the system and are no threat.

----------


## FrankRep

InterestedParticipant:

What's your opinion of Dr. Carroll Quigley and his books: "Tragedy and Hope" and "The Anglo American Establishment" ?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant:
> 
> What's your opinion of Dr. Carroll Quigley and his books: "Tragedy and Hope" and "The Anglo American Establishment" ?


PM me if you're going to start asking me direct questions.  That's what that tool is for.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Have we reached burn out on this thread?


You got burned to a crisp on pages 20 and 21. Why am I not surprised that you've completely avoided responding to even one of the intellectual smackdowns I gave you.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> JBS had high degree Freemasons, CFR members and Federal Reserve Board members on its founding board/committee....  infiltration was unnecessary.


Since you're such a self-proclaimed "expert" on the John Birch Society, I'm sure you'll have no problem naming ALL the "high degree Freemasons, CFR members and Federal Reserve Board members on its founding board/committee", and give us complete verifiable documentation of the organizational ties of all of them. Please also give us complete verifiable documentation proving that each one was actually an agent of the New World Order.




> As much love as there is here for McDonald (and I was in that camp for many years too), people should check out what other organizations he was part of and who was on the boards of those organizations with him.  To your surprise, you'll find lots of establishment players.  The mind boggles at how McDonald could truly be anti-world government and yet consistently show up on boards with people who clearly were in favor of world government.  I have not yet proven a conclusions to myself here, but I have certainly been more than surprised after some investigation.


During his lifetime, Larry McDonald was a member of well over fifty anti-New World Order, anti-Communist/Socialist organizations etc.---virtually none of which he actually controlled himself. Since he had no control over virtually any of the organizations he belonged to, it's quite obvious that he would be unable to stop those who controlled the organization from bringing in anybody they bloody well pleased.

And if McDonald was "controlled opposition", why were the Soviets allowed to shoot down the plane he was on, whereupon he disappeared forever? 

The Soviets wouldn't have shot down a civilian airliner with 269 people aboard, without approval from very highly placed individuals in the New World Order power structure.

If McDonald was a key "operative" of the New World Order, providing extremely valuable "controlled opposition" in the many organizations he belonged to---why would the NWO get rid of such an important "agent"?

Sorry son, but your fanciful hypotheses are nothing but pure *BULLS--T!*

----------


## teacherone

> You got burned to a crisp on pages 20 and 21. Why am I not surprised that you've completely avoided responding to even one of the intellectual smackdowns I gave you.


See, I really liked Interested Participant's arguments before you came along and destroyed them. 

Thanks a lot... 

It's too bad really. It all sounded so mysterious and conspiratorial...as if there was another red pill to be taken...after the first.

Oh well. I guess this is what happens when extravagant theories are asked to be proven. Sometimes the evidence just isn't there. 

Anybody who says facts are irrelevant trivialities probably shouldn't be trusted anyways...

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You got burned to a crisp on pages 20 and 21. Why am I not surprised that you've completely avoided responding to even one of the intellectual smackdowns I gave you.


This is not about some childish game on an Internet forum, this is about peoples lives and the decisions they make.  I'm not in some sort of competition with anyone here, for these are techniques that the other side uses.  I'm here to enforce how important it is to research all organizations before one gets involved, and to motivate people to understand why groups are created and how people are manipulated once in side them, even groups with the most apparent benevolent PR.  I'm here to get people to start relying on the mind that God gave them, and to stop relying on organizations who serve them up their view of the world and their opinions.

To this end, there is ample evidence that can be found on the web to support everything I've stated here.  As a first step to adult hood forum members should follow the leads, learn for themselves, and ultimately make their own decisions about how they move forward.  I'm confident that this is already happening, and people will make good decisions once they have the information.

Finally, I understand how important it is for you to keep people in groups, I understand how the social manipulations were created and the structures required to perpetrate these manipulations.  People are easily fooled by the type of technique that are being employed here, namely, comparing small data points of information, demanding inordinate level of proof, all while refusing to address the big picture where the constructs are so obvious.

What people here should retain is that this is a system, and that for every action there must be opposite actions... this is the dialectic that is manufactured and that we do not see.  So, when the Communist threat was supposed to be elevated to its highest level in preparations for inordinate military expenditures, opposition groups of course needed to be formed, and in the late 50's JBS was one of these groups.  For, social controller know there will be opposition to every action they take, so they create groups to capture and control that opposition before it even starts.  This is simply how the game is played.  Of course the actual allegiance of the actors who front for the opposition group must be hidden, that is obvious.  And of course the opposition group must be sellable to the public, as they must see it as real opposition and must buy into the false reality.  Once the public is bought into the opposition group, they will do anything to fight for its survival... that's the cognitive dissonance kicking in.

Anyway, my comments transcend all groups and organizations.  My message is to think on your own and to discard all thought leaders and create opinions based on your own humanity.

P.S.  If you remain curious about JBS, one starting point might be *Des Griffin's web site* where you can purchase a set of cassette tapes that play a conversation between Dr. Stuart Crane and Conrad Jarrell regarding the JBS and its foundings.  But then this is only one source.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> See, I really liked Interested Participant's arguments before you came along and destroyed them. 
> 
> Thanks a lot... 
> 
> It's too bad really. It all sounded so mysterious and conspiratorial...as if there was another red pill to be taken...after the first.
> 
> Oh well. I guess this is what happens when extravagant theories are asked to be proven. Sometimes the evidence just isn't there. 
> 
> Anybody who says facts are irrelevant trivialities probably shouldn't be trusted anyways...


InterestedParticipant's official motto is "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull$#@!".

And IP *IS* a master bull$#@! artist! 

Unfortunately, he can't BS all the people all the time. And he can't BS me AT ALL!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Anybody who says facts are irrelevant trivialities probably shouldn't be trusted anyways...


No doubt, bro!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> I'm here to get people to start relying on the mind that God gave them, and to stop relying on organizations who serve them up their view of the world and their opinions.


No, you're here to create paranoia and isolate patriots, so they'll be ineffective in combating the New World Order. 

There's ALWAYS strength in numbers, especially in well-organized groups like the John Birch Society.

And the REAL controlled opposition in the late 50's and 60's was CIA asset William F. Buckley and his Trotskyite pals at the CIA-funded National Review, who savagely attacked the JBS.

The New World Order knew that the fledgling John Birch Society was the first real organized opposition that they had ever faced, thus they sought to destroy it by setting up Buckley and other pseudoconservatives at the National Review. 

Buckley and his Trotskyite pals created a phony conservatism, in order to counteract the very real conservatism and aggressive anti-New World Order agenda of the JBS.

Sorry slick, but your whole propaganda effort in this thread = MONUMENTAL FAIL! 


.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> No, you're here to create paranoia and isolate patriots, so they'll be ineffective in combating the New World Order. 
> 
> There's ALWAYS strength in numbers, especially in well-organized groups like the John Birch Society.
> 
> And the REAL controlled opposition in the late 50's and 60's was CIA asset William F. Buckley and his Trotskyite pals at the CIA-funded National Review, who savagely attacked the JBS.
> 
> The New World Order knew that the fledgling John Birch Society was the first real organized opposition that they had ever faced, thus they sought to destroy it by setting up Buckley and other pseudoconservatives at the National Review. 
> 
> Buckley and his Trotskyite pals created a phony conservatism, in order to counteract the very real conservatism and aggressive anti-New World Order agenda of the JBS.
> ...


Suggesting that people begin to think on their own and stop listening to controlled actors is bull $#@! propaganda that should be dismissed... is this your proposition?

Further, people should bundle into groups where techniques developed by many social scientists can be used to control them, is that another one of your favorites?  What you are advocating is that people marginalize their own individuality in favor of group think, which is counter the Libertarian philosophy.




> *Tavistock Method Basic Premise*
> http://209.85.135.132/search?q=cache...ck+method&cd=1
> 
> An aggregate cluster of persons becomes a group when interaction between members occurs,
> when members' awareness of their common relationship develops and when a common group task
> emerges. Various forces can operate to produce a group: an external threat, collective threat, and
> collective regressive behavior, or attempts to satisfy needs for security, safety, dependency, and
> affection. A more deliberate force is the conscious choice of individuals to band together to perform
> a task.
> ...





> *Theory*
> 
> Groups, like dreams, have a manifest, overt aspect and a latent, covert aspect. The manifest
> aspect is the work group, a level of functioning at which members consciously pursue agreed-on
> objectives and work toward the completion of a task. *Although group members have hidden
> agendas, they rely on internal and external controls to prevent these hidden agendas from
> emerging and interfering with the announced group task*. They pool their irrational thinking and
> combine their skills to solve problems and make decisions.
> In truth, *groups do not always function rationally or productively, nor are individual members
> ...


You advocate that people walk into and stay in a trap, a trap where ample evidence exists to show was covertly setup by the leaders of the so-called NWO.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> And the REAL controlled opposition in the late 50's and 60's was CIA asset William F. Buckley and his Trotskyite pals at the CIA-funded National Review, who savagely attacked the JBS..


I agree with you on this point.  But what your not seeing is that both sides are/were controlled.  That's the part that you're missing.

*These guys always control all sides of an argument... and this is the most important lesson to learn from this thread.
*

That's what controlled opposition is all about.  It's not just one side that is controlled, but all sides of the dialectic.  Otherwise, you lose control of the dialectic.  So for every vector there must be a counter-vector.  That's why Griffin held on to Norman Dodd's interview for 20 years, for it would have exposed Communism as a fraud, and therefore destroyed the controlled opposition as well.

It's a game, and the sooner people see ALL of the game the better positioned they are to protect themselves.  You advocate the same game, which has gotten the public nowhere, becuase it is all controlled.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Interested Participant, I agree with a lot of what you have said, however, with regard to the JBS, you seem to have fallen for the same thing that you are protesting about.  The JBS has a lot of enemies and no wonder.  You yourself have fallen for a number of smear attacks on them.  You have been shown the error of your ways by more than just one poster here.  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...4&postcount=10

You know, I don't know about anyone else here, but when someone doesn't have the guts to stand up and admit when they are wrong, it makes me wonder about their intentions.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Interested Participant, I agree with a lot of what you have said, however, with regard to the JBS, you seem to have fallen for the same thing that you are protesting about.  The JBS has a lot of enemies and no wonder.  You yourself have fallen for a number of smear attacks on them.  You have been shown the error of your ways by more than just one poster here.  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpos...4&postcount=10
> 
> You know, I don't know about anyone else here, but when someone doesn't have the guts to stand up and admit when they are wrong, it makes me wonder about their intentions.


You must break out of your controlled paradigm, it is for your own survival.  Attempting to shut this topic down with your comment, especially as a moderator, is to shut down open discussion and is quite a negative force on everyone here, and quite frankly, makes me wonder what the agenda of this forum really is.

How anyone here can argue with a push toward independent thought development, outside of groups, groups that I argue are controlled, is beyond logic .

----------


## InterestedParticipant

This is from a conversation between James Dyer & *Eustace Mullins, author of Secrets of the Federal Reserve (1952)*....
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/268064.shtml




> *JBS was setup by Nelson Rockefeller*. I knew two people at the original meeting. *They needed a right-wing, anti-communist organization*. NR decided that Robert Welch was the man to run JBS, so he arranged for the sale of Welch's Candy Co. (where Robert Welch had been working for his brother John) to Nabisco (which was a Rockefeller controlled company) at a highly inflated price and Welch was given an income to run the John Birch Society.
> 
> *Revilo Oliver was a good friend of mine and he was one of the founders of the JBS*. He and I were sitting in his living room once and he told me that he knew Nelson *Rockefeller ran the Birch Society because he had a revolving fund at Chase Manhattan Bank*, and whenever Welch needed a quarter million dollars to meet the payroll, he'd go to CMB and withdraw the money.
> 
> _Oliver told you that?_
> 
> Himself. *One of the founders*, can't ask for better authority than that.







> _Let's touch on the Council on Foreign Relations..._
> 
> *The CFR was a phoney institution, they've never had any power at all. They take their orders from the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, the Rothschilds*. This bugaboo about the CFR has always made me laugh. Back in the 50's everybody thought the United States was ruled by this corrupt, sinister organization. In fact the CFR was a bunch of fatcats that got together in New York City, had dinner in luxurious hotels...they were all wealthy people, CEOS of banks and insurance companies and so forth...
> _
> So their place in the scheme of things is...?_
> 
> *They're strictly a diversion. They had no power,* and their policies were always written by the RIIA in London at Chatham House. I can't find an instance where the CFR has inaugurated a policy of any kind. Even today, people read books from the 50's about the sinister CFR and how sinister they are, like a KGB ruling the US...*I always thought it a joke*.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

That was a direct quote from Eustace Mullins, author of Secrets of the Federal Reserve (1952), who said he was told this information directly from Revilo Oliver, one of the JBS founders, while at Oliver's home for dinner. 

A little searching finds the info quoted below, which support Mullins and Oliver.




> In the article  *My 'One-Minute' Membership In the John Birch Society*, the following information, concerning the buyout of the Welch Candy Company is related:
> 
>     ".... In the August 1965 edition of Capsule News, Morris Bealle (now deceased) laid it bare. He wrote:
> 
> *Robert Welch (and his brother Jimmy) received a tremendous payoff from the House of Rockefeller two years ago, for organizing the John Birch Society and sitting on the communist lid for the past seven years*. The total pay-off was $10,800,000, less the value of the family candy company, which is reputed to be maybe $100,000 or $200,000.
> 
>     On October 1, 1963, Rockefeller's National Biscuit Company announced the "purchase" of the James O. Welch Candy Company of Cambridge, Massachusetts.
> 
>     In Moody's Manual of Industrials, and in Standard-and-Poor's Business Index, NBC gave the alleged purchase price as "200,000 shares of National Biscuit common stock." *According to The Wall Street Journal for Oct. 1, 1963, NBC common stock was selling for $54 a share on the New York Stock Exchange.
> ...

----------


## LibertyEagle

> You must break out of your controlled paradigm, it is for your own survival.


 



> Attempting to shut this topic down with your comment, especially as a moderator, is to shut down open discussion and is quite a negative force on everyone here, and quite frankly, makes me wonder what the agenda of this forum really is.


This is how you answer my statement that you are not admitting when you have been shown to be incorrect in your assertions?  Seriously?  

Frankly, it comes across as a technique that someone would use who was attempting to obfuscate.




> How anyone here can argue with a push toward independent thought development, outside of groups, groups that I argue are controlled, is beyond logic .


No one is arguing that.  If you look back through this thread, you will see me saying the very same thing.  

Here's what I'm seeing.  Your main focus seems to be to attack the John Birch Society and in doing so, are falling for some of the very techniques that you yourself are trying to steer us away from.  Some of your assertions have been shown to be wrong and when they are, instead of admitting you were incorrect, you attempt to just slide over them and continue the attack.  I find it quite peculiar.

I don't pledge allegiance to the JBS or any other organization and I agree with you that it's not wise to do so.  I believe that assertions and proposed facts should be verified before one just accepts them.  I'm thinking that you might want to do so too.

----------


## FrankRep

> That was a direct quote from Eustace Mullins, author of Secrets of the Federal Reserve (1952), who said he was told this information directly from Revilo Oliver, one of the JBS founders, while at Oliver's home for dinner. 
> 
> A little searching finds the info quoted below, which support Mullins and Oliver.





> JBS was setup by Nelson Rockefeller.


Nelson Rockefeller's Nabisco Company bought James O. Welch's Candy Company. James O. Welch is Robert Welch's brother.


*Saying that Nelson Rockefeller funded or setup the John Birch Society is a complete lie.* 

Here's the story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Welch,_Jr.

*Robert Welch* decided to manufacture candy as a way to earn a living, describing it as "the one field in which it seemed least impossible to get started without either capital or experience." He *founded the Oxford Candy Company* in Brooklyn, New York, which was a one-man operation until he hired his brother James to assist him. James Welch left to start his own candy company in 1925.
...

*The Oxford Candy Company went out of business during the Great Depression, but his brother's company, the James O. Welch Company, survived, and Robert was hired by his brother.* The company began making caramel lollipops, renamed Sugar Daddies, and Welch developed other well known candies such as Sugar Babies, Junior Mints, and Pom Poms. Welch retired a wealthy man in 1956.
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/02/01/us...y-company.html

In 1963 the National Biscuit Company, now *Nabisco Brands Inc., bought Mr. Welch's company*. Mr. Welch was a director of Nabisco from 1963 until his retirement in 1978. His son, James O. Welch Jr., of Short Hills, N.J., is president of Nabisco.


---


Do you seriously think Revilo Oliver, a Racist White Nationalist, is credible? The JBS kicked him out for being a racist. Revilo Oliver is a big reason why the JBS got smeared as racist.

Revilo Oliver called the JBS "the Birch hoax" because he thought the JBS was secretly run by Jews. That's why he was attacking the JBS.


Eustace Mullins is openly anti-Jewish and the JBS disowned him because of his views.


In the 1960s, Oliver supposedly broke with conventional American conservatism and, having become convinced that Welch had either cozened him from the start or sold out later, he even severed his connections with what he called "the Birch hoax." *He thus came to openly embrace an essentially far-right worldview, and eventually to assist William Luther Pierce in forming the National Alliance, a White Nationalist organization*, a significant portion of whose supporters and members would re-form under the name National Vanguard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revilo_P._Oliver

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Here's what I'm seeing.  Your main focus seems to be to attack the John Birch Society and in doing so, are falling for some of the very techniques that you yourself are trying to steer us away from.  Some of your assertions have been shown to be wrong and when they are, instead of admitting you were incorrect, you attempt to just slide over them and continue the attack.  I find it quite peculiar.


My primary focus is to expose the system, that has been my theme in all of my threads since I joined this forum in 2007.

JBS has been used as an example of controlled opposition because of the hypocrisy demonstrated in the OP's article.

The funny thing about it is I am not wrong.  You are the victim of sleight of hand and semantic deception.  For example, Griffin admitted in his reply email that he held on to Norman Dodd's interview, he did not deny that he held it for 20 years, only saying there was not sufficient interest to release it.  Those are his own words, not mine.  We have a JBS founder admitting what the JBS is and who really funded its startup.  We have the JBS being a Gatekeeper, even today, with articles that propose bogus external threats that are really internal.

The evidence is overwhelming, and the only thing keeping anyone from seeing it is psychological manipulation.

----------


## pcosmar

*InterestedParticipant*=Eustace Mullins fanboy

nuff said

----------


## LibertyEagle

> My primary focus is to expose the system, that has been my theme in all of my threads since I joined this forum in 2007.
> 
> JBS has been used as an example of controlled opposition because of the hypocrisy demonstrated in the OP's article.
> 
> The funny thing about it is I am not wrong.  You are the victim of sleight of hand and semantic deception.




I am not a member of the JBS.  I have read their stuff for many years; some of it I have agreed with and some I have not.  But, I always verify what they're saying before I just tuck it away.  One thing that I have always liked, is that they footnote their assertions, by backing them up with verifiable documents.




> For example, Griffin admitted in his reply email that he held on to Norman Dodd's interview, he did not deny that he held it for 20 years, only saying there was not sufficient interest to release it.  Those are his own words, not mine.


I'm not sure how old you are, but I remember stuff more damning than this, that many people were trying to get people to pay attention to.  People cared more than they do now, but it still wasn't enough.  People did not want to believe it could happen here.  Now, that doesn't mean that I'm happy that he didn't release it, but I read the stuff in that video in books, YEARS ago.  It wasn't like it was a secret, if you were looking, or cared.  In fact, the JBS wrote pieces about the very things that were in Griffin's interview.  As I recall, that was already pointed out to you by someone in this thread.  But instead of acknowledging that, you steam on.  Perhaps it is because it kind of takes the wind out of your assertion; I don't know.




> We have a JBS founder admitting what the JBS is and who really funded its startup.  We have the JBS being a Gatekeeper, even today, with articles that propose bogus external threats that are really internal.
> 
> The evidence is overwhelming, and the only thing keeping anyone from seeing it is psychological manipulation.


lol.

Oliver was kicked out for his beliefs.  I don't believe he was the only bad apple that they divested themselves of, over the years.  Good groups get infiltrated and if they're smart, they're vigilant and kick them out when they're identified.

For me, I read stuff from a bunch of sources and try my best to verify what I'm reading.  I think it's a problem to rely on any one source for all your news; whether that is the John Birch Society, Lew Rockwell.com, the MSM, or even Ron Paul.

----------


## jmdrake

Wow!  Awesome article!  Really hit home.  Especially this part.




> In a few instances, these groups have leaders who come right out of the ranks of the Council on Foreign Relations. In the case of Newt Gingrich, one has to marvel that the man who took control of the conservative groundswell in the early 1990s and misdirected it into supporting big government and foreign entanglements such as NAFTA, is back once again, paddling in front of the wave to steer it as before. This time his reemergence seems to be part of a bid for the Presidency.


I've been to two tea parties. recently organized by two different groups.  The second one really gave me pause.  The opening prayer asked God to help us "support Israel from where comes our salvation".  There was also a taped message played from Newt Gingrich.  A lot of "Obama bashing" with nobody pointing out the fact that the bailouts go back to Bush.  There were some good speakers too that stuck to important issues like small government and fiscal responsibility.  But on balance a casual observer would have thought it was just another GOP rally.  We can't afford to let that happen.

----------


## jmdrake

> My primary focus is to expose the system, that has been my theme in all of my threads since I joined this forum in 2007.
> 
> JBS has been used as an example of controlled opposition because of the hypocrisy demonstrated in the OP's article.
> 
> The funny thing about it is I am not wrong.  You are the victim of sleight of hand and semantic deception.  For example, Griffin admitted in his reply email that he held on to Norman Dodd's interview, he did not deny that he held it for 20 years, only saying there was not sufficient interest to release it.  Those are his own words, not mine.  We have a JBS founder admitting what the JBS is and who really funded its startup.  We have the JBS being a Gatekeeper, even today, with articles that propose bogus external threats that are really internal.
> 
> The evidence is overwhelming, and the only thing keeping anyone from seeing it is psychological manipulation.


  I'm not a Bircher although I do have friends who are.  We hadn't talked about what was said in this article, but it underscored a lot of my concerns.  The external threats are *NOT* bogus!  There is a concerted effort to undermine the "tea party" movement by making it appear to be nothing more than a GOP cheering squad.  If you aren't aware of this then you just aren't paying attention.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I'm not a Bircher although I do have friends who are.  We hadn't talked about what was said in this article, but it underscored a lot of my concerns.  The external threats are *NOT* bogus!  There is a concerted effort to undermine the "tea party" movement by making it appear to be nothing more than a GOP cheering squad.  If you aren't aware of this then you just aren't paying attention.


Yup, the New American is spot-on when it says that Korea is perpetrating the current cyber attacks.  Yup, that's one we should believe!

This is how gatekeeping is done, it obfuscates the real perpetrators....hides the real enemy.  This is why Griffin couldn't publish Dodd's interview until after the Communist threat was dismantled and the need for that dialectic muted.  And that is why the New American is hiding the real perpetrators of these cyber attacks, so that our illusions remain intact.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> For me, I read stuff from a bunch of sources and try my best to verify what I'm reading.  I think it's a problem to rely on any one source for all your news; whether that is the John Birch Society, Lew Rockwell.com, the MSM, or even Ron Paul.


Now, that is very encouraging.

So, should I assume that you've followed up the many leads that I've referred to in this thread, that you've done your own research and haven't relied solely on what anyone has said in this thread?

----------


## FrankRep

> Yup, the New American is spot-on when it says that Korea is perpetrating the current cyber attacks.  Yup, that's one we should believe!


The New American brings up this point that American wants a Cybersecurity bill passed. Now conveniently we're having Internet attacks. 

*The New American has already exposed these facts.*


*New Cybersecurity Regime Proposed*

Ann Shibler | The New American
09 April 2009

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index..../computers/983

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> *Saying that Nelson Rockefeller funded or setup the John Birch Society is a complete lie.*


The quote stated that Nelson Rockefeller arranged for the purchase of the Welch Candy company at an inflated price so that the startup of JBS could be funded.  According to Moody's Manual, two of [Nabisco's] directors were Roy E. Tomlinson and Don. G. Mitchell.  [Both are] members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Further, they are a pair of Rockefeller's "professional directors.

Does anyone here really believe that these directors would act on their own, without Nelson Rockefellers direction on a matter such as the acquisition of a company.  The Welch brothers were given $10,800,000, when it is reported that the business was  worth approximately $200,000.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> The New American brings up this point that American wants a Cybersecurity bill passed. Now conveniently we're having Internet attacks. 
> 
> *The New American has already exposed these facts.*
> 
> 
> *New Cybersecurity Regime Proposed*
> 
> Ann Shibler | The New American
> 09 April 2009
> ...


But the illusions of an external threat are maintained.  They must bee maintained at all costs.  No one can be allowed to break the paradigm, and see the system in its entirety.  That's called Gatekeeping.  

It's was they did with the Communist threat... oppose it in order to keep the manufactured dialectic alive and well while controlling right-wing patriots who were the greatest threat to the elite's plot.

----------


## FrankRep

> The quote stated that Nelson Rockefeller arranged for the purchase of the Welch Candy company at an inflated price so that the startup of JBS could be funded.  According to Moody's Manual, two of [Nabisco's] directors were Roy E. Tomlinson and Don. G. Mitchell.  [Both are] members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Further, they are a pair of Rockefeller's "professional directors.
> 
> Does anyone here really believe that these directors would act on their own, without Nelson Rockefellers direction on a matter such as the acquisition of a company.  The Welch brothers were given $10,800,000, when it is reported that the business was  worth approximately $200,000.


I would like to see the financials.

----------


## pcosmar

> The Welch brothers were given $10,800,000, when it is reported that the business was  worth approximately $200,000.


They sold it *too cheap*.
I still like Sugar Babies.

Those candies are sold in nearly every theater in the country and at premium prices.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Now, that is very encouraging.
> 
> So, should I assume that you've followed up the many leads that I've referred to in this thread, that you've done your own research and haven't relied solely on what anyone has said in this thread?


Dude, if you don't mind me asking you, how old are you?  You're acting like someone who has just discovered some of what has been going on for many years.  There are some of us here who have known about this stuff, although we're always learning, since before others were an itch in their daddy's pants.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I would like to see the financials.


Ask JBS exec team for them.  I would expect that they would want to be full disclosure on such a critical issue.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ask JBS exec team for them.  I would expect that they would want to be full disclosure on such a critical issue.


You're the one who made the claim, dude.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Dude, if you don't mind me asking you, how old are you?  You're acting like someone who has just discovered some of what has been going on for many years.  There are some of us here who have known about this stuff, although we're always learning, since before others were an itch in their daddy's pants.


So, to all those that are passively viewing this thread I hope you are seeing and understanding the pressure one comes under when they truly attempt to exercise their individuality and resist all pressures to be subsumed into a group.  Can you see all the various tactics that are in play to mute the individual's voice, it is quite astonishing.  Why are these pressures there, why are they so severe?  These are the questions to ask oneself?

How does one maintain the libertarian value system, of rugged individualism, in a society that attempts to co-opt everyone into a group framework, where everyone's thinking must agree, where no one is able to have a unique opinion without ridicule and threats against them?

I sincerely hope people are seeing this.  For this is what you will have to fight against if you really wish to maintain liberty, not simply some illusion of liberty that is constructed for you by others.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You're the one who made the claim, dude.


No, I was referring to other's claims (ie. Moody's Manual, Candy Industry, Mulllins, et. al.)

The point here is to learn to do your own research.  Stop being lazy and expecting me to serve-up every angle of every argument to you on a silver platter.

----------


## ramallamamama

It's a veritable 'coming out' party for controlled opposition.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> *InterestedParticipant*=Eustace Mullins fanboy
> 
> nuff said


BINGO!

Eustace Mullins was a radical anti-semite and racist, as well as CONTROLLED OPPOSITION against the New World Order.

InterestedParticipant and his beloved Mullins are CONTROLLED OPPOSITION against the New World Order, trying to attack legitimate anti-New World Order groups like the John Birch Society.




> *In 1968, Mullins authored a tract entitled The Biological Jew (Staunton, Va., Faith and Service Books, Aryan League of America, 1968). The tract includes the following statement about Nazi antisemitism: 
> 
> "Nazism is simply this — a proposal that the German people rid themselves of the parasitic Jews. The gentile host dared to protest against the continued presence of the parasite, and attempted to throw it off." 
> 
> The book also claims that Jews "drink the blood of an innocent gentile child" in religious ceremonies, and that this practice represents the essence of Judaism.*
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustace...nd_allegations

----------


## LibertyEagle

> So, to all those that are passively viewing this thread I hope you are seeing and understanding the pressure one comes under when they truly attempt to exercise their individuality and resist all pressures to be subsumed into a group.  Can you see all the various tactics that are in play to mute the individual's voice, it is quite astonishing.  Why are these pressures there, why are they so severe?  These are the questions to ask oneself?
> 
> How does one maintain the libertarian value system, of rugged individualism, in a society that attempts to co-opt everyone into a group framework, where everyone's thinking must agree, where no one is able to have a unique opinion without ridicule and threats against them?
> 
> I sincerely hope people are seeing this.  For this is what you will have to fight against if you really wish to maintain liberty, not simply some illusion of liberty that is constructed for you by others.


This is almost getting funny.  You are employing the very same tactics that you are accusing these organizations of using.  Do you not even see that?

----------


## acptulsa

> So, to all those that are passively viewing this thread I hope you are seeing and understanding the pressure one comes under when they truly attempt to exercise their individuality and resist all pressures to be subsumed into a group.  Can you see all the various tactics that are in play to mute the individual's voice, it is quite astonishing.  Why are these pressures there, why are they so severe?  These are the questions to ask oneself?
> 
> How does one maintain the libertarian value system, of rugged individualism, in a society that attempts to co-opt everyone into a group framework, where everyone's thinking must agree, where no one is able to have a unique opinion without ridicule and threats against them?
> 
> I sincerely hope people are seeing this.  For this is what you will have to fight against if you really wish to maintain liberty, not simply some illusion of liberty that is constructed for you by others.


Why are you here?

I'm a rugged individualist.  I also go to work every day and do what is required of me.  Why?  Because that way I can accomplish more than I could do as a 'team of one'.  If I am not helping, I get fired.  The company cannot afford to let me freeload.

I will join a pack of wolves.  I will not join a herd of sheep.  And so long as the leadership of that pack of wolves leads where I want to go, I'll not undermine it.

Only those who would see us divided and useless would even consider trying to make us think that every effort at organization for the greater goal is a direct threat to our individuality.

----------


## ScoutsHonor

> So, to all those that are passively viewing this thread I hope you are seeing and understanding the pressure one comes under when they truly attempt to exercise their individuality and resist all pressures to be subsumed into a group.  Can you see all the various tactics that are in play to mute the individual's voice, it is quite astonishing.  Why are these pressures there, why are they so severe?  These are the questions to ask oneself?
> 
> How does one maintain the libertarian value system, of rugged individualism, in a society that attempts to co-opt everyone into a group framework, where everyone's thinking must agree, where no one is able to have a unique opinion without ridicule and threats against them?
> 
> I sincerely hope people are seeing this.  For this is what you will have to fight against if you really wish to maintain liberty, not simply some illusion of liberty that is constructed for you by others.


Whoa!  He's just saying "don't patronize me" with your mentoring, er, mode - otherwise LE seems quite open-minded so far..

We ain't all against ya...

Now back to the topic, I hope.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Nelson Rockefeller's Nabisco Company bought James O. Welch's Candy Company. James O. Welch is Robert Welch's brother.


FrankRep is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

The Welch Candy Company was owned and controlled by Robert Welch's brother, James. Robert Welch NEVER owned or controlled it. James didn't share Robert's political interests.

The New World Order disinformation agent InterestedParticipant, is simply parroting the phony and disproven claim of the radical anti-semite, racist and New World Order disinformation agent, Eustace Mullins.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> This is almost getting funny.  You are employing the very same tactics that you are accusing these organizations of using.  Do you not even see that?


Of course he sees it. InterestedParticipant is a New World Order disinformation agent. He's the very controlled opposition against the New World Order that he claims the JBS to be.

However, he's definitely one of the least sophisticated NWO disinfo agents I've ever seen.

----------


## FrankRep

> But the illusions of an external threat are maintained.  They must bee maintained at all costs.  No one can be allowed to break the paradigm, and see the system in its entirety.  That's called Gatekeeping.  
> 
> It's was they did with the Communist threat... oppose it in order to keep the manufactured dialectic alive and well while controlling right-wing patriots who were the greatest threat to the elite's plot.


In the beginning of the JBS, late 50's, they viewed Communism to be the threat. As the JBS started to research deeper and become more experienced, they found out how the issue reached deeper than what anybody realized. Communism is just a tentacle and realized how so called "Capitalists" were subsidizing Communism and this fight isn't about ideology. Left-wing vs. Right-wing, Conservative vs. Liberal, for example, for meaningless words just to divide people.

You keep pointing to the early JBS before they had 10-20-50 years worth of research. Any experienced JBS member knows this issue goes Way beyond Communism.

----------


## Conservative Christian

The John Birch Society was the first national conservative organization to expose the world government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations, with the publication of Dan Smoot's book _The Invisible Government_ in 1962.

Robert Welch and the John Birch Society have openly declared since the early 1960's, that there is a conspiracy ABOVE communism, and that communism is merely a tentacle of what Welch termed "The Master Conspiracy".

New World Order disinformation agent InterestedParticipant = MONUMENTAL FAIL.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> In the beginning of the JBS, late 50's, they viewed Communism to be the threat. As the JBS started to research deeper and become more experienced, they found out how the issue reached deeper than what anybody realized. Communism is just a tentacle and realized how so called "Capitalists" were subsidizing Communism and this fight isn't about ideology. Left-wing vs. Right-wing, Conservative vs. Liberal, for example, for meaningless words just to divide people.
> 
> You keep pointing to the early JBS before they had 10-20-50 years worth of research. Any experienced JBS member knows this issue goes Way beyond Communism.


FrankRep nailed it! I couldn't have said it much better myself. 

The John Birch Society sold and distributed SEVERAL MILLION copies of JBS member Gary Allen's 1971 classic _None Dare Call It Conspiracy_, which exposed the conspiracy of the so-called "Capitalists" who founded, funded and controlled the international communist movement and the Soviet Union.

Can the New World Order disinformation agent InterestedParticipant get ANYTHING right?!

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> This is almost getting funny.  You are employing the very same tactics that you are accusing these organizations of using.  Do you not even see that?


Why are  you attempting to making this thread about me?  This seems to be a continual pattern on your part.  I am not a membership organization with thousands of members and a magazine.  I don't think anyone here could care less about me.  The point of this thread is Controlled Opposition and how to identify them, and the focus is on one particular group... a case study if you will.

But if you must redirect everyone's attention to one forum member, the please spell it out for the audience. Yet, before you do, I want to to repeat that I have continually called for people to do their own research, to do their own homework, to come to their own individual opinions and to resist the pressures of groups.  I don't hear anyone delivering that message, especially groups who's survival is based upon their membership.

I even have referred people to the methods that groups use, and posted information on how the group dynamic works (Tavistock Method is one example).  Groups or member based organizations can't and won't do this, for it is in their own disinterest.

Individuality is the antithesis of these groups, no matter what position these groups are espousing.  This is very different message than the message that any group is distributing.

In fact, I've been ridiculed in this thread repeatedly, even called a lier because I refuse to spoon-feed people all of the details and refute every small point.  I want people to search for answers on their own.  I want people to tough-it through the maze of information and engage in independent critical thinking in an effort to come to their own opinion, one they've developed outside of group influences.

So, with that frame of reference on the table, please tell the audience what it is that I am doing.  Something that you must disrespect so much that you call into question my age and attack me as merely amusing.

Again folks, looks at one must endure.  Burn this into your brain and determine for yourself if you are adult enough to handle the pressure of assimilation when it hits you.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Whoa!  He's just saying "don't patronize me" with your mentoring, er, mode - otherwise LE seems quite open-minded so far..
> 
> We ain't all against ya...
> 
> Now back to the topic, I hope.


ummm.... he's got the JBS url in his signature block.... you call that open minded?  I'd call it *vectored*.

I've got to step away for the weekend, please feel free to talk amongst yourselves.  Let me know when someone breaks free from the dialectic.  We're getting close to a break through moment for our advanced participants.  It's traumatic, but you'll survive it when it comes.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Why are you here?
> 
> I'm a rugged individualist.  I also go to work every day and do what is required of me.  Why?  Because that way I can accomplish more than I could do as a 'team of one'.  If I am not helping, I get fired.  The company cannot afford to let me freeload.
> 
> I will join a pack of wolves.  I will not join a herd of sheep.  And so long as the leadership of that pack of wolves leads where I want to go, I'll not undermine it.
> 
> Only those who would see us divided and useless would even consider trying to make us think that every effort at organization for the greater goal is a direct threat to our individuality.


Well said, bro! 

InterestedParticipant is trying to create paranoia, division and isolation. Paranoid, isolated individuals are of little concern to the New World Order.

However, they do fear national organizations like the John Birch Society, that bring rugged individualists together to combat the New World Order.

There's ALWAYS great strength in organized numbers.

----------


## jmdrake

> Yup, the New American is spot-on when it says that Korea is perpetrating the current cyber attacks.  Yup, that's one we should believe!


And you have proof that the North Koreans weren't involved?  Note I haven't read this "New American" article you're referring to.  I have seen this in the MSM though.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/10/te...cyber.html?hpw

I do know that North Korea is a criminal regime with some technical sophistication.  I do know that they once kidnapped Japanese citizens just to see what Japan was like.  (Why not just visit Japan?)  I know this *because North Korea admitted it!*  So right now the "New American" is sounding a LOT more credible than you.




> This is how gatekeeping is done, it obfuscates the real perpetrators....hides the real enemy.


Funny.  But that seems to be exactly what *YOU* are doing!  Newt Gingrich is obviously no fan of liberty shown by his cutting a "global warming" commercial with Nancy Pelosi.  And yet at a tea party with a primary focus of protesting the recently past cap and trade bill we have a speech played by Newt!  I'm not blaming the organizers for this.  Well....maybe I am.  But I'm not blaming the many well intentioned people who came.  But the fact is that we can't afford to sit idly by and allow people like Newt to co-opt a movement that began while Bush was still president.




> This is why Griffin couldn't publish Dodd's interview until after the Communist threat was dismantled and the need for that dialectic muted.  And that is why the New American is hiding the real perpetrators of these cyber attacks, so that our illusions remain intact.


 And I'm sure you have documentation of who these real perps are?

----------


## pcosmar

> ummm.... he's got the JBS url in his signature block.... you call that open minded?  I'd call it *vectored*.


And I would call you ignorant. ( not a personal attack, just an observation)

BTW , he is a lady.

----------


## jmdrake

Oh.  Found the article New American Article.  Looks like you lied mr. "InterestedParticipant".  The New American made no claim on who actually launched the attack but only raised the question (raised by many others) if it came from North Korea.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....computers/1379

Note, even if North Korea was involved that doesn't mean others weren't as well.

----------


## Conservative Christian

InterestedParticipant has lost all credibility, if he ever had any to begin with. 

One poster after the other just keeps exposing his numerous brazen lies and self-contradictions.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Oh.  Found the article New American Article.  Looks like you lied mr. "InterestedParticipant".  The New American may no claim on who actually launched the attack but only raised the question (raised by many others) if it came from North Korea.
> 
> http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....computers/1379
> 
> Note, even if North Korea was involved that doesn't mean others weren't as well.


InterestedParticipant lied?!

So what's new?!

----------


## FrankRep

> Oh.  Found the article New American Article.  Looks like you lied mr. "InterestedParticipant".  The New American may no claim on who actually launched the attack but only raised the question (raised by many others) if it came from North Korea.
> 
> http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....computers/1379
> 
> Note, even if North Korea was involved that doesn't mean others weren't as well.



*Correct.*

I would like to point out that The New American shows how the United States wants the new Cybersecurity bill passed:

New Cybersecurity Regime Proposed
Ann Shibler | The New American
09 April 2009
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index..../computers/983


Now, very conveniently, the United States is attacked on the Internet!


*Cyber Attacks Originating With North Korea?*
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....computers/1379


On top of that. Jay Rockefeller says: "Internet should have never been invented"

YouTube - Jay Rockefeller "Internet should have never been invented"

----------


## FrankRep

InterestedParticipant is playing the same game the Media did by trying to link Ron Paul with Neo-Nazis. Remember Don Black's donation to the Ron Paul campaign?

Exact same game.

----------


## RonneJJones

> InterestedParticipant lied?!
> 
> So what's new?!


Is it Conservative and Christian to openly and repeatedly call someone a liar?  I've never seen this in this forum.  Are you attempting to claim the moral high ground here?

----------


## FrankRep

> Is it Conservative and Christian to openly and repeatedly call someone a liar?  I've never seen this in this forum.  Are you attempting to claim the moral high ground here?


When someone is spreading false information, it's your duty to correct that person.

----------


## pcosmar

> Is it Conservative and Christian to openly and repeatedly call someone a liar?  I've never seen this in this forum.  Are you attempting to claim the moral high ground here?


Huh?
There is nothing Un Christian about calling someone that lies a lier.
Christ himself rebuked those that were dishonest.

----------


## pcosmar

> ?


I have a question Ronnie.
Are you a "Sock Puppet"?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=185385

You seem to appear , post and run.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Is it Conservative and Christian to openly and repeatedly call someone a liar?  I've never seen this in this forum.  Are you attempting to claim the moral high ground here?


I PROVED that he is a liar on pages 20 and 21 of this thread, to anybody who wishes to research it.

It's ALWAYS "Conservative and Christian" to tell the TRUTH, which I have.

And if you've "never seen" anybody on this forum repeatedly called a liar before, then I must presume you have very little reading comprehension.

People being called a "liar" is pretty common on this forum, and for that matter, MULTIPLE other individuals in this thread have called InterestedParticipant a liar.

Thus your whining is irrelevant. Now PLEASE try to stay on thread topic.

Thank you!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> When someone is spreading false information, it's your duty to correct that person.


Amen, bro!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Huh?
> There is nothing Un Christian about calling someone that lies a lier.
> Christ himself rebuked those that were dishonest.


Tell it like it is, brother!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> I have a question Ronnie.
> Are you a "Sock Puppet"?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=185385
> 
> You seem to appear , post and run.


It sounds like you're on to him, pcosmar!

----------


## jmdrake

> Is it Conservative and Christian to openly and repeatedly call someone a liar?  I've never seen this in this forum.  Are you attempting to claim the moral high ground here?


Hmmmmm...what would Jesus say in this situation?  Here's a quote.

_John 8:44 (New King James Version)

44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it._

Ok.  Jesus didn't call the pharisees liars.  He called them children of satan and said satan was the liar.  Much better.

----------


## RonneJJones

> I have a question Ronnie.
> Are you a "Sock Puppet"?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=185385
> 
> You seem to appear , post and run.


How dare you begin to attack me.  Back off right now.

Just because this thread has turned into a mob, doesn't me it can attack anyone who enters the thread and doesn't join-in on the attack.  As far as I am concerned, this thread has turned into a disgusting display, and the moderators have not only turned a blind eye, they have fed into the mob feeding frenzy.

This is precisely why I choose to stay away from groups, the group think and mob behavior that develops just sickens me.  If people want to see where they want to take us next, well here it is.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> How dare you begin to attack me.  Back off right now.
> 
> Just because this thread has turned into a mob, doesn't me it can attack anyone who enters the thread and doesn't join-in on the attack.  As far as I am concerned, this thread has turned into a disgusting display, and the moderators have not only turned a blind eye, they have fed into the mob feeding frenzy.
> 
> This is precisely why I choose to stay away from groups, the group think and mob behavior that develops just sickens me.  If people want to see where they want to take us next, well here it is.


^The sockpuppet has returned! 

InterestedParticipant has been PROVEN to be a liar, REPEATEDLY in this thread. He has made NUMEROUS SERIOUS charges that he has been totally unable to prove---and I have PERSONALLY destroyed MANY of his false claims.

People who make false claims, WILL be denounced. That's human nature. If a white person committed a crime and attempted to blame it on a black person, but the white person's guilt was eventually discovered, he would be denounced by many. Plain and simple.

If you don't like to associate with groups, fine! Run along, lad! Nobody's making you stay here. Nobody's making you post here.

And NOBODY would be denouncing InterestedParticipant, if he hadn't been caught telling so many lies, and trying to smear an honorable patriotic group that has been in the freedom fight for 50 years.

An individual of dubious intent like yourself, comes into a thread very late, blindly defending an individual who has REPEATEDLY been PROVEN to be LYING. Then you have the nerve to wonder why you're being denounced.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> How dare you begin to attack me.  Back off right now.
> 
> Just because this thread has turned into a mob, doesn't me it can attack anyone who enters the thread and doesn't join-in on the attack.  As far as I am concerned, this thread has turned into a disgusting display, and the moderators have not only turned a blind eye, they have fed into the mob feeding frenzy.
> 
> This is precisely why I choose to stay away from groups, the group think and mob behavior that develops just sickens me.  If people want to see where they want to take us next, well here it is.


You're a real drama queen!  

InterestedParticipant [IP] has NOT been threatened in any way. Nobody has told IP he can no longer participate in this thread. Nobody has used vulgar language toward IP.  

The moderators haven't intervened, because there haven't been any significant rules violations in this thread.

You come into a thread attempting to defend a proven liar and smear artist, then have the gall to wonder why you are also being denounced.

What's really happening is that your compatriot InterestedParticipant is taking it on the chin here, and you're here to help him try to save face. Sorry friend, but it's way too late for that! 

Your attempt to stifle free speech/discussion in this thread has been duly noted, and soundly rejected.

----------


## ScoutsHonor

> ummm.... he's got the JBS url in his signature block.... you call that open minded?  I'd call it *vectored*.


(Umm,..vectored?  Could you explain?  I think I get the general gist but I like to keep my definitions clear.)

Re: the URL, I guess she's got that in the signature block because she believes in the JBS, which doesn't necessarily mean she's not open to new information.

I see now though that a veritable barrage of negative posts have been posted, so will wait to see if this thread is still "alive" after you return.  

Regards.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> (Umm,..vectored?  Could you explain?  I think I get the general gist but I like to keep my definitions clear.)
> 
> Re: the URL, I guess she's got that in the signature block because she believes in the JBS, which doesn't necessarily mean she's not open to new information.
> 
> I see now though that a veritable barrage of negative posts have been posted, so will wait to see if this thread is still "alive" after you return.  
> 
> Regards.


There have been no significant rules violations in this thread. Nobody has been threatened. Nobody has been told they can't post here anymore. Nobody has used vulgar language.

"Negative posts" are no reason to curtail free speech. And the "negative posts" are the result of a certain individual making serious, unfounded charges and smears against the JBS.

There's no reason for this thread to be shut down. At most, it should be moved to "hot topics".

----------


## ScoutsHonor

Great!

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Why are  you attempting to making this thread about me?  This seems to be a continual pattern on your part.  I am not a membership organization with thousands of members and a magazine.  I don't think anyone here could care less about me.  T*he point of this thread is Controlled Opposition and how to identify them*,


Exactly.  And I am merely pointing out that you are using some of the very techniques that you accuse the 'controlled opposition' of using.




> and the focus is on one particular group... a case study if you will


.
You are the one who has made the JBS "the focus" of this thread; not the thread-starter.  And if you are going to do so and do not backup your assertions, you can expect on this board that you will receive some flak.




> But if you must redirect everyone's attention to one forum member, the please spell it out for the audience. Yet, before you do, I want to to repeat that I have continually called for people to do their own research, to do their own homework, to come to their own individual opinions and to resist the pressures of groups.  I don't hear anyone delivering that message, especially groups who's survival is based upon their membership.


Are you wanting me to repeat what I already posted?




> Here's what I'm seeing. Your main focus seems to be to attack the John Birch Society and in doing so, are falling for some of the very techniques that you yourself are trying to steer us away from. Some of your assertions have been shown to be wrong and when they are, instead of admitting you were incorrect, you attempt to just slide over them and continue the attack. I find it quite peculiar.
> 
> I don't pledge allegiance to the JBS or any other organization and I agree with you that it's not wise to do so. I believe that assertions and proposed facts should be verified before one just accepts them. I'm thinking that you might want to do so too.





> I even have referred people to the methods that groups use, and posted information on how the group dynamic works (Tavistock Method is one example).  Groups or member based organizations can't and won't do this, for it is in their own disinterest.
> 
> Individuality is the antithesis of these groups, no matter what position these groups are espousing.  This is very different message than the message that any group is distributing.


So basically, you're saying not to put your trust in any group and to think for yourself?  Yup.  I've said the same thing several times in this thread.  I also suggest that people do not just accept what *you*  or any individual says either, without doing the research.  In the case of the JBS, there is all kinds of disinformation out there and it has existed for years.  One has to do more than to just cut-and-paste from a website to determine whether the claims have merit.




> In fact, I've been ridiculed in this thread repeatedly, even called a lier because I refuse to spoon-feed people all of the details and refute every small point.


Name-calling is never the best way to win an argument.  But, from reviewing the posts it appears to me that the reason you were called that is because some of your assertions were shown to be false.




> I want people to search for answers on their own.  I want people to tough-it through the maze of information and engage in independent critical thinking in an effort to come to their own opinion, one they've developed outside of group influences.


That's good.  I think the part that some people had trouble with is that you went far beyond that and made a number of claims against the JBS that you didn't seem to want to back up and when shown that you were incorrect in some of your assertions, you did not step forward and admit it.

So, yes, independent critical thinking is a good thing.  Doing research is too.  Don't you think both of these things that you suggest others to do, you should hold yourself accountable for also?




> So, with that frame of reference on the table, please tell the audience what it is that I am doing.  Something that you must disrespect so much that you call into question my age and attack me as merely amusing.


It wasn't an attack; it was a question.  And I asked it because of the condescending manner in which you were approaching everyone else.  Not all of us just fell off a turnip truck yesterday, you know.  




> Again folks, looks at one must endure.  Burn this into your brain and determine for yourself if you are adult enough to handle the pressure of assimilation when it hits you.


Don't you think this is a bit dramatic?  You came into someone else's thread and started flinging insults about an organization that you seem to hate.  You didn't back up much of anything you said for the longest time and when you tried to, you linked to someone else's web page who made all kinds of unsubstantiated claims.   When some asked you to backup your mudslinging, you either refused or got offended and attempted to divert by telling people they couldn't understand unless they researched the techniques of controlled opposition, or just claimed you were being unfairly treated.  Neither of those answered the question.  I've read some about the techniques that are used by the controlled opposition.  I believe *this* one is called 'diversion'.  




> ummm.... he's got the JBS url in his signature block.... you call that open minded?  I'd call it *vectored*.


What do you mean by your comment?

I have a number of sites in my sig line.  I read all kinds of things to get information.  The JBS is just one of many.  I do not pledge allegiance to them, or any organization.  I thought such independent thought was what you were suggesting throughout this entire thread and some of your others?  Or, is it just the fact that you have a bee in your bonnet over the JBS?  Even then, I'm still open to what you have to say, but you're going to have to do a better job than you have done so far in backing up your claims.  Otherwise, it is just so much gossip.

Note: And BTW, I'm not a "he".

----------


## Conservative Christian

> So, yes, independent critical thinking is a good thing.  Doing research is too.  Don't you think both of these things that you suggest others to do, you should hold yourself accountable for also?


BINGO!

Basically what InterestedParticipant (IP) is saying here is "Anybody who disagrees with me is an uncritical thinker".

But of course, genuine critical thinking involves looking at things from ALL possible angles.

True critical thinking means questioning EVERYTHING----INCLUDING InterestedParticipant's point of view and unfounded assertions.

I'm ROTFLMAO over the fact that IP whines about us allegedly being "uncritical thinkers", when it's painfully obvious he wants us to UNCRITICALLY accept his unfounded assertions and smears against the JBS.

And there's nothing wrong with calling a liar a liar. I've proven that IP has lied numerous times in this thread.

If IP doesn't like being called a liar, then I suggest he stop lying. 

Anybody who claims that calling a liar a liar is "un-Christian", obviously isn't too familiar with the Holy Bible. Christ Jesus himself refers to multiple individuals in the New Testament as "liars", "hypocrites",  "vipers", "fools", "children of Satan" etc.

----------


## pcosmar

> How dare you begin to attack me.  Back off right now.
> 
> .


Ooooo, I'm so intimidated.  /Not
I did not attack you.I asked a simple question based on your posting history.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search....archid=3748727

BTW, I try very hard not to be rude. But I can be. 
Don't push my buttons, and just answer the question.

----------


## RonneJJones

> Ooooo, I'm so intimidated.  /Not
> I did not attack you.I asked a simple question based on your posting history.
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search....archid=3748727
> 
> BTW, I try very hard not to be rude. But I can be. 
> Don't push my buttons, and just answer the question.


What you are attempting to do is intimidate people from joining the discussion who refuse to join the mob.  It's either someone enters the thread and participates in the mob or they are intimidated and victimized as well.

This is what has happened in this thread, and the moderators have facilitated it.  There's no logical discussion going on in here anymore, its accusations, namecalling and branding people with Scarlett letters.  This is not an environment for objective discussion and learning.

*This is about Assimilation or Castration*.  There are no other options being allowed here.

Ugh, what happened to all the smart people who used to post at RPF... why did they leave and where did they all go.

----------


## FrankRep

> What you are attempting to do is intimidate people from joining the discussion who refuse to join the mob.  It's either someone enters the thread and participates in the mob or they are intimidated and victimized as well.
> 
> This is what has happened in this thread, and the moderators have facilitated it.  There's no logical discussion going on in here anymore, its accusations, namecalling and branding people with Scarlett letters.  This is not an environment for objective discussion and learning.
> 
> *This is about Assimilation or Castration*.  There are no other options being allowed here.
> 
> Ugh, what happened to all the smart people who used to post at RPF... why did they leave and where did they all go.


Kiss and make up. Let go of the petty squabbles.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> What you are attempting to do is intimidate people from joining the discussion who refuse to join the mob.  It's either someone enters the thread and participates in the mob or they are intimidated and victimized as well.
> 
> This is what has happened in this thread, and the moderators have facilitated it.  There's no logical discussion going on in here anymore, its accusations, namecalling and branding people with Scarlett letters.  This is not an environment for objective discussion and learning.
> 
> *This is about Assimilation or Castration*.  There are no other options being allowed here.
> 
> Ugh, what happened to all the smart people who used to post at RPF... why did they leave and where did they all go.


NO, pcosmar is NOT trying to intimidate ANYBODY from joining the discussion, and NOBODY is being victimized.

You sound an AWFUL lot like InterestedParticipant, so pcosmar's question as to whether you're a "sockpuppet" is completely legitimate.

NOBODY in this thread is preventing you or your alter-ego InterestedParticipant (IP) from posting, ESPECIALLY the moderators.

Now you and your alter-ego IP need to quit wallowing and whining in self-pity, and start giving us REAL DOCUMENTATION for your dubious and disproven claims.

What's REALLY happening here is YOU are trying to DEFLECT people's attention away from the intellectual ass-whipping IP has been taking in this thread, because of his virtual complete inability to document and provide solid evidence for his unfounded and scurrilous charges.

Sorry, but your DEFLECTION technique = MONUMENTAL FAIL.

It has become painfully obvious that you are trying to get this thread shut down by the moderators, because your alter-ego IP is making a bigger fool of himself every time he posts, as you are.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Ugh, what happened to all the smart people who used to post at RPF... why did they leave and where did they all go.


SO typical of RonneJJones and his alter-ego InterestedParticipant.

Anybody who disagrees with InterestedParticipant and Ronne, and doesn't uncritically and blindly accept everything they say, is just "dumb".

ROTFLMAO!

----------


## Conservative Christian

> *This is about Assimilation or Castration*.  There are no other options being allowed here.


Sure there are. You can post anything you bloody want. No member or moderator is stopping you.

Now stop engaging in *Deflection*, and start presenting SOLID EVIDENCE and DOCUMENTATION for yours and InterestedParticipant's scurrilous and disproven claims.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Just logged in remotely to see how the thread is going and I can't say I expected to see anything too different.  I've added Conservative Christian to my ignore list because the posts are downright destructive and are obviously meant only to be inflammatory.  It really would have been nice to use this thread as a growth and educational process, but that opportunity is obviously being thwarted.

When I'm back tomorrow I'll post some summary thoughts for those that are still trying to be objective.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

*Here is some of what groups do to the individual, irrespective of the group of discussion....
*
Disappear everything in the nature of critical and personal judgmentLimit the propagandee's field of thought to the extent that it provides him with ready made (and moreover, unreal) thoughts and stereotypes.Orients the subject towards very limited ends and prevents him from using his mind or experimenting on his own.It determines the core from which all his thoughts must derive and draws from the beginning a sort of guideline that permits neither criticism nor imagination.Any imagination exercised will lead only to small digressions from the fixed line and to only slightly deviant, preliminary responses within the authorized framework. Acceptance of this line, of such ends and limitations, presupposes the suppression of all critical judgment, which in turn is a result of the crystallization of thoughts and attitudes and the creations of taboos.






> *Alienation Through Propaganda*
> (page 169)
> 
> To be alienated means to be someone other (alienus) than oneself; it also can mean to belong to someone else, it means to be deprived of one's self, to be subjected to, or even identified with, someone else. That is definitely the effect of propaganda. _Propaganda strips the individual robs him of himself, and makes him live an alien and artificial life, to such an extent that he becomes another person and obeys impulses foreign to him. He obeys someone else_.
> 
> Once again, to produce this effect, propaganda restricts itself to utilizing, increasing, and reinforcing the individual's inclination to lose himself in something bigger than he is, to dissipate his individuality, to free his ego of all doubt, conflict, and suffering - _through fusion with others; to devote himself to a great leader and a great cause_. In large groups, man feels united with others and he therefore tries to free himself by blending with a large group. Indeed, propaganda offers him that possibility in an exceptionally easy and satisfying fashion. _But it pushes the individual into the mass until he disappears entirely_.
> 
> To begin with, what is it that propaganda makes disappear? _Everything in the nature of critical and personal judgment_. Obviously, propaganda limits the application of thought. It limits the propagandee's field of thought to the extent that it provides him with ready made (and moreover, unreal) thoughts and stereotypes.  _It orients him towards very limited ends and prevents him from using his mind or experimenting on his own_. It determines the core from which all his thoughts must derive and draws from the beginning a sort of guideline that permits neither criticism nor imagination. More precisely, his imagination will lead only to a small digressions from the _fixed line_ and to only slightly deviant, _preliminary responses within the framework_. In this fashion we see the progressives make some "variations" around the basic propaganda tenets of the Communist party. But the field of such variations is strictly limited.
> 
> ...

----------


## RonneJJones

Thanks very much for posting again in this thread and taking it in a much needed and very positive direction.  This should be read and understood by everyone here.... it seems to me it is irrelevant who the group is or what their stated goals are, the individual subsumes to the group as soon as they acquiesce to the need for feeling part of something, of putting the need for acceptance and placation over their own individuality.  Great stuff!




> [B]We thus reach the same point via different route: on the one hand, propaganda destroys the critical faculty; on the other, it presents objectives on which that faculty could not be exercised, and thus renders it useless.
> 
> All this obviously leads to the elimination of personal judgment, which takes place as soon as the individual accepts public opinion as his own. When he expresses public opinion in his words and gestures, he no longer expresses himself, but his society, his group. To be sure, the individual always will express the group, more or less. But in this case he will express it totally and in response to a systematic operation.
> 
> Moreover, this impersonal public opinion, when produced by propaganda, is artificial. It corresponds to nothing authentic; yet is precisely this artificial opinion that the individual absorbs. He is filled with it; he no longer expresses his ideas, but those of his group, and with great fervor at that - it is a propaganda prerequisite that he should assert them with firmness and conviction. He absorbs the collective judgments, the creatures of propaganda; he absorbs them like the nourishment which they have, in fact become. he expounds them as his own. He takes a vigorous stand, begins to oppose others. He asserts himself at the very moment that he denies his own self without realizing it.

----------


## Deborah K

> Thanks very much for posting again in this thread and taking it in a much needed and very positive direction.  This should be read and understood by everyone here.... it seems to me it is irrelevant who the group is or what their stated goals are, the individual subsumes to the group as soon as they acquiesce to the need for feeling part of something, of putting the need for acceptance and placation over their own individuality.  Great stuff!


Believe or not, a person can actually participate in an organization without - as you state - "putting the need for acceptance and placation over their own individuality".

I reject the notion that participation with, and/or acknowledgement of people (with leadership skills) and various organizations, somehow denotes a loss of individualism.  That presumes that all participation in such, is cultish.  Only in cults is there a loss of individuality.

If one is going to presume that involvement and agreement with all such organizations and people results in a loss of individuality, then that would also include anyone who is in agreement with IP.  And that would be just dumb, now wouldn't it?

----------


## RonneJJones

> Believe or not, a person can actually participate in an organization without - as you state - "putting the need for acceptance and placation over their own individuality".
> 
> I reject the notion that participation with, and/or acknowledgement of people (with leadership skills) and various organizations, somehow denotes a loss of individualism.  That presumes that all participation in such, is cultish.  Only in cults is there a loss of individuality.
> 
> If one is going to presume that involvement and agreement with all such organizations and people results in a loss of individuality, then that would also include anyone who is in agreement with IP.  And that would be just dumb, now wouldn't it?


I don't necessarily disagree with you, as long as the person is able to recognize the techniques of manipulation.  But my concern here is that these techniques are not taught, and are largely unknown in the general population.  For example, would a group member recognize sophisticated Delphi Techniques or NLP if perpetrated during a group setting?  Further, if one does not go outside the group for affirmation, how does one test the hypotheses and information being promulgated by the group?  Is it simply accepted?

----------


## Deborah K

I see what you're saying.  This is has been an issue since Edward L. Bernays turned propaganda into public relations:

In Propaganda (1928), his most important book, Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

----------


## RonneJJones

> I see what you're saying.  This is has been an issue since Edward L. Bernays turned propaganda into public relations:
> 
> In Propaganda (1928), his most important book, Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy:
> 
> The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.


Yup, Bernays certainly advanced some of the craft, but other critical techniques have been around since before Plato, who significantly advanced the concept of the dialectic.

But yes, my point is, if you are unaware of the techniques, and are unable to recognize them and how they are designed to impact you, then how can you be certain you are not a subject of these techniques, especially when you are talking about well funded sophisticated nationally or internationally run "groups."

----------


## Conservative Christian

The New World Order disinformation agent and his sock-puppet have returned.

There is ALWAYS greater strength in organized group opposition to tyranny.

It is a primary goal of the New World Order to create paranoia and isolation, so they can divide and conquer. 

Paranoid, isolated individuals such as Theodore Kaczynski are useless to the cause of freedom, and often resort to unnecessary violence to achieve their goals.

..

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> (*Umm,..vectored?  Could you explain?*  I think I get the general gist but I like to keep my definitions clear.)
> 
> Re: the URL, I guess she's got that in the signature block because she believes in the JBS, which doesn't necessarily mean she's not open to new information.
> 
> I see now though that a veritable barrage of negative posts have been posted, so will wait to see if this thread is still "alive" after you return.  
> 
> Regards.





> Originally Posted by InterestedParticipant
> 
> 
> ummm.... he's got the JBS url in his signature block.... you call that open minded?  I'd call it *vectored*.
> 
> 
> What do you mean by your comment?


Now we are getting somewhere.  Thanks for the questions.  Let me continue to try to refocus this thread on the tools and definitions that the public must incorporate into their inventory of understanding.  Let's see if that can be a more productive direction.  

So I will start this off with the following post, which will be followed by other posts in this thread along the same line.... all designed and intended to provide insight into how the system works and to answer the questions posed about *vectors*, explaining what they are and how they fit into the framework of control that I am attempting to expose.

*Joint Vision 2020*

Let me start this part of the discussion by introducing the reader to the Joint Vision 2020 document released on May 30, 2000, by the United States Department of Defense, proclaiming the need for "full-spectrum dominance" on the battlefield. The Joint Vision 2020 concepts have subsequently formed the basis of United States military doctrine.

Document available at
http://www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/[/QUOTE]

*Full Spectrum Dominance (FSD)*




> *Military speak*
> 
> Full-spectrum dominance is a military doctrine whereby a joint military structure achieves control over all elements of the battlespace using land, air, maritime and space based assets.
> 
> Full spectrum dominance includes the physical battlespace; air, surface and sub-surface as well as the *electromagnetic spectrum and information space. Control implies that freedom of opposition force assets to exploit the battlespace is wholly constrained.*


Interpretation:
The "information space" (ie. all information communicated to potential adversaries) and the entire "electromagnetic spectrum" (ie. television, radio, citizens band radio, Ham radio, Internet, electricity grids, cellular telephone networks, etc.) must be controlled under this doctrine. Hence,  all mediums of communication are controlled as well as all information passed through these mediums.  This definition of control means any potential adversaries are wholly constrained.  Hence, anything or anyone that is considered a potential adversary is attacked using the various techniques at their disposal.   I will begin to discuss techniques later in this thread.Lastly, before anyone says, hey wait, this doctrine only applies to military activities in the battle space.  Well, what is critical to understand is that with the introduction of global terrorism (ie "Global War on Terrorism"), the US Military now considers the entire planet a _War Theater_.  Hence, these techniques apply everywhere and to anyone (ie all potential adversaries).  

These are the primary goals of FSD, and they apply globally.

*Information Operations: Total Information Dominance (TID)*

Now, let's move on to one of the key tenants under FSD, and that is Information Operations: Total Information Dominance, which is discussed in the following quote.  Please note that the US military has amalgamated the Center for Information Dominance (CID) at a single location, Corry Station, integrating all key disciplines of information dominance.




> *Information Dominance: The Philosophy Of Total Propaganda Control?*
> David Miller, 29 December 2003
> 
> The concept of information dominance is the key to understanding US and UK propaganda strategy and a
> central component of the US aim of total spectrum dominance. It redefines our notions of spin and propaganda
> and the role of the media in capitalist society. *To say that it is about total propaganda control is to force the
> English language into contortions that the term propaganda simply cannot handle*. Information dominance is not
> about the success of propaganda in the conventional sense with which we are all familiar. It is not about all those
> phrases winning hearts and minds, about truth being the first casualty about media manipulation about
> ...





> It is evident that the US and its UK ally are intent on ruling the world and that information control has become central to that effort. The key to understanding information dominance is to be clear that *it is not dissent in itself that the US planners object to. Rather it is dissent that hampers their ability to do whatever they want that matters*. As the military themselves put it: *When dominance occurs, nothing done, makes any difference*


*To be continued* (feel free to ask questions before I post again, and I will try to answer or clarify)

----------


## ScoutsHonor

Very interesting.  Please continue.

SH

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Very interesting.  Please continue.
> 
> SH


Read pages 20 and 21 of this thread, in their entirety.

"InterestedParticipant" has posted numerous outright lies and fabrications, and frequently uses several of the same tactics himself, that he's claiming to "expose" here.

You'll also find that the poster "RonneJJones" often conveniently appears in the thread at virtually the same time as "InterestedParticipant", and can always be counted on to be a sycophantic fanboy for everything "InterestedParticipant" says---and they both sound very similar if you read their posts carefully.

.

----------


## RonneJJones

> Read pages 20 and 21 of this thread, in their entirety.
> 
> "InterestedParticipant" has posted numerous outright lies and fabrications, and frequently uses several of the same tactics himself, that he's claiming to "expose" here.
> 
> You'll also find that the poster "RonneJJones" often conveniently appears in the thread at virtually the same time as "InterestedParticipant", and can always be counted on to be a sycophantic fanboy for everything "InterestedParticipant" says---and they both sound very similar if you read their posts carefully.
> 
> .


I'm sure people here are capable of reading the material and judging it on its merits.  Was there something specific in the posts that you wanted to address and had not yet, or is this merely open-season on character assassination?  If it is the latter, than the mods are at fault for allowing this kind of behavior to infiltrate this forum.

I have also studied some material from the defense department but I am not nearly as schooled on the subject as I.P. appears to be.  I certainly would like to listen to what they have to say without the continued childish attacks.

----------


## pcosmar

*Sock Puppet*




> n. A fake persona used to discuss or comment on oneself or one's work, particularly in an online discussion group or the comments section of a blog. adj.


http://www.wordspy.com/words/sockpuppet.asp

----------


## RonneJJones

> *sock puppet*
> 
> 
> http://www.wordspy.com/words/sockpuppet.asp


proove it!

----------


## pcosmar

> proove it!


Did you think I was referring to you?  There was no reference to you in the post.

But anyone that is interested could just review your post history. 

I only posted a definition.

----------


## RonneJJones

> Did you think I was referring to you?  There was no reference to you in the post.
> 
> But anyone that is interested could just review your post history. 
> 
> I only posted a definition.


Perhaps some here would be better served holding a slogan on the end of a sign and shouting obscenities at a building through a bull horn.  But there are a few people here who appear to want to move beyond that level of _Mass Man_ behavior, so please leave us to engage in this conversation without the insults and innuendos that offer no value to the conversation.

----------


## PatriotOne

Dayum.  I love this thread.  Makes me all warm and fuzzy to see how members here are recognizing a troll and calling him and his sock puppet out.  Another ID that IP has gone under is itsthepathocrats who had a sock puppet called ronpaulforprez2008.  I recognize the M.O. and writing styles.

Conservative Christian is calling it perfectly 




> The New World Order disinformation agent and his sock-puppet have returned.
> 
> There is ALWAYS greater strength in organized group opposition to tyranny.
> 
> It is a primary goal of the New World Order to create paranoia and isolation, so they can divide and conquer.





> Of course he sees it. InterestedParticipant is a New World Order disinformation agent. He's the very controlled opposition against the New World Order that he claims the JBS to be.

----------


## PatriotOne

> proove it!


Typical sock puppet response.  BTW, you spelled "prove" wrong .

----------


## InterestedParticipant

I will post more later this week, and will continue to provide insight into how *Total Information Dominance* (TID) works, explaining some of the key techniques.  But observers to this thread are getting good insight into the tactics, for those who step OUTSIDE authorized vectors of thought, for a given group, are immediately attacked by the group itself.  Nothing outside the limits of group think are allowed, PERIOD!

Perhaps those here who pretend to be figuring it all out so well should start a list of those individuals who think in ways that are "disapproved" of.  Then perhaps it might be a good idea to post that list on the forum somewhere... heck, start a thread of all the people who should *NOT* be listened to.  Maybe you can even call it a *Black List*.

----------


## LibertyEagle

No one is discouraging you from posting about TID, InterestedParticipant.  However, if you see fit to attack someone without substantiating that attack with credible evidence, you are going to get blowback.  The fact that you keep attempting to turn that around to "poor me", is very interesting and is a technique right out of the TID book.

Substantiate your claims and you will have no problems.

----------


## sevin

> I will post more later this week, and will continue to provide insight into how *Total Information Dominance* (TID) works, explaining some of the key techniques.  But observers to this thread are getting good insight into the tactics, for those who step OUTSIDE authorized vectors of thought, for a given group, are immediately attacked by the group itself.  Nothing outside the limits of group think are allowed, PERIOD!
> 
> Perhaps those here who pretend to be figuring it all out so well should start a list of those individuals who think in ways that are "disapproved" of.  Then perhaps it might be a good idea to post that list on the forum somewhere... heck, start a thread of all the people who should *NOT* be listened to.  Maybe you can even call it a *Black List*.


IP, if everything is as controlled as you say, then we all may as well give up.

----------


## PatriotOne

> IP, if everything is as controlled as you say, then we all may as well give up.


That's one of the goals of IP.  Give up and trust no one.  Isolate yourself from the pack and weaken the anti-NWO movement.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> IP, if everything is as controlled as you say, then we all may as well give up.


No, the correct solution is to recognize the techniques and to not become subservient to them.  If we can recognize the techniques without relying on others, then we can effectively operate in groups.  But as long as we are unable to decipher the techniques, then we are highly susceptible to them and I suggest, must stay away from situations where these techniques can be perpetrated.... that means groups where groupthink takes over from individual independent thinking.  If you read the documentation from the social planners and change agents, created by institutions like the Univ of Michigan, Tavistock Institute or the Frankfurt School on Social Research, you will find ample evidence to support ALL of my claims.

As for all of my claims, I stand by every word I've said in this forum.  And any statements made by others that I have failed to refute was simply a decision by me to avoid needless confrontation with those who are largely uneducated in the techniques at play.

As I said, I will continue to explain the methods and techniques, and the continued attacks only serve to raise questions about their motive.

----------


## PatriotOne

> No, the correct solution is to recognize the techniques and to not become subservient to them.  If we can recognize the techniques without relying on others, then we can effectively operate in groups.  But as long as we are unable to decipher the techniques, then we are highly susceptible to them and I suggest, must stay away from situations where these techniques can be perpetrated.... that means groups where groupthink takes over from individual independent thinking.  If you read the documentation from the social planners and change agents, created by institutions like the Univ of Michigan, Tavistock Institute or the Frankfurt School on Social Research, you will find ample evidence to support ALL of my claims.
> 
> As for all of my claims, I stand by every word I've said in this forum.  And any statements made by others that I have failed to refute was simply a decision by me to avoid needless confrontation with those who are largely uneducated in the techniques at play.
> 
> As I said, I will continue to explain the methods and techniques, and the continued attacks only serve to raise questions about their motive.


Don't worry so much.  Many people do recognize the techniques.  That's why YOU are being called out IP.  And btw..."trust no one" is not a technique used by the NWO.  "Trust no one telling the truth" is a technique used by the NWO.

----------


## PatriotOne

> As for all of my claims, I stand by every word I've said in this forum.  And any statements made by others that I have failed to refute was simply a decision by me to avoid needless confrontation with those who are largely uneducated in the techniques at play.


How convenient

----------


## InterestedParticipant

While I assemble my next series of posts for these threads, I think it would be appropriate for interested forum members to listen to the following.
*
Aldous Huxley in a speech given to Berkley in which he admits that dystopic novels "Brave New World" and "1984" were not just fiction, but blueprints for two types of controlled and enslaved societies.*

"The prophetic Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World, speaks to an audience at University of California, Berkeley, surrounding the use of terrorism and pharmaceuticals to create willing slaves out of the population."

"And it seems to me perfectly in the cards that there will be within the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that *people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda, brainwashing*, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods."

-- Aldous Huxley



YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 1

YouTube - Aldous Huxley -The Ultimate Revolution part 2

YouTube - Aldous Huxley -The Ultimate Revolution part 3

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 4

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 5

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 6

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 7

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 8

YouTube - Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution part 9


The entire Patriot Radio Network provides Huxle's service of propaganda and brainwashing to the Patriot/Libertarian community.  Hence, this group has its own uniquely designed set of distractions, and an entire cadre of purpose built actors to absorb our money, our time and our energy.  Every group gets is own purpose built set, and libertarians are no different.  It is imperative that we see this.

----------


## ScoutsHonor

"The entire Patriot Radio Network provides Huxle's service of propaganda and brainwashing to the Patriot/Libertarian community. Hence, this group has its own uniquely designed set of distractions, and an entire cadre of purpose built actors to absorb our money, our time and our energy. Every group gets is own purpose built set, and libertarians are no different. It is imperative that we see this.         "

I am particularly interested in this, as I listen to a LOT of "patriot radio."  Do you have any set of guidelines you would suggest, as a test of just how genuine any one of these hosts might be.  Would appreciate your view of this.  Thanks (and welcome back. )

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I am particularly interested in this, as I listen to a LOT of "patriot radio."  Do you have any set of guidelines you would suggest, as a test of just how genuine any one of these hosts might be.  Would appreciate your view of this.  Thanks (and welcome back. )


Be careful posting here and not showing the appropriate level of disdain for me, otherwise, you run the high risk of being attack by the RPF content police.

First, stop listening to ALL of it.  It's highly vectored. 

Jacques Attali wrote a book a few years ago about the Labyrinths in Society, which in some sense are basically webs of beliefs and thoughts that social controllers engineer into society to segment the population and maintain "order."  The Patriot system is also engineered, and when I say system, I mean ALL of it.  It's not about 1-bad apple, its a network that is under total control.  Spats between various actors are merely staged to keep it believable and to further segment the public.

So, to answer your question, anyone with any traction is either highly vectored themselves, unknowingly, or is deliberatively manipulative.  You are much better off using the brain the God gave you to evaluate and analyze various situations that occur.  For once a Patriot actor has framed an issue, the frames (or vectors) become channels in your mind that develop into barriers that are difficult to break from.  By shutting off their framing, you actually keep your mind more agile, and more able to objectively evaluate information as it develops.

These Patriot actors that everyone raves about are just about the worst thing to hit the libertarian community, as it is forming groupthink, segmenting populations, hampering our individuality and our ability to think independently, and turning us against each other.... just as we see here in this thread.

There are many many excellent books that clearly and methodically tell you what is going on and how the system was developed and why.  They are written by the social planners and thinkers themselves... no koodies and no tin foil.  You simply have to be willing to invest the money, the time, and the energy to read them and decipher the way they write (ie double speak).  You don't need 3rd party interpreters, you just need to break from the conditioning and to do some independent reading.  It's quite a rewarding experience, as you will no longer be reliant on anyone anymore for your thinking and analysis, you will be able to accurately assess all situations on your own, independently, as God had intended before Elite Men attempted to bend Nature.

----------


## pcosmar

> First, stop listening to ALL of it.  It's highly vectored. 
> .


And by taking this advice there will never be any resistance to TPTB.
Don't listen to any one.
Don't get involved with anyone
Don't do anything.

just passively accept what ever happens to you and your family with out resistance or complaint.

Sounds like a plan.
not mine though.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> And by taking this advice there will never be any resistance to TPTB.
> Don't listen to any one.
> Don't get involved with anyone
> Don't do anything.
> 
> just passively accept what ever happens to you and your family with out resistance or complaint.
> 
> Sounds like a plan.
> not mine though.


Perhaps someone here could tell me the significance of Herbert Markuse's work, and where he found solutions for the elite where Karl Marx failed.  I think understanding the differences between their concepts of gaining social control can help explain and justify what it is that I am claiming.  Who here amongst the doubters would like to engage in that research and learning?  Who here has the courage to really learn something, something new and extremely important and applicable?  Who here is willing to break from the "crowd"?

----------


## pcosmar

Promoting a Marxist now are we?
Ha,
I'll bet you are "Bert".
http://solari.com/blog/?p=3363



> *Bert*
> Jul 6th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
> 
> Angelo. look, your are simply not able to determine what I think, so dont put thoughts or words into my mouth here. I see the manufactured reality, and just because I call it out in one place does not mean I buy into elsewhere.
> 
> The point here is to point out the manufactured reality where ever it may occur and to refrain from taking sides in some fake dialectic. What I find disappointing is that because I simply call-out one example of a manufactured event, it is assumed that I must have the opposite position. The problem is, that the opposite position, in fact, the entire frame of both sides is manufactured. Once must see it all to protect themselves from the manipulation. Your entire line of thinking and discussion is within frames created for you by others, and I refuse to take part in this containment of thought and perspective as developed by social scientists.
> *
> Perhaps a study of Herbert Markuse, OSS member & Frankfurt Institute academic, is in order. Having found that Marxs theory of social change through middle class revolution did not work, as the elite could not get the middle classes to revolt in order to provide an opportunity to change society to their liking through dialectics, Markuse developed victims groups who could be leveraged to create the desired outcomes by placing sufficient pressures on society. These same techniques are in-play here.
> *
> ...

----------


## FrankRep

> And by taking this advice there will never be any resistance to TPTB.
> Don't listen to any one.
> Don't get involved with anyone
> Don't do anything.
> 
> just passively accept what ever happens to you and your family with out resistance or complaint.
> 
> Sounds like a plan.
> not mine though.


InterestedParticipant, is your shadow a cointel plot against yourself? 
Seriously, you think everyone is cointel, including yourself.

----------


## ScoutsHonor

> Be careful posting here and not showing the appropriate level of disdain for me, otherwise, you run the high risk of being attack by the RPF content police.
> 
> First, stop listening to ALL of it.  It's highly vectored. 
> 
> Jacques Attali wrote a book a few years ago about the Labyrinths in Society, which in some sense are basically webs of beliefs and thoughts that social controllers engineer into society to segment the population and maintain "order."  The Patriot system is also engineered, and when I say system, I mean ALL of it.  It's not about 1-bad apple, its a network that is under total control.  Spats between various actors are merely staged to keep it believable and to further segment the public.
> 
> So, to answer your question, anyone with any traction is either highly vectored themselves, unknowingly, or is deliberatively manipulative.  You are much better off using the brain the God gave you to evaluate and analyze various situations that occur.  For once a Patriot actor has framed an issue, the frames (or vectors) become channels in your mind that develop into barriers that are difficult to break from.  By shutting off their framing, you actually keep your mind more agile, and more able to objectively evaluate information as it develops.
> 
> These Patriot actors that everyone raves about are just about the worst thing to hit the libertarian community, as it is forming groupthink, segmenting populations, hampering our individuality and our ability to think independently, and turning us against each other.... just as we see here in this thread.
> ...


I can handle it. 
You haven't earned my disdain, so no disdain forthcoming.


I can't help but ask how you can be so sure that all of the patriot hosts are compromised.  That's a pretty broad statement and I don't like the thought that I may be rejecting someone who may in actuality be a genuine patriot, I'm sure  you see what I mean. 

I'm having a problem with the message software so will have to try to continue this later.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> IP, if everything is as controlled as you say, then we all may as well give up.


Which is PRECISELY what IP is attempting to do---convince as many people as possible that all organized opposition against the New World Order is "controlled" and "futile", thus everything is hopeless and we should just give up.

It'll be a cold day in Hell before I give up, so IP and his sock puppet can go take a hike. 

If we don't hang together, we'll most certainly all be hanged separately!

.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Perhaps someone here could tell me the significance of Herbert Markuse's work, and where he found solutions for the elite where Karl Marx failed.  I think understanding the differences between their concepts of gaining social control can help explain and justify what it is that I am claiming.  Who here amongst the doubters would like to engage in that research and learning?  Who here has the courage to really learn something, something new and extremely important and applicable?  Who here is willing to break from the "crowd"?


It's a shame you can't even spell his name correctly, Mr. pseudointellectual.

The name is MARCUSE.

You're the biggest poseur on Ron Paul Forums.

And nobody is trying to discourage you from posting here. As long as you continue to post lies, pseudointellectual claptrap and pure BS---you'll continue to get a well-deserved intellectual beatdown. 

.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> Promoting a Marxist now are we?
> Ha,
> I'll bet you are "Bert".
> http://solari.com/blog/?p=3363


DING! DING! DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

pcosmar has NAILED IP's sorry little hiney!

Please note that IP and his sock puppet "Bert" both misspelled Herbert Marcuse's name in an identical manner with a "k"---Markuse---which is incorrect.

The only real question left to be asked now, is which FedGov agency does IP work for? 

GOOD JOB, pcosmar! 

.

----------


## Conservative Christian

> And by taking this advice there will never be any resistance to TPTB.
> Don't listen to any one.
> Don't get involved with anyone
> Don't do anything.
> 
> just passively accept what ever happens to you and your family with out resistance or complaint.
> 
> Sounds like a plan.
> not mine though.


BINGO!

pcosmar has PWNED InterestedParticipant. 

.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> InterestedParticipant, is your shadow a cointel plot against yourself? 
> Seriously, you think everyone is cointel, including yourself.


Have you read any of the source materials that I have referred to in this thread or elsewhere in this forum?

Do you really understand what Full Spectrum Dominance is or means?

Have you ever operated within the Elite power structure or within the Political power structure, at high levels?  

In other words, other than your JBS & public schooling inputs, what information do you have to confirm your view of the world is accurate?  How do you even test your own hypothesis, what outputs do you test against?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Perhaps a study of Herbert Markuse, OSS member & Frankfurt Institute academic, is in order. Having found that Marxs theory of social change through middle class revolution did not work, as the elite could not get the middle classes to revolt in order to provide an opportunity to change society to their liking through dialectics, *Markuse developed victims groups* who could be leveraged to create the desired outcomes by placing sufficient pressures on society. These same techniques are in-play here.
> 			
> 		
> 
> http://solari.com/blog/?p=3363


Great answer, and great find.

This hits the nail on the head, and I'm impressed that someone here actually took the time to chase down and research something that I had said.

So, what this shows is that social planners moved from middle class revolution, to change society, to small groups as the instruments (ie wedges) of this change.  This is one very powerful reason why groups are so dangerous, and why the people inside the group must be so tightly controlled, for the group has a specific purpose, and that is to modify society in some pre-determine way..... for this is what Markuse shows us.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Here is insight into how the system works from French philosopher Jean Baudrillard ...




> A *simulation* is a representation or imitation of something in reality.  *Simulacra* don't try to imitate anything that precedes it, but create their own reality, or hyperreality (ie. a model built in reality).
> 
> Jean Baudrillard's (the philosopher behind these concepts) work was used by the Wachowski brothers in their development of  *the Matrix* movies.  More at *this thread*.
> 
> To what extent are we living in a Simulation versus a Simulacrum?  Baudrillard claims we are living in a *3rd order Simulacrum*, associated with the postmodern age, where the simulacrum precedes the original and the distinction between reality and representation breaks down. 
> 
> YouTube - Simulacra


As promised, I will followup more information, but I realize that an understanding of Baudrillard's Simulacra is necessary to continue the conversation.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

More from Baudrillard, this time a brief interview on The Matrix movies...




> *The Matrix Decoded
> Le Nouvel Observateur Interview With Jean Baudrillard*
> http://hive2.wordpress.com/2009/08/1...d-baudrillard/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...

----------


## InterestedParticipant

I have posted "*How Propaganda Effects Us - Jacques Ellul*" in another thread.  This discussion has relevance to this thread, so I am cross posting here.  Here is a relevant clip from the thread.... 




> ...to produce this effect, propaganda restricts itself to utilizing, increasing, and reinforcing the individual's inclination to lose himself in something bigger than he is, to dissipate his individuality, *to free his ego of all doubt, conflict, and suffering - through fusion with others; to devote himself to a great leader and a great cause. In large groups, man feels united with others and he therefore tries to free himself by blending with a large group*. Indeed, propaganda offers him that possibility in an exceptionally easy and satisfying fashion. *But it pushes the individual into the mass until he disappears entirely.*
> 
> To begin with, what is it that propaganda makes disappear? *Everything in the nature of critical and personal judgment.* Obviously, propaganda limits the application of thought. It limits the propagandee's field of thought to the extent that *it provides him with ready made (and moreover, unreal) thoughts and stereotypes*. *It orients him towards very limited ends and prevents him from using his mind or experimenting on his own*. It determines the core from which all his thoughts must derive and draws from the beginning a sort of guideline that permits neither criticism nor imagination. More precisely, his imagination will lead only to a small digressions from the *fixed line (ie vector)* and to only slightly deviant, *preliminary responses within the framework*. In this fashion we see the progressives make some "variations" around the basic propaganda tenets of the Communist party. But the field of such variations is strictly limited.
> 
> The acceptance of this line (ie vector), of such ends and limitations, presupposes the suppression of all critical judgment, which in turn is a result of the *crystallization of thoughts and attitudes and the creations of taboos*. As Jules Monnerot ha accurately said: All individual passion leads to the suppression of all critical judgment with regard to the object of that passion. Beyond that, in the collective passion created by propaganda, critical judgment disappears altogether, for in no way can there ever be critical collective judgment. *Man becomes incapable of "separation," of discernment* (the word critical is derived from the Greek krino, separate). *The individual can no longer judge for himself because he inescapably relates his thoughts to the entire complex of values and prejudices established by propaganda*. With regard to political situations, *he is given ready made value judgments invested with the power of truth by the number of supporters and the word of experts*. The individual has no chance exercise his judgment either on principal questions or on their implication; this leads to the atrophy of a faculty not comfortably exercised under any conditions.

----------


## ScoutsHonor

> More from Baudrillard, this time a brief interview on The Matrix movies...


This may be off-topic, to some extent, but I wonder whether you would view
"The Matrix" as a modern version of "Plato's Cave?"

As for the Baudrillard material, it looks wonderfully interesting but I need time to read, and understand, it.

So, will be back later. 
(BBL)

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> This may be off-topic, to some extent, but I wonder whether you would view
> *"The Matrix" as a modern version of "Plato's Cave?"*


Yes, the Matrix is Platos Cave..... absolutely!  

Now, what is essential is that people must see that there are various levels to this cave analogy.  The obvious level is the virtual cities depicted in the movie.  But what is applicable to this thread, and absolutely critical to understand (as referenced by another poster earlier in this thread [see below]) is that Zion, Neo and the cast of characters (thought of as being "outside" the Matrix) are not outside the Matrix at all, but rather are also inside the Matrix.  They are just in another part of the cave, a part that is made to seem as if its participants are genuinely opposed to the system, but in fact are merely an outlet for fake opposition that is also controlled.




> Is this kinda like The Matrix Reloaded where Neo finds out that what he thought was the free city of Zion is actually just a way to control those who would fight the matrix?
> 
> BTW, this thread rocks. 
> 
> I'm not too sure about you, InterestedParticipant, but your point of view is very interesting and I'm enjoying watching this discussion. I've bookmarked those links you posted.


This is why it is so important to understand and think through this thread, irrespective of the myriad of attacks that the thread has endured.  It is attacked because once someone understands this concept, and begins to evaluate all messages, thought leaders, etc. with skepticism, then the control systems break down almost immediately.  You see, under the concept of Total Information Dominance, it is ok to support a set of opposition messages and actions, just as long as those do not impact the establishment's primary agenda.  And by herding the public into opposition groups that are controlled, the establishment can give those groups and their participants fake and unimportant memes to chase until they are exhausted or until they attack other Cave dwellers.

So, yes, people must be in a Cave, it doesn't matter which one, just as long as they stay in one where they can be controlled.  Someone who leaves *all* the caves and begins to act on their own direct perceptions (ie senses), using their own critical analysis, is one who cannot be controlled and is the most dangerous kind of individual.  Please see *the thread on Propaganda from Jacques Ellul* (referenced in post #353 of this thread), as it explains the dynamic in more detail.





> As for the Baudrillard material, it looks wonderfully interesting but I need time to read, and understand, it.
> 
> So, will be back later. 
> (BBL)


Baudrillard is basically explaining how a fake reality can be created, a reality based on nothing at all, just totally made up.  What he calls a Simulacrum.  It is really another way of looking at Platos Cave allegory.

He argues that this is what the establishment is trying to make the public live in today, and that people cannot see that they live in this fake reality.  But he also argues that a Simulacrum cannot be successful, and humanity will not sustain this type of manipulation.   He basically believes that the Tavistock $#@!s pushing the Matrix onto society did not really understand his philosophy, thinking that Simulacrum could be a long term "_reality_."  Baudrillard says that seduction, human challenge and the notion of reversibility are indestructible, and therefore this whole Matrix Cave they are trying to install will eventually fall into "the dustbin of history."

I agree with Baudrillard, as we're already seeing signs of their system breaking down very quickly.  I think this will disintegrate very quickly now, perhaps in the next decade.

So, the takeaway here is, that just because you are part of a community of *opposition* does not guarantee that you are NOT simply in another Cave....




> "...propaganda restricts itself to utilizing, increasing, and reinforcing the individual's inclination to lose himself in something bigger than he is, to dissipate his individuality, to free his ego of all doubt, conflict, and suffering - through fusion with others; to devote himself to a great leader and a great cause. In large groups, man feels united with others and he therefore tries to free himself by blending with a large group. Indeed, propaganda offers him that possibility in an exceptionally easy and satisfying fashion. But *it pushes the individual into the mass until he disappears entirel*y."

----------


## InterestedParticipant

I'm cross-posting the following from another thread...




> I recently found this good overview of Platos Cave Allegory.... definitely watch it through to its ending.
> 
> YouTube - Plato - The Allegory of the Cave - (The Matrix) Animated

----------


## ScoutsHonor

> Now, what is essential is that people must see that there are various levels to this cave analogy.  The obvious level is the virtual cities depicted in the movie.  But what is applicable to this thread, and absolutely critical to understand (as referenced by another poster earlier in this thread [see below]) is that Zion, Neo and the cast of characters (thought of as being "outside" the Matrix) are not outside the Matrix at all, but rather are also inside the Matrix.  They are just in another part of the cave, a part that is made to seem as if its participants are genuinely opposed to the system, but in fact are merely an outlet for fake opposition that is also controlled.
> 
> *This is why it is so important to understand and think through this thread, irrespective of the myriad of attacks that the thread has endured.  It is attacked because once someone understands this concept, and begins to evaluate all messages, thought leaders, etc. with skepticism, then the control systems break down almost immediately.  You see, under the concept of Total Information Dominance, it is ok to support a set of opposition messages and actions, just as long as those do not impact the establishment's primary agenda.  And by herding the public into opposition groups that are controlled, the establishment can give those groups and their participants fake and unimportant memes to chase until they are exhausted or until they attack other Cave dwellers.*


Someone who can do this would have to possess a heightened state of awareness (as Objectivism would describe it).  It seems to me that most if not _all_ of the trouble is that so many of us are only partially awake.  In that condition, all kinds of ideas are snuck by us--the ad agencies LOVE that semi-conscious state.

Once a person realizes this, the next step is possible, such as seeing that some of the ideas you've accepted may be in conflict (contradict) with other ideas--so now you have "cognivitive dissonance."  (Alas...)

This is all part of Objectivist "Principles of Efficient Thinking."  Ayn Rand herself was nothing if not a brilliantly logical thinker.  

But I don't want to change the subject to Objectivism.  It just was very relevant to the evil we're discussing:  being vulnerable to *mind control*.  I strongly agree that *skepticism* is the most valuable tool we could have in this struggle to preserve control over our own minds.  It amazes me that so many people seem to act from the belief that "most people are good" or something along those lines.  This may be a 'sweet thought' but it's an open invitation to all the rogues in the world.  

Next would be:  noticing when one's ego has been "engaged".....so to speak.
This is a BIG ensnarement. BTW, does that venture into Bernays territory?

I'll stop here for now for your thoughts.
To be continued..

----------


## ernie1241

> The quote stated that Nelson Rockefeller arranged for the purchase of the Welch Candy company at an inflated price so that the startup of JBS could be funded. According to Moody's Manual, two of [Nabisco's] directors were Roy E. Tomlinson and Don. G. Mitchell. [Both are] members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Further, they are a pair of Rockefeller's "professional directors. Does anyone here really believe that these directors would act on their own, without Nelson Rockefellers direction on a matter such as the acquisition of a company. The Welch brothers were given $10,800,000, when it is reported that the business was worth approximately $200,000.


Understandably, Interested Participant does not provide ANY substantiation for his assertions. 

For example: WHOM "reported" that the James O. Welch Company was only worth $200,000? 

Be specific. And how did IP verify that "report"? 

IP also states that the "Welch brothers were given $10,800,000".  A total lie. 

The company was owned by James O. Welch.  Robert Welch did not even own any stock in the company. 

Robert was employed by his brother but James asked Robert to terminate his relationship with the company because he (James) did not want negative publicity regarding Robert's political views to be associated with the candy company. Robert agreed. He resigned. 

IP also repeats the claim by Eustace Mullins that "Nelson Rockefeller arranged for the purchase of the Welch Candy company at an inflated price so that the startup of JBS could be funded." 

There are four immediate problems with Mullins' (and IP's) claims about an alleged JBS-Rockefeller connection and about Revilo Oliver being the source for Mullins' contentions: 

1. Mullins' time-line doesn't make any sense (see details below) 

2. There are absolutely no documents, memos, reports, transcripts, correspondence, etc. to support the assertions made by Mullins

Oliver lived in Urbana, IL. He sometimes participated in JBS National Council meetings held at various locations around the country but there is no evidence that he had access to the type of factual data about JBS financial matters that Mullins claims Oliver was privy to. 

*Most significantly, Revilo Oliver's 1981 memoir, The Education of A Conservative, does NOT mention any Rockefeller connection to the founding or "startup" of the JBS.* 

3. Mullins gets so many basic factual details wrong, it really calls into question his veracity. 

4. JBS President John McManus presents some information (copied below) which helps explain what may have motivated Mullins. 

FACTS: 

1. Robert Welch worked 22 years for the "James O. Welch Company" not the "Welch Candy Company" as Mullins writes. 

2. Robert's brother's name was JAMES  not (as Mullins claims) "John" 

3. Robert Welch did NOT own the candy company. In fact, he did not even own any stock in it. 

4. In 1957, James and Robert had a conversation about Robert's political activities. James did not want his candy company associated with Robert's political views and activities. Robert agreed to retire from the company. James also gave interviews in which he explicitly stated that he disagreed with his brother's beliefs and did not want his company associated with those beliefs. 

5. The Birch Society was founded (on paper) in December 1958. Its first chapters were formed circa February 1959. However, the sale of the "James O. Welch Company" to the Nabisco Biscuit Company was announced in June 1963 and completed in October 1963 so why does Mullins claim that the sale of the candy company financed the creation or "_startup_" of the JBS?? 

For details concerning the sale, see _New York Times_ article, _"Nabisco Enters The Candy Business_" in the 10/1/63 issue of the Times. The article mentions that the company was acquired in exchange for 200,000 shares of Nabisco's common stock, then valued at $10,800,000. 

Annual sales of the James O. Welch company at that time were *$20 million*. Consider the relevance of this with respect to Mullins' assertion that the company was sold "at a highly inflated price" or IP's absurdity that the company was only worth $200,000!

Mullins never explained the basis for his accusation and he certainly had no personal knowledge or expertise within the candy industry upon which he could base an informed judgment. 

*WHY WOULD WELCH NEED FUNDS FROM ROCKEFELLER?* 

6. Significantly, JBS financial statements prior to the sale of the James O. Welch Company in October 1963 reveal that the JBS had very substantial income and major increases in its income (_50%-100% increases per year!_) from member dues, contributions, and sale of publications, speech fees, National Council dinners, etc). 

So why would Rockefeller money be necessary? 

In addition, the JBS received significant sums from bequests of deceased persons such as D.B. Lewis (Dr. Ross Pet Foods) who bequeathed a million dollars to the JBS. 

Some specifics from annual JBS financial reports submitted to Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

1959 income (first year of operation) = $129,844 
1960 income = $198,719 
1961 income = $595,000 
1962 income = $826,100 
1963 income = $1.6 million 
1964 income = $3.2 million 
1965 income = $4.0 million 
1967 income = $4.2 million 

The doubling of income between 1963 and 1964 is attributable to the 1964 election campaign and the concurrent dramatic growth of JBS membership. 

In February 1964, Welch wrote to Westbrook Pegler that the JBS had: 
 150 employees 
 a $22,000 weekly payroll 
 a $12,000 weekly printing bill 

In December 1965, the JBS had: 
 approx 240 employees 
 $35,000 weekly payroll 
 $60,000 weekly printing bill 

7.  In addition, many JBS members and supporters (including JBS National Council members) were persons of very substantial means---including several millionaires. 

Furthermore, Welch had numerous connections all over the country in business circles (NAM folks) so he surely had ready access to whatever funds he required without relying upon any alleged Rockefeller ploys. 

8. JBS President (and former Director of Public Relations), John McManus has responded to numerous inquiries over the years concerning various statements made by Mullins. 

Here are some noteworthy excerpts. 

"RW" refers to Robert Welch: 

"The only correct item in the Mullins interview is his mention of Revilo Oliver as one of the JBS FoundersOliver was heavily involved in JBS (writing regularly for _American Opinion_ magazine) until July 1966 when a speech he gave at the New England Rally for God, Family and Country disturbed RW to the degree that he traveled to Illinois to sit down with Oliver and discuss it. Oliver refused to let him in his home, told RW he wanted nothing more to do with JBS, and started a campaign to besmirch the Society. I never saw any evidence that Oliver was responsible for the Mullins' charges about Rockefeller although it's possible that he started that nonsense. The truth is completely opposite. Nelson Rockefeller had no part in the JBS - ever! RW separated himself from the Welch Candy Company before he started JBS because he expected retaliation and didn't want what he was about to do reflect negatively on the company. The sale of the company to Nabisco in 1963 was engineered by James O. Welch, RW's younger brother. ... There was no JBS bank account at Chase Manhattan - ever. " 

In answer to inquiries concerning (a) whom might be the "second" person who attended the December 1958 founding meeting of the JBS that Mullins claims was his source, and another unrelated claim made by Mullins that his writings had been cited as a reliable source by Gary Allen in the first editions of_ None Dare Call It Conspiracy_, but later editions expunged those comments at the direction of the JBS, McManus replied: 

"I have no idea who the second Council member might be. What I suspect is that Mullins made this up just as he created a lot of other supposed facts." 

"After I sent the most recent message to you, I recalled being approached by Mullins who hoped that we might help to market his books. This was long after he had published the claims about Rockefeller being the JBS patron. The response to him was simple: `_Why would you want an organization that you believe is part of the Conspiracy's subversion to market your books? ` 
_
"I also recall meeting the man who financed the Mullins book on the Federal Reserve. He told me that he was very angry about having spent money for such a poor piece of work." 

Regarding _None Dare Call It Conspiracy_, I read the manuscript before it was published. Then, I read the book after it was published. There was never any mention of Eustace Mullins in either It is simply amazing to have to refute such nonsense as has reached you. But I appreciate your wilingness to ask us for clarification. - John F. McManus." 

And McManus also wrote in another communication: 

"I'm pleased that you checked with us before responding to the inquiry you received. We wish others would do likewise when questions arise about our policies, statements, etc. There have always been several reasons why our American Opinion Bookstores were asked not to stock the works of some persons and organizations. One was their anti-Semitic content. Others included faulty research, unproven claims, nastiness toward JBS, racism, etc. [Mullins] works were placed in the `_not recommended'_ category because they were deemed unreliable. After that decision was made, and probably in retaliation, Mullins issued a book entitled _Murder By Injection_ in which he devoted several pages to making the most outrageous and ridiculous charges about our Society and Founder (Robert Welch) that have ever been made. We have frequently had to respond to his absurdities."

In February 1966, Donald Gray, (the Birch Society's Wholesale Book Division Business Manager) sent a memo to all American Opinion Bookstores.  The purpose of the memo was to identify the type of material that should NOT be sold in, or recommended by, JBS bookstores. 

Gray described such verboten material as:

"...most of the books and pamphlets with an anti-Semitic flavor  which we omit from our booklist (that) are not of sufficient value in substance or scholarship to rise above the level of anti-Semitic invective or propaganda.  Frankly, in our opinion, this applies to most of the books or pamphlets by Marilyn Allen, Richard Cotten, Myron Fagan, Kenneth Goff, Wickliffe Vennard, *Eustace Mullins*, Gerald L.K. Smith, Robert H. Williams, and Benjamin Freedman."  [*my emphasis in bold type.*]

----------


## ernie1241

> Nelson Rockefeller's Nabisco Company bought James O. Welch's Candy Company. James O. Welch is Robert Welch's brother.  
> 
> *Saying that Nelson Rockefeller funded or setup the John Birch Society is a complete lie.* 
> 
> Here's the story:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Welch,_Jr.
> 
> *Robert Welch* decided to manufacture candy as a way to earn a living, describing it as "the one field in which it seemed least impossible to get started without either capital or experience." He *founded the Oxford Candy Company* in Brooklyn, New York, which was a one-man operation until he hired his brother James to assist him. James Welch left to start his own candy company in 1925.
> ...


FrankRep relies entirely upon Wikipedia articles to support his statements.  As I have previously advised Frank, Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source because, usually, the people writing the articles are just regurgitating what has been presented in secondary sources and those secondary sources are NOT based upon primary source research.

Frank claims that Revilo Oliver was _"kicked out_" of the JBS for being a "_racist_".  *Not true!*  Oliver resigned from the JBS.  

In fact, Robert Welch traveled to Urbana IL (Oliver's home) to ask him to reconsider his resignation. 

Robert Welch sent a memo dated 8/8/66 to all JBS National Council members regarding Oliver’s resignation.  The memo was addressed “_To A Number of Friends Who Have Written Us About Dr. Oliver’s Speech”_ .

In his memo Welch stated that the July 4th 1966 New England Rally For God, Family and Country was not a function of the JBS even though about half the sponsors were Birchers.  Welch claimed he didn’t even know Oliver would be a speaker at that event.  

Then Welch observed:

“Dr. Oliver was speaking entirely on his own, and not in any way expressing the views of the John Birch Society…We do not subscribe at all to Dr. Oliver’s _‘racial superiority_’ theories, nor to his views concerning the degeneracy of the human race.”

“We are quite proud of the brilliant (and extremely patriotic) Jewish writers who work full-time on the staff of the Society and of our several hundred Jewish members, many of whom are among our finest Chapter Leaders.”

“Despite our long and growing disagreement with Dr. Oliver over the subject matter of this letter, we have accepted his resignation from the Council with a considerable and natural reluctance.  For he is an earnest anti-communist, as well as one of the world’s greatest scholars in the fields of classical languages and literature.”

Keep in mind that the year before Oliver's resignation, Robert Welch had described Oliver in the March 1965 issue of the JBS magazine, _American Opinion_, as “an authentic genius of the first water, and quite possibly the world’s greatest living scholar.”

Oliver's racist and anti-semitic sentiments were known LONG BEFORE the July 1966 speech which resulted in his resignation from the JBS but, nevertheless, Welch kept Oliver on the JBS National Council and as a major contributor to _American Opinion_ magazine---including as editor of its annual _Scoreboard_ issue.  

*As Oliver correctly pointed out in a letter he wrote to JBS National Council members about his July 1966 speech:*

“There was no significant statement in that speech that I had not made, months or years before, in the pages of _American Opinion_, without eliciting the slightest objection or adverse criticism from Mr. Welch.”

Former FBI informant Herbert Philbrick (of I Led 3 Lives Fame) was initially a Home Chapter member of the JBS.  Philbrick told the FBI as far back as February 1961 that Oliver was "an extremist in anticommunist feelings and violently anti-Semitic"  and Philbrick based his conclusion upon his contacts with Oliver *in 1959!*

This is not the first or only case where Robert Welch accepted racists or anti-semites into the JBS -- as long as they kept their personal bigotry to themselves so it would not reflect adversely upon the JBS -- because Welch considered them "earnest anti-communists".

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Understandably, Interested Participant does not provide ANY substantiation for his assertions.






> For example: WHOM "reported" that the James O. Welch Company was only worth $200,000? 
> 
> Be specific. And how did IP verify that "report"? 
> 
> IP also states that the "Welch brothers were given $10,800,000".  A total lie. 
> 
> The company was owned by James O. Welch.  Robert Welch did not even own any stock in the company. 
> 
> Robert was employed by his brother but James asked Robert to terminate his relationship with the company because he (James) did not want negative publicity regarding Robert's political views to be associated with the candy company. Robert agreed. He resigned. 
> ...



*First*, I referenced other's claims (ie. Moody's Manual, Candy Industry, Mulllins, et. al.), which I clearly stated in a previous post.  Quoting another source is not a lie, as you insinuate.  

*Second*, you are unable to validate any of your own claims, or disprove any of the claims that I reference.

*Third*, you rely on the absence of documentation to justify your hypothesis.

*Fourth*, you say, "IP also states that the "Welch brothers were given $10,800,000". *A total lie*."  But then in your own post refer readers to a 10/1/63 New York Times article, that "mentions that the company was acquired in exchange for 200,000 shares of Nabisco's common stock, then valued at $10,800,000."  What's the "total lie"?  That it was stock instead of cash?  That the paper transaction only had one brother's name on it?  What, exactly?

*Fifth*, While I haven't verified the numbers that you post, if I were to rely upon them then one would conclude that JBS's revenues more that quadrupled from 1962-1965, after the sale to the Rockefellers.  That's certainly an interesting relationship, and one that bears further investigation.

*Sixth, and most importantly*, you obviously did not read the entire thread,  and have missed the larger point about how controlled opposition works and the techniques around it, and how JBS fits the dialectical profile.

----------


## ramallamamama

http://www.truthin7minutes.com/contr...opposition.php




> The "great" Alan Watt warns us that those seeking real truth are given our "leaders".. they swoop in with amazing, never-before-seen or heard nuggest of truth. We latch on to them -- often treat 'em as hereos... only to be ultimately spun into la la land about 6 to 12 monhts later. He's right on the money...
> 
> Over the years, I've been fooled by just about every "truther" out there. Here's my personal list of controlled opposition:
> 
> 
>     * All Patriot Radio hosts
>     * Alan Watt - The "Ultimate Gatekeeper"
>     * Andrew Napolitano
>     * Alex Jones
> ...

----------


## InterestedParticipant

For those that think *G.* Griffin is *not* controlled opposition, please describe for us what controlled opposition looks like and provide examples of people and organizations that fit this description.

----------


## BillyDkid

Interesting piece, but I have to say I have mixed feelings about The JB Society.  I seem to remember back in the day they were big time supporters of the war in Vietnam and US militarism and suppression of dissent and big "law and order" types.  I could be wrong, but that is what I remember from the 60's and 70's.

----------


## BillyDkid

> http://www.truthin7minutes.com/contr...opposition.php


Wow, that pretty much covers everybody.  I'm surprised that Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell aren't on there - or maybe I missed them.  Explain to me how people speaking out against exactly and everything most of us oppose in here constitute a controlled opposition.  Explain to me how people speaking out against The NWO and world government and central banking and the Fed and pre-emptive war and world empire and those promoting a return to a Constitutional republic and individual liberty constitute a controlled opposition?

----------


## FrankRep

> Interesting piece, but I have to say I have mixed feelings about The JB Society.  I seem to remember back in the day they were big time supporters of the war in Vietnam and US militarism and suppression of dissent and big "law and order" types.  I could be wrong, but that is what I remember from the 60's and 70's.


The JBS / Robert Welch was against the Vietnam War. Watch the video below.

YouTube - Robert Welch Explains Purpose of Vietnam War

----------


## BillyDkid

Okay, thanks for clearing up my misconception.

----------


## FrankRep

> Okay, thanks for clearing up my misconception.


Robert Welch kinda sounds like Ron Paul, huh?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> The JBS / Robert Welch was against the Vietnam War. Watch the video below.


Can you please provide links to other references that show that the JBS was publicly against the Vietnam war at the time of the War.  The left-vector clearly understood at the time that the Birchers were in alignment with the right-vector, with their position being that the War was necessary to stop the Communists from taking over the World via the 'domino' theory.

----------


## FrankRep

> Can you please provide links to other references that show that the JBS was publicly against the Vietnam war at the time of the War.  The left-vector clearly understood at the time that the Birchers were in alignment with the right-vector, with their position being that the War was necessary to stop the Communists from taking over the World via the 'domino' theory.


"THE TRUTH ABOUT VIETNAM" by Robert Welch published by American Opinion, 1967

"MORE TRUTH ABOUT VIETNAM" by Robert Welch published by American Opinion, 1967


*Antiwar.com - May 1, 2000*
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/pf/p-j050100.html

THE TRUTH IN TIME

If we are examining right-wing revisionist accounts of the Vietnam war, then I much prefer the one proffered by *Robert Welch*, the much vilified founder of the *John Birch Society* who was once a bogeyman to the liberal elites, in his excellent pamphlet The Truth in Time. As the war was tearing the country  and the American military  apart, Welch noted that it was the West that created the conditions (including the Viet Minh) for precisely *the kind of war that America could not hope to win*. Welch also maintained that the installation of President Ngo Dinh Diem, and his subsequent persecution of the Buddhists, had done more to undermine the noncommunist element in Vietnam than any action initiated by Ho Chi Minh and his subordinates. The subsequent US-engineered coup, in which Diem was killed, led to the seizing of power by a series of generals who seemed to change by the week  and *led Welch to ask: who benefits from the Vietnam war?*

*LewRockwell.com - March 25, 2003*
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/epstein11.html

Buckley of course focuses on the least pleasant aspects of the John Birch Society and Rands Collective. The main focus on Rand is her affair with Branden. When dealing with the John Birch Society, he spends more time on General Walker and Revilo Oliver, a man who was eventually forced out of the Society for his anti-Semitism, than on Robert Welch. Interestingly enough, Oliver originally wrote for National Review and was a close friend of Buckleys, indeed a member of his wedding party. National Review also editorialized in defense of Walker after he was arrested for his protest. They hoped "that all civil libertarians in the United States will take on the General Walker case, and that President Kennedy will telephone his condolences to him in jail, that being his habit when people involved in racial entanglements are abused by local courts, proving that Mr. Kennedy is willing to intercede on behalf of the victimized, irrespective of race, color, or creed." Obviously if someone wrote anything like that today, the mini-cons at National Review would call for their head.

More importantly is the fact that this book only touches on Buckleys excommunication of the Randians and Birchers. While I dont think Buckley should have written either group out of the conservative movement, the book still accurately shows the absurdities of some of the John Birch Societys conspiracy theories, and the cult-like atmosphere of the Objectivists.

In fact it was not really the kookiness of the John Birch Society that led to their excommunication. *By Buckleys own account the final straw in writing out the Birchers was Robert Welchs editorial opposing the Vietnam War.*

----------


## friedenmeister

Glenn Beck is quite simple to analyze once you understand Leninist doctrine and where he fits in it. One of the first things Lenin said you should do is organize your own opposition. Then, you can easily misguide and distract those who oppose you and you can squander their time, energy and resources on meaningless battles. This makes it easy for you to do what you really came to do: build collectivism.

Glenn Beck is the figurehead for a Leninist controlled opposition movement. He is not one of us; he never was and never will be. 

Rather think of it like this: the inmates of Concentration Camp USA have become more restless over the last couple of years. The establishment realizes that if the braindead are not kept tuned in to the mindless propaganda on television, they will start looking for answers on their own. The natural place for people to look for information is on the internet, where there are no controls on information. This scares the establishment more than anything under the sun.

In order to keep this from happening, Glenn Beck comes on the scene to discuss and discredit the topics people are most worried about. He trots around the issues people are worried about and then inevitably circles back around to validating the government's position. You can think of Glenn Beck like a dog who goes out into the back yard, remembering that somewhere back there he buried a bone last month. Unable to find the bone, the dog sniffs the ground all around the place where he did bury it, and then, in defeat, walks back to the house with no reward.

In the case of Glenn Beck, his sole purpose is to keep people from understanding what is going on. The people tuning in to him are increasingly more restless, and they are gathering in numbers next to the electric fence at the aforementioned Concentration Camp USA. As they congregate, they are rumbling louder and louder about how nice the frontier of Liberty beyond the fence looks. 

This is where Glenn Beck comes on stage. He rides up to the congregating inmates to tell them that he has just come from outside the gates and he personally has investigated what they are looking at out there. Then he tells them there is nothing to experience and that things are much better inside the prison camp. The solution to their sorrows, he assures them, is to sign his new petition asking the warden of the concentration camp for better heat in the winter and better AC in the summer. Then he cracks a few jokes about the bureaucratic inefficiency of the prison camp administration and makes a sneer about one of the foul-smelling camp guards. Assured that Beck really is on their side and that things really will get better now, the inmates go back to their barracks and turn in for the evening.

Because Glenn Beck is credible to so many people, he is able to get away with this. I am among those who are not fooled by Glenn Beck the Leninist. Make no mistake, he is a Leninist and he has full knowledge of what is going on, and he is instrumental in making sure Americans continue pouring their energy into worthless endeavors like his 9/12 groups.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Glenn Beck is quite simple to analyze once you understand Leninist doctrine and where he fits in it. One of the first things Lenin said you should do is organize your own opposition. Then, you can easily misguide and distract those who oppose you and you can squander their time, energy and resources on meaningless battles. This makes it easy for you to do what you really came to do: build collectivism.
> 
> Glenn Beck is the figurehead for a Leninist controlled opposition movement. He is not one of us; he never was and never will be. 
> 
> Rather think of it like this: the inmates of Concentration Camp USA have become more restless over the last couple of years. The establishment realizes that if the braindead are not kept tuned in to the mindless propaganda on television, they will start looking for answers on their own. The natural place for people to look for information is on the internet, where there are no controls on information. This scares the establishment more than anything under the sun.
> 
> In order to keep this from happening, Glenn Beck comes on the scene to discuss and discredit the topics people are most worried about. He trots around the issues people are worried about and then inevitably circles back around to validating the government's position. You can think of Glenn Beck like a dog who goes out into the back yard, remembering that somewhere back there he buried a bone last month. Unable to find the bone, the dog sniffs the ground all around the place where he did bury it, and then, in defeat, walks back to the house with no reward.
> 
> In the case of Glenn Beck, his sole purpose is to keep people from understanding what is going on. The people tuning in to him are increasingly more restless, and they are gathering in numbers next to the electric fence at the aforementioned Concentration Camp USA. As they congregate, they are rumbling louder and louder about how nice the frontier of Liberty beyond the fence looks. 
> ...


Well ... well.... well... what a difference a year makes.  

This is a highly encouraging post, that most likely would have incited a vicious attack on this poster last year.  I must say, the forum is progressing quite quickly.  It's very encouraging.

Thanks very much for the added insight.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Wow, I wrote some very profound material in this thread.  I was just rereading some of my posts, and I forgot what good stuff is buried inside the noise of this very important thread.  Perhaps there might be the odd-person still hanging on to hope here who might actually take a moment to review this thread in order to gain new insight.  Just block out all the noise, as there is a lot of it.

----------


## ernie1241

> The JBS / Robert Welch was against the Vietnam War. Watch the video below.
> 
> YouTube - Robert Welch Explains Purpose of Vietnam War


Yes and no.  

Welch was NOT opposed to our involvement in Vietnam---he simply wanted us to "win" the conflict by any means necessary. 

Two prominent JBS members in Wichita KS (Robert Love and Charles Koch) ran a full-page ad in the _Wichita KS Eagle_ in May 1968 entitled _"Let's Get Out of Vietnam Now"_ -- which produced an immediate hostile response from JBS headquarters. 

Both Koch and Love were requested to resign from the JBS. Love and Koch wanted the U.S. to withdraw from Vietnam whereas the official JBS position at that time was that we should *"win"* and defeat the Communists. 

Koch did resign immediately but Robert Love (a JBS National Council member) initially hesitated -- but he was convinced to resign by fellow Council member William Grede.  Grede also asked Koch to help convince Love to resign. 

Keep in mind the context i.e. Welch and the JBS had gotten almost a million signatures on a Vietnam petition advocating a winning policy and withholding aid to Communist countries -- so Welch/JBS thought Koch and Love had sabotaged that project.

----------


## Danke

> Wow, I wrote some very profound material in this thread.



*Don't you always?*






> Wow, I wrote some very profound material in this thread.  I was just rereading some of my posts, and I forgot what good stuff is buried inside the noise of this very important thread.  Perhaps there might be the odd-person still hanging on to hope here who might actually take a moment to review this thread in order to gain new insight.  Just block out all the noise, as there is a lot of it.

----------


## ernie1241

> *First*, I referenced other's claims (ie. Moody's Manual, Candy Industry, Mulllins, et. al.), which I clearly stated in a previous post.  Quoting another source is not a lie, as you insinuate.  
> 
> *Second*, you are unable to validate any of your own claims, or disprove any of the claims that I reference.
> 
> *Third*, you rely on the absence of documentation to justify your hypothesis.
> 
> *Fourth*, you say, "IP also states that the "Welch brothers were given $10,800,000". *A total lie*."  But then in your own post refer readers to a 10/1/63 New York Times article, that "mentions that the company was acquired in exchange for 200,000 shares of Nabisco's common stock, then valued at $10,800,000."  What's the "total lie"?  That it was stock instead of cash?  That the paper transaction only had one brother's name on it?  What, exactly?
> 
> *Fifth*, While I haven't verified the numbers that you post, if I were to rely upon them then one would conclude that JBS's revenues more that quadrupled from 1962-1965, after the sale to the Rockefellers.  That's certainly an interesting relationship, and one that bears further investigation.
> ...



With respect to #1 -- what does Moodys Manual have to do with your assertions?  Be specific.  What specific edition are you "quoting" and what page number and what, exactly, does it say?  What "Candy Industry" data are you citing?  Be specific.  If you are, as you claim, "quoting another source" -- then where are the "quotes"?

With respect to #2 -- what specific "claim" are you asserting that I cannot validate?

With respect to #3 -- what "absent documentation" are your referring to?  What "hyypothesis" are you referring to?  It is YOU that is providing no documentation -- but merely the assertion.

With respect to #4 --  The "brothers" were not given money.  Only one person owned the company and as James made perfectly clear, he insisted that his brother Robert severe all connections with his candy company more than a year before the JBS was even founded.  If you claim that James secretly gave Robert money for the JBS -- where is your documentation for that -- especially since James rejected the political views of his brother?

With respect to #5 -- your comments are absurd.  Mullins' claimed that the sale of the candy company financed the "set up" of the JBS but the JBS was started 5 years BEFORE that sale.  Second, the greatest growth period of the JBS (members and financial support) occurred simultaneously with the Goldwater run for the Presidency (which, incidentally, also dramatically increased the revenues of all conservative organizations).   There is no connection to the sale of the candy company.

With respect to #6 -- "Controlled opposition" is a buzz phrase used mindlessly by people to dismiss any inconvenient evidence which otherwise would disprove their speculations.  One could argue that YOUR messages amount to controlled opposition -- designed to eviscerate anyone or anything that contradicts your personal political positions.

----------


## blissentia

> Wow, I wrote some very profound material in this thread.  I was just rereading some of my posts, and I forgot what good stuff is buried inside the noise of this very important thread.  Perhaps there might be the odd-person still hanging on to hope here who might actually take a moment to review this thread in order to gain new insight.  Just block out all the noise, as there is a lot of it.


The following is from "Judas Goats" by Michael Collins Piper, a Bible for understanding controlled opposition:


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Chapter Twenty-Two
The John Birch Society:
A Premier Case Study of The Judas Goat

Although William F. Buckley, Jr. and his fellow “responsible conservatives”
made many noises critical of the John Birch Society, founded by
Massachusetts candy maker Robert Welch in 1958—therefore leading
many to believe that the Birch Society and Buckley were, in some ways,
at odds in their approach to dealing with the problems of the day
(despite the fact that both the Buckleyites and the Birchers claimed the
mantle of “anti-communism” and “conservatism”)—there are many
intriguing elements surrounding the history of the John Birch Society
that have largely remained ignored by many Americans who believe the
Birch movement, in the balance, made a valuable contribution to the
anti-communist cause.

The truth is that Buckley’s attacks on the John Birch Society—
echoing much of the same rhetoric about the Society appearing in the
major media in America—effectively brought massive publicity to the
Birch movement that it would not have otherwise received. And the
very fact that the major media gave so much attention to the society is
an interesting point indeed. For the direct result of all of the attention
was that the Birch Society grew exponentially and effectively “corralled”
a very substantial group of American anti-communists into the ranks of
an organization which—as we shall see—was very suspect indeed.
The following essay is an account by the author of The Judas
Goats—The Enemy Within of his own brief journey into the strange
world of the John Birch Society. While highly personal in nature, the
essay reflects much of the thinking of many others who had their own
individual experiences as members—and ultimately former members—
of the JBS.The essay—originally published in the July-August 2005 issue
of The Barnes Review, the bimonthly historical magazine based in
Washington—speaks for itself.The essay was originally entitled “My One-
Minute Membership in the John Birch Society.”

Many questions about the John Birch Society (JBS) have
passed through my own mind since I first became aware
of the existence of the JBS when I was a sixteen-year-old
high school student. Honestly, I’m fully aware that there will be many
good people who will be utterly inflamed by my remarks, but let’s let
the chips fall where they may.

My first awareness of the JBS came at a time when I was becoming
embroiled (for better or worse) in political affairs. Having pretty much
determined (on my own,with no input from friends or family) that I was
some sort of “conservative,” I quickly began the process of trying to
learn as much as I could about various “right wing” political organizations.
That led me to my local libraries where I savored all the standard
conservative writings that were available.However, I did not restrict my
reading to literature that reflected my own point of view.Always openminded,
I was curious to see what “the other side” had to say.

As a consequence of that, I zipped through a wide variety of volumes
coming from what might be described as the “liberal-left” and I
continually came across references to a mysterious and controversial
“John Birch Society” and its founder, Robert Welch. In my own mind, I
said,“If the liberals consider the JBS and its founder to be so bad, then
they must be pretty good.”

No sooner had I made up my mind to try to find the address of,and
contact, the John Birch Society, than there—lo and behold—in my own
local public library—I spotted a copy of the JBS publication, American
Opinion, sitting right there on the shelf, alongside so-called “mainstream”
publications.

With great excitement, I began leafing through the professionallyproduced
JBS journal, thrilled to have access to the forbidden facts and
hidden information that I just knew I couldn’t get from Time or
Newsweek or even in the pages of the so-called “conservative”weekly,
U.S. News & World Report.

That particular issue of American Opinion had a chart that captured
my attention. It was an overview—country by country—of “communist
influence” (by percent, on a scale of 0 to 100) in the various
countries of the world.

I knew, of course, that communists were in control of the Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe and that they also had widespread influence
throughout the West. I was acutely aware that communist influence, in
one form or another, had gained a stranglehold in my own United States
of America.

However, I was surprised to see that, according to the JBS, communist
strength in America was far more powerful than I would have
estimated. I don’t recall the exact percentage, but I recall that it was
extraordinarily high.

“Thank God,” I thought, as I studied the chart,“that there are a few
countries, such as Argentina and Chile, that are in the hands of anti-communist
military leaders.” But when I turned to those two republics, I
found that the JBS listed communist influence there to be in the range
of 70 to 90 percent. I was startled, needless to say.“Maybe they know
something I don’t know,” I thought. But I continued to read on.

Next I turned to the state of Israel. Based on my own earlier
research I knew that Israel’s economy was based on a strictly socialist model, 
funded by billions in U.S. tax dollars. In addition, I was also aware
of the predominant influence of Russian and Eastern European Jews in
the worldwide communist movement and knew that many Jews of a
Marxist bent had been involved in establishing the Jewish state.What’s
more, I also knew that not only had Israel been strategically assisted, in
its founding years, with arms and support from the communist bloc, but
also that tiny Israel was the only nation in the Middle East with a freelyflourishing
communist party.

With all of this in mind, imagine how surprised I was to learn that
—at least according to the JBS in its American Opinion chart—communist
influence in Israel was hardly more than 10 to 20 percent!
At that moment—having only had a JBS publication in my hand for
the first time ever, for less than several minutes, in fact—I realized that
something was very much amiss.

Skimming the rest of the chart, I soon saw that, in the Birch worldview,
Israel was probably the only serious bastion of anti-communism on
the entire face of the planet. Not even the anti-communist regimes in
Argentina and Chile seemed to qualify.

It was then I knew, pure and simple, that those at the highest levels
of the JBS had fallen under the influence—perhaps the outright control—
of the insidious force of political Zionism.That was enough for
me. I knew then that the JBS was not for me. My “membership” in the
JBS, if truth be told, lasted little more than a minute.

Little did I know at that time, however, that I had learned, rapidly
and quite easily,what thousands of good,honest members of the JBS had
to learn with much more pain over a considerably longer period of time.
I had no idea that there were disillusioned former members of the JBS
all over the United States who had, in one way or another, figured out
what I had discovered on my own, without ever even having been a
member of the JBS.

The most notable among the former Birchers,perhaps,was the late
Dr.Revilo P. Oliver, an eminent classicist and former U.S. intelligence officer
who, for several years, was quite active in the JBS and very much
publicly identified with the group. However, Oliver quit the Birchers
precisely because he knew that Birch Boss Welch was determined to
carry water for the Zionist cause and Oliver wanted nothing to do with
it. 

[...]

In any case, some four years later, when I went to work in
Washington for The Spotlight, I learned the full history of the Zionist
infiltration and manipulation of the JBS.At The Spotlight I gained access to 
fascinating archives accumulated over the years, pointing to the
strange origins—and directions—of the JBS.There I discovered the facts
about the little-known “Rockefeller connection” to the JBS. In the August
1965 edition of Capsule News, Morris Bealle laid it bare. He wrote:




> Robert Welch (and his brother Jimmy) received a
> tremendous pay-off from the House of Rockefeller two years
> ago, for organizing the John Birch Society and sitting on the
> Communist lid for the past seven years.The total pay-off was
> $10,800,000, less the value of the family candy company
> which is reputed to be maybe $100,000 or $200,000.
> On October 1, 1963, Rockefeller’s National Biscuit
> Company announced the “purchase” of the James O.Welch
> Candy Company of Cambridge, Massachusetts. In Moody’s
> ...


And, for the record, in more recent years, famed populist historian
Eustace Mullins, author of The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, The World
Order and other classics, has said publicly—more than once—that his
research led him to the conclusion that the Birch Society was indeed a
creation of the Rockefeller empire, based on precisely the same data
that led Bealle to reach his assessment. So Bealle was not standing alone,
by any means, in making these allegations.

In the matter of the privately-owned Federal Reserve banking
monopoly, the JBS took some mighty peculiar positions. In the
September 1964 issue of American Opinion, one of Birch’s favorite
economists, Hans Sennholz, wrote an article about the Federal Reserve
System.The article stated of the Fed as follows:




> The control rests absolutely and undividedly in the
> hands of the U.S. president . . . They [the people who run
> the Federal Reserve System] are agents of the government,
> not corporate officials with the proprietorship rights and
> powers customarily of stockholders of corporations. The
> Federal Reserve System is not, nor has it ever been, a ‘private
> banking institution’ that is busily filling the pockets of the
> bankers, nor is it the evil product of an international conspiracy
> of foreign bankers . . . .


The late Norbert Murray, an outspoken Montana patriot who was a
career journalist in the mainstream media and a former New York publicist
for major business interests, succinctly described the article as a
“pack of lies” that “protected the fraud of the system.”
Publication of such an article could only mislead good members of
the JBS who were trying to sort out the myths—from the facts—about
the nature of the privately-owned and banker-dominated Federal
Reserve and of the powerful international banking houses that play
such a major role in the manipulation of U.S. foreign policy.

In any case, while working for The Spotlight, I did indeed learn
much more about the JBS than I would have ever imagined possible.
It was at that point—in the late 1970s and early 1980s—that the
JBS began actively promoting the interests of the state of Israel and hyping
spokesmen for its powerful lobby in Washington, discarding any
ambiguity about where the Birch Society’s controllers stood on the
issue of U.S. policy toward the Middle East.

Much to the dismay of longtime JBS loyalists, The Spotlight’s hardhitting
senior journalist, the legendary Andrew St. George, reported at
length and in devastating detail on the mysterious manueverings of one
John Rees, a Britisher by birth and one with quite a murky past,who had
squirreled his way into the inner circles of the JBS, establishing himself
as the real “power behind the throne” during Robert Welch’s declining
days. The Spotlight pinpointed Rees’ disturbing role in operating his
own intelligence and spying operation which was, in many respects,
quite akin to that of the Anti-Defamation League, the all-powerful
American adjunct of Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad.

For my own part, as a student of the JFK assassination, I discovered
the fact that like Robert Welch in his heyday, the John Birch Society—to
this day—endorses the discredited Warren Commission fraud that “one
lone nut” assassinated President Kennedy.

Morris Bealle pointed out early on (June 19, 1965) in his newsletter,
Capsule News, that Robert Welch had declared Bealle’s book, The
Guns of the Regressive Right—which pointed a finger in the direction
of the CIA—to be “all wrong” and told his followers that it was not the
CIA but Lyndon Johnson behind the JFK assassination.
According to Bealle,“We examined thoroughly all of his 1964 bulletins
. . . [which] were filled with attacks on Earl Warren and curious
expressions of hearty agreement with him on the myth that ‘a
Communist [meaning the Decoy Man Oswald] killed Kennedy.’”
In fact, as I pointed out in Final Judgment, my own book on the
JFK assassination,Welch played a major part in directing conservative
attention away from a possible role by the CIA in the JFK assassination
and in the direction of the Soviet KGB. This was the same propaganda
line of top CIA figure James J.Angelton, the CIA’s pro-Israel liaison to
Israel’s Mossad.

So while the Birchers think Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone-nut
communist under the direction of the Soviet KGB—the theory put forth
by the Mossad loyalist Angleton—they are very careful to avoid pointing
toward the culpability of the CIA and certainly never ever dare mention
that—as documented in my own book—the Mossad also played a critical
role in the assassination conspiracy.

On Nov. 21, 1988 the Birch Society’s New American magazine touted
the Warren Commission Report, saying that “evidence demonstrates
beyond a reasonable doubt” that Lee Harvey Oswald—one lone communist
nut—killed JFK.

In any case, however, the JBS acceptance of the obviously dubious
claim that one lone communist nut killed JFK remains in force. In 1995,
I sent a copy of the second edition of my book to a vast array of individuals
inviting them to debate the thesis of the book with me—on
radio or in any public forum or in writing. I gave them the opportunity
to refute the book in the manner they wished. One of those to whom
I sent a copy of the book was Bill Jasper, senior editor of the Birch
Society’s New American.To this day—more than ten years later, and following
the sales of almost 50,000 copies of Final Judgment to enthusiastic
readers around the world—I have yet to hear from Mr. Jasper.

My experiences with the JBS—as far as the issue of the JFK assassination
is concerned—were certainly instructive. But (years before) I
had already figured out that the Birch Society was somewhat dubious,
based on my research and that of others and on the study of Birch publications.
Certainly, there are many fine Americants who are supporters
of the JBS but my “one minute membership” was enough for me.

In closing this essay on the role of the Birchers in “shifting” the philosophy
of many good Americans, it seems appropriate to recall what
Richard Gid Powers, in his book Not Without Honor: A History of
American Anti-Communism, had to say about Robert Welch and the
John Birch Society:




> The John Birch Society was, if truth be told,more in the
> nature of a study club devoted to the reading and discussion
> of Welch’s literary production than a threat to the country. .
> . Welch’s notoriety was largely bogus, concocted by enemies
> on the left and within the respectable elite.
> 
> They knew from past experience that a weird figure
> like Welch, with his oddball turns of phrase, could be used
> to discredit the anticommunist right and the entire anticommunist
> ...


So while, on the one hand, self-styled “responsible conservative”
William F. Buckley, Jr. was denouncing the Birch Society, the American
“mainstream”media was providing massive publicity to the JBS and corralling
many Americans into this dubious movement.

There could be much more written. However, considering even
just what we have examined, can there be any real doubt that America
would have been much better off if Robert Welch had stayed in the
candy business and stayed out of politics?

----------


## FrankRep

> In any case, some four years later, when I went to work in Washington for The Spotlight, I learned the full history of the Zionist infiltration and manipulation of the JBS.
> ...
> 
> It also appears that the Rock Mob financed and promoted the organization of the John Birch Society. How else could it have gotten millions of dollars worth of newspaper publicity by the phony attacks on Welch that came with dramatic suddenness.


1.) The John Birch Society is NOT secretly (or openly) controlled by the Jews. 

2.) Saying that Nelson Rockefeller funded or setup the John Birch Society is a complete lie. Nelson Rockefeller's Nabisco Company bought James O. Welch's Candy Company. James O. Welch is Robert Welch's brother.
The Welch brothers didn't share the same political views.

3.) Eustace Mullins received his information from the Revilo Oliver, a Racist White Nationalist. The John Birch Society didn't share the racist views of Revilo Oliver so Revilo Oliver "declared war" on the JBS by spreading smears and rumors of the JBS being secretly controlled by Rockefeller and the Jews.


Read the background.

----------


## blissentia

Griffin plagiarized and distorted the work of Mullins for his federal Reserve book - per Mullins' admission, and from comparative analysis of the texts. Then he promoted Rockefeller Foundation financed Austrian "Economics"/neo-feudalism:

YouTube - Eustace Mullins' on FED, Ron Paul, Rockefeller & G. Edward Griffin

Examples of honest works that use original research are Sutton's "The Federal Reserve Conspiracy" and Brown's "The Web of Debt". Sutton believed in Austrian slavery, and seemed to think that rather than totalitarian collectivists running the country, it would be better to have the Old style of exploitation with Drug Running, Slave Trading, and financially exploitative capitalists setting up their dominions like feudal fiefdoms, but at least he did original research.

It doesn't matter if somebody is a white nationalist or anti-Semite, it matters if what they say is true. The information concerning Rockefeller and the CFR also comes from Morris Beale. Please consider this in the context of the other information in Piper's chapter.

----------


## FrankRep

> Griffin plagiarized and distorted the work of Mullins for his federal Reserve book.


What's your problem?

Eustace Mullins doesn't have a copyright on the subject of the Federal Reserve.

----------


## blissentia

> What's your problem?
> 
> Eustace Mullins doesn't have a copyright on the subject of the Federal Reserve.


Much of the "research" Griffin did paralleled Mullins extensively, save for the fact that Griffin included the work of other authors and made extensive digressions. 

Here is Mullins' text for comparison: http://www.mediafire.com/?mr14lwh2vmz 

I believe it is intellectually dishonest of Griffin to have not credited Mullins. He credited Mullins once, in a disparaging way, but nearly all the information from the first chapter comes from Mullins. A great deal of the other information comes from Mullins. Even the title of a chapter called "The London Connection" comes from Mullins. Griffin's methods in this regard give him the appearance of having dug up hard to find documentation, which seem highly implausible, since they were dug up from a person who was a disciple of Ezra Pound, the social credit advocate.

The Gold Standard was a favorite of the international bankers for a while, as Gold could be expanded and contracted at will, and was inherently deflationary. For years the daily price of gold was set by the Rothschilds: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_fixing

Now they have moved away from gold, into the "higher spheres" of carbon credits, which will be the backbone of the Technetronic era: http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=90090

On this and the power of international bankers, Quigley had a few interesting things to say:

"Indeed, some of them intended to contribute to both and to allow an alternation of the two parties in public office in order to conceal their own influence, inhibit any exhibition of independence by politicians, and allow the electorate to believe that they were exercising their own free choice.

"[in 1924] J. P. Morgan was able to sit back with a feeling of satisfaction to watch a presidential election in which the candidates of both parties were in his sphere of influence. [The same is happening today w/ David Rockefeller and the Trilateral Commission]

"Usually, Morgan had to share this political influence with other sectors of the business oligarchy, especially with the Rockefeller interest (as was done, for example, by dividing the ticket between them

"The Power of Investment Bankers Over Governments

"The power of investment bankers over governments rests on a number of factors, of which the most significant, perhaps, is the need of governments to issue short-term treasury bills as well as long-term government bonds. Just as businessmen go to commercial banks for current capital advances to smooth over the discrepancies between their irregular and intermittent incomes and their periodic and persistent outgoes (such as monthly rents, annual mortgage payments, and weekly wages), so a government has to go to merchant bankers (or institutions controlled by them) to tide over the shallow places caused by irregular tax receipts. As experts in government bonds, the international bankers not only handled the necessary advances but provided advice to government officials and, on many occasions, placed their own members in official posts for varied periods to deal with special problems. This is so widely accepted even today that in 1961 a Republican investment banker became Secretary of the Treasury in a Democratic Administration in Washington without significant comment from any direction.

"The Key International Banking Families

"The names of some of these banking families are familiar to all of us and should he more so. They include Raring, Lazard, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Seligman, the Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould, and above all Rothschild and Morgan. Even after these banking families became fully involved in domestic industry by the emergence of financial capitalism, they remained different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways: (1) they were cosmopolitan and international; (2) they were close to governments and were particularly concerned with questions of government debts, including foreign government debts, even in areas which seemed, at first glance, poor risks, like Egypt, Persia, Ottoman Turkey, Imperial China, and Latin America; (3) their interests were almost exclusively in bonds and very rarely in goods, since they admired `liquidity' and regarded commitments in commodities or even real estate as the first step toward bankruptcy; (4) they were, accordingly, fanatical devotees of deflation (which they called "sound" money from its close associations with high interest rates and a high value of money) and of the gold standard, which, in their eyes, symbolized and ensured these values; and (5) they were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence in political life. These bankers came to be called `international bankers' and, more particularly, were known as `merchant bankers' in England, `private bankers' in France, and `investment bankers' in the United States. In all countries they carried on various kinds of banking and exchange activities, but everywhere they were sharply distinguishable from other, more obvious, kinds of banks, such as savings banks or commercial banks."

"The Dynasties of International Bankers

"In time they brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers, organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other. The men who did this, looking backward toward the period of dynastic monarchy in which they had their own roots, aspired to establish dynasties of international bankers and were at least as successful at this as were many of the dynastic political rulers. The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild's five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, as well as Frankfort, cooperated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled."

"The Money Power-Controlled by International Investment Bankers-Dominates Business and Government

"As early as 1909, Walter Rathenau, who was in a position to know (since he had inherited from his father control of the German General Electric Company and held scores of directorships himself), said, `Three hundred men, all of whom know one another, direct the economic destiny of Europe and choose their successors from among themselves.' Big Banking and Business Control the Federal Government The structure of financial controls created by the tycoons of `Big Banking' and `Big Business' in the period 1880-1933 was of extraordinary complexity, one business fief being built on another, both being allied with semi-independent associates, the whole rearing upward into two pinnacles of economic and financial power, of which one, centered in New York, was headed by J. P. Morgan and Company, and the other, in Ohio, was headed by the Rockefeller family

"By 1930 these 200 largest corporations held 49.2 percent of the assets of all 40,000 corporations in the country

"In fact, in 1930, one corporation (American Telephone and Telegraph, controlled by Morgan) had greater assets than the total wealth in twenty-one states of the Union.

"The influence of these business leaders was so great that the Morgan and Rockefeller groups acting together, or even Morgan acting alone, could have wrecked the economic system of the country"

Of course pure debt fiat is better for them, since it allows more speculation. We will soon probably see carbon credits replace them: http://www.augustreview.com/issues/t...?_20100125155/

----------


## MN Patriot

Seems to me that the Establishment wouldn't want any uppity independent third parties to challenge their hold on power, so they would use any means to marginalize, smear or discourage any third parties that would give voters an honest alternative.
I'm not one who thinks that the USA has always had the Republican and Democrat parties, and we will *must* always have those two parties to represent us.
If enough people are motivated to create a truly independent third party to replace the most phony of the two (hint: the Republican Party who claims to back free enterprise, but supports socialism in practice), then they can create a third party to put one of the old two out of business.

----------


## FrankRep

What's up with Eustace Mullins attacking Ron Paul?


*Eustace Mullins: Ron Paul is a Rothschild Agent*

YouTube - Eustace Mullins' on FED, Ron Paul, Rockefeller & G. Edward Griffin

----------


## blissentia

It's important to look into how the gold standard has been used in the past, the ties between the Austrian Economists, the Mont Pelerin Society, and the Rockefeller Foundation, etc.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

Yeah, sorry. When the interviewer, who is keen on The SECRETS of the FEDERAL RESERVE and The Lost Science of Money, started touting DENNIS FREAKING KUCINICH as the savior of our society while taking kindly to those who would denigrate Ron Paul (who isn't a gold/silver standard or bust believer [WHOOPS GUESS HE'S NOT A ROTHSCHILD AGENT]), I couldn't take anything else seriously.

There's skepticism, then there's pissing in the wind.

This is clearly pissing in the wind.

Also, there's this:

"In 1987, Mullins authored The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History, in which he set forth the theory that an occult conspiracy founded in ancient Babylon controls the world monetary system, evidence of which he sees in Talmudic and Kabbalistic writings."

Yeah. Derp.

----------


## blissentia

> Yeah, sorry. When the interviewer, who is keen on The SECRETS of the FEDERAL RESERVE and The Lost Science of Money, started touting DENNIS FREAKING KUCINICH as the savior of our society while taking kindly to those who would denigrate Ron Paul (who isn't a gold/silver standard or bust believer [WHOOPS GUESS HE'S NOT A ROTHSCHILD AGENT]), I couldn't take anything else seriously.
> 
> There's skepticism, then there's pissing in the wind.
> 
> This is clearly pissing in the wind.
> 
> Also, there's this:
> 
> "In 1987, Mullins authored The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History, in which he set forth the theory that an occult conspiracy founded in ancient Babylon controls the world monetary system, evidence of which he sees in Talmudic and Kabbalistic writings."
> ...



Mullins also quotes Masonic writings. There is a synthesis between the high levels of Judaism and high levels of Masonry. Nesta Webster realized this as well.


And there here is an occult obsession among power elites. 

I suggest, for insight into that aspect, some of the works sold by Michael Hoffman II: http://revisionisthistorystore.blogs...visionist.html

----------


## AuH20

> Yeah, sorry. When the interviewer, who is keen on The SECRETS of the FEDERAL RESERVE and The Lost Science of Money*, started touting DENNIS FREAKING KUCINICH as the savior of our society* while taking kindly to those who would denigrate Ron Paul (who isn't a gold/silver standard or bust believer [WHOOPS GUESS HE'S NOT A ROTHSCHILD AGENT]), I couldn't take anything else seriously.
> 
> There's skepticism, then there's pissing in the wind.
> 
> This is clearly pissing in the wind.
> 
> Also, there's this:
> 
> "In 1987, Mullins authored The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History, in which he set forth the theory that an occult conspiracy founded in ancient Babylon controls the world monetary system, evidence of which he sees in Talmudic and Kabbalistic writings."
> ...



The same Dennis Kucinich who finally succumbed to the beast after a flight on Air Force One. Yea, that one.

----------


## blissentia

> The same Dennis Kucinich who finally succumbed to the beast after a flight on Air Force One. Yea, that one.


This interview was prior to that action. Kucinich did indeed succumb.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

People here still buying into G. Griffin's version of history that a handful of men jumped on a train and changed the world by changing our money supply?  Yup, just a few powerful guys acted alone to craft a devious plot to control the world via paper money.  Don't look any further folks, it was just a few evil men on a gold plated train.

I wonder where Griffin was born?  Any know?

----------


## Travlyr

> What's up with Eustace Mullins attacking Ron Paul?
> 
> *Eustace Mullins: Ron Paul is a Rothschild Agent*
> 
> YouTube - Eustace Mullins' on FED, Ron Paul, Rockefeller & G. Edward Griffin


 Is that really what you heard Eustace Mullins say? That is a real stretch ... and that is not what he was saying.

Eustace has previously stated that JBS was funded by Nelson Rockefeller  and that he was told that by one of the founders of JBS. The fact that  JBS has been unable to even slow down the growth of government since  1960 is a testament to the failure of JBS so far. Their tactics are ineffective. Why? Eustace is again proved right  by the FACTS.




> People here still buying into G. Griffin's version of history that a handful of men jumped on a train and changed the world by changing our money supply?  Yup, just a few powerful guys acted alone to craft a devious plot to control the world via paper money.  Don't look any further folks, it was just a few evil men on a gold plated train.
> 
> I wonder where Griffin was born?  Any know?


https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Edward_Griffin



> Griffin was born in Detroit, Michigan, on November 7, 1931.





> "The matter of a uniform discount rate was discussed and settled at Jekyll Island." - Paul M. Warburg


So yes. There is plenty of credible evidence to prove without a shaddow of a doubt that powerful international bankers conspired to create a central bank in the United States of America at Jekyll Island in November 1910.

----------


## osan

> ...Glenn Beck ...who I am pissed at for the moment for trying to link "right wing extremeists" and Radical Islam..AND for some things he said about the Confederacy...and vomiting on the souths' Constitution in the Confederate Museum.


Pardon my possible dullitude, but Beck _vomited_ on it?

----------


## teacherone

Hey IP!

Nice to have you back man!





> People here still buying into G. Griffin's version of history that a handful of men jumped on a train and changed the world by changing our money supply?  Yup, just a few powerful guys acted alone to craft a devious plot to control the world via paper money.  Don't look any further folks, it was just a few evil men on a gold plated train.
> 
> I wonder where Griffin was born?  Any know?

----------


## Captain Shays

> The techniques he uses, amongst many, are called containment and diversion, and they are way beyond your ability to observe.  So, yeah, I would expect that 99.9999% here would be totally bought-in to his "program."  These guys are professionally trained... do you really think you'd ever be able to figure it out on your own?
> 
> By the way, the next time you talk to "*G*", ask him why he sat on the Norman Dodd video taped interviews for 20 years because his public excuse about this is pathetic.


I think what you're doing here is much the same mistake many archeologists made when researching the Great Pyramid. They did some math and concluded that the Egyptians were the first to discover the formula Pi. Later researchers found that the Egyptians used a wheel on a stick and a marker on that wheel to measure the foundation of the pyramids. Any time you use a wheel or circumference you automatically incorporate the formula Pi.
Do you see how your responses fit into my analogy? Because say Ed Griffen or the JBS does this or that pratice or technique you assume they are part of the dialectic (great conspiratorial engineers controlling the mind of the population) yet they are only using a wheel.

----------


## jmdrake

> People here still buying into G. Griffin's version of history that a handful of men jumped on a train and changed the world by changing our money supply?  Yup, just a few powerful guys acted alone to craft a devious plot to control the world via paper money.  Don't look any further folks, it was just a few evil men on a gold plated train.
> 
> I wonder where Griffin was born?  Any know?


Hello IP.  I was wondering if you were still around.  I'm not 100% familiar with Griffin's work.  I have watched some of his lectures but I haven't read his books.  (I've got a long reading list these days).  That said, my position is that the creation of the federal reserve is a *significant step* in something that was started long before that.  After all, the federal reserve is only the *third* bank of the U.S.  And manipulations of geopolitics go back before the founding of the U.S.  I would be surprised if Griffin doesn't realize and/or say this also.

----------


## Captain Shays

> Seems to me that the Establishment wouldn't want any uppity independent third parties to challenge their hold on power, so they would use any means to marginalize, smear or discourage any third parties that would give voters an honest alternative.
> I'm not one who thinks that the USA has always had the Republican and Democrat parties, and we will *must* always have those two parties to represent us.
> If enough people are motivated to create a truly independent third party to replace the most phony of the two (hint: the Republican Party who claims to back free enterprise, but supports socialism in practice), then they can create a third party to put one of the old two out of business.


I agree with you but here's the problem. We've heard it said that "republicans and Democrats are different sides of the same coin". I agree but let's not ignore the edge of the coin; the mainstream media. That's what gives them their edge over third party challengers to their power structures. Information is power so whomever controls the flow of information controls a lot of power. Likewise the Fabians who took control of our educational system realized that to orchestrate their long term incremental plans toward totalitarianism they had to control the minds of generations of people. Thats when the phraseology changed from "We're a constitutional Republic" to "We're a Democracy". The difference seems blurred and the definitions nebulous and nondescript today and most Americans don't even know the difference between the two. But in our Republican form of government based on individual rights and personal responsibility we inherent our rights like we do our fingers and toes and ears. We do not get them from the government. But, in a collectivist sort of government structure like democracy we do get our rights from the government. In a limited constitutional republic if you attempt to take away the rights of free people it would be like ripping off their ears and fingers, or worse, ripping off the fingers from their children, in which case we would never tolerate it and we would never elect the SOBs let alone re-elect them. In a democracy we're just happy to keep what rights we can and maybe even get something from the government (some other poor working sap).
My point is this. We who would LOVE to break up the two party crimocracy by electing a third or fourth party candidate are up against YEARS of indoctrination in our educational system and the power of the mass media.
Me thinks Ron Paul has it right. Change it from within.We need to infiltrate THEM!

----------


## pcosmar

> People here still buying into G. Griffin's version of history that a handful of men jumped on a train and changed the world by changing our money supply?  Yup, just a few powerful guys acted alone to craft a devious plot to control the world via paper money.  Don't look any further folks, it was just a few evil men on a gold plated train.
> 
> I wonder where Griffin was born?  Any know?


The Money supply is only one aspect.
The Socialist Coup of 1913 has affected other issues as well. Education, News Media and the Military Industrial Complex etc.
They have had 80 years to  consolidate their positions.

Globalism is the next phase.

And what does G,E. Griffins birthplace have to do with anything?

_edit._ it seems he was born in Detroit Michigan.

----------


## MN Patriot

> I agree with you but here's the problem. We've heard it said that "republicans and Democrats are different sides of the same coin". I agree but let's not ignore the edge of the coin; the mainstream media. That's what gives them their edge over third party challengers to their power structures. Information is power so whomever controls the flow of information controls a lot of power. Likewise the Fabians who took control of our educational system realized that to orchestrate their long term incremental plans toward totalitarianism they had to control the minds of generations of people. Thats when the phraseology changed from "We're a constitutional Republic" to "We're a Democracy". The difference seems blurred and the definitions nebulous and nondescript today and most Americans don't even know the difference between the two. But in our Republican form of government based on individual rights and personal responsibility we inherent our rights like we do our fingers and toes and ears. We do not get them from the government. But, in a collectivist sort of government structure like democracy we do get our rights from the government. In a limited constitutional republic if you attempt to take away the rights of free people it would be like ripping off their ears and fingers, or worse, ripping off the fingers from their children, in which case we would never tolerate it and we would never elect the SOBs let alone re-elect them. In a democracy we're just happy to keep what rights we can and maybe even get something from the government (some other poor working sap).
> My point is this. We who would LOVE to break up the two party crimocracy by electing a third or fourth party candidate are up against YEARS of indoctrination in our educational system and the power of the mass media.
> Me thinks Ron Paul has it right. Change it from within.We need to infiltrate THEM!


I like your assessment of democracy vs republics.

Infiltration works great for people who have evil intent. What diabolical agenda does the liberty movement seek to conceal by conspiring to take over the Republican Party?

I think the liberty movement needs to be louder and more aggressive and confrontational to the fascists who seek to enslave us. Shame them as they should be shamed.

Use a third party like the Libertarian Party to directly challenge the Republicans to reform themselves, or else the Libertarian party will put the Republicans into 3rd party status. Openly state our plans and goals. 

Might as well incite a tax revolt while we are at it; challenge the Republicans to introduce legislation to end tax withholding, so workers would have to write a check every month to the government. The first step to ending the income tax. If the Republicans oppose this idea, that would prove they are just as socialist as the Democrats. Another reason why we need a third party.

Various polls have shown great distrust with the two old parties, so the massive brainwashing efforts haven't endeared Americans to either party. I think the time is right for a legitimate, competent libertarian third party to appear.

----------


## Captain Shays

From your lips to God's ears MN Patriot. Now what's your plan on over coming the power of the mass media when they can simply ignore or marginalize our Libertarian or Constitution Party champions? How many people still think the tea Party movement is full of racists? How many people think Ron Paul is connected to the KKK? How many people bought into the "Bush's tax cuts for the rich" line thinking that some how we poor people had money taken out of our pockets to give to his rich oil buddies? How many people still think Al Gore is an environmental savior yet know nothing about the U'Wa tribe or the poor people of East Liverpool Ohio that he screwed over? How many people bought into the lie that Iraq had something to do with 911? How many people when asked "what kind of government do we have"? answer "Democracy"? I could go on and on and on about the lies we've bought into because of the power of the media and the years of indoctrination in our public educational system and so could you if you tried.

I'm not so set in my ways that I'm no longer open to suggestion so if you have one please bring it to my eyes because we both want the same thing and I'll join with ANYONE who can up root this corrupt, freedom robbing Satanic establishment.

----------


## Travlyr

> I'm not so set in my ways that I'm no longer open to suggestion so if you have one please bring it to my eyes because we both want the same thing and I'll join with ANYONE who can up root this corrupt, freedom robbing Satanic establishment.


 Honest Sound Money as described by Ron Paul is the answer. None of the elite antics could be perpetuated if we win the elimination of the central banking fiat money schemes, imo.

----------


## MN Patriot

> I'm not so set in my ways that I'm no longer open to suggestion so if you have one please bring it to my eyes because we both want the same thing and I'll join with ANYONE who can up root this corrupt, freedom robbing Satanic establishment.


Billboards and the internet. http://www.freedomboardsacrossamerica.com/

Run third party liberty candidates in a unified campaign for EVERY congressional seat in the nation (plus as many other statewide seats, legislative, etc as possible), with the eventual goal of creating a political party that represents the people and not the Establishment. Make a 6 year goal of putting the pathetic Republican Party out of business, or at least an irrelevant third party.

We need a serious national discussion of HOW to make this happen, not WHY it can't happen. Too many people stuck in the past about third parties, like you said. A new reality needs to be constructed, but it takes a coordinated effort of many people.

----------


## MN Patriot

> Honest Sound Money as described by Ron Paul is the answer. None of the elite antics could be perpetuated if we win the elimination of the central banking fiat money schemes, imo.


3 is the magic number.
1) End the Fed.
2) End the income tax and abolish the IRS.
3) Downsize government dramatically.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Hey IP!
> 
> Nice to have you back man!


*Thanks for the nice comment.  Not around very much anymore, perhaps just bop-in every few months or so.  But always a pleasure stopping by.*




> I think what you're doing here is much the same mistake many archeologists made when researching the Great Pyramid. They did some math and concluded that the Egyptians were the first to discover the formula Pi. Later researchers found that the Egyptians used a wheel on a stick and a marker on that wheel to measure the foundation of the pyramids. Any time you use a wheel or circumference you automatically incorporate the formula Pi.
> Do you see how your responses fit into my analogy? Because say Ed Griffen or the JBS does this or that pratice or technique you assume they are part of the dialectic (great conspiratorial engineers controlling the mind of the population) yet they are only using a wheel.


*What Griffin is doing is called "Vector Containment".  He isolates the players involved, the timeframe of their involvement and the geophraphy of their activity.  It's all about trying to 'reveal' something without revealling "everything".  His book is a sham, he is a sham, and the scope of the conspiracy goes far beyond anything that he's ever discussed.  He's a lightening rod for disgruntled members of the public, but also a great big dead end that limits ones thinking, exploration and research.  He's a freaking criminal, that's what he is.  No better than the rest of the mob.*




> Hello IP.  I was wondering if you were still around.  I'm not 100% familiar with Griffin's work.  I have watched some of his lectures but I haven't read his books.  (I've got a long reading list these days).  That said, my position is that the creation of the federal reserve is a *significant step* in something that was started long before that.  After all, the federal reserve is only the *third* bank of the U.S.  And manipulations of geopolitics go back before the founding of the U.S.  I would be surprised if Griffin doesn't realize and/or say this also.


It's far more extensive than financial controls, and the people and institutions involved are far wider spread than he's ever indicated.  See the guy in person if you ever can, and then you'll get a better understanding of just how scripted he is.  He's just a front-man.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Bump... and hi

----------


## PatriotOne

> It's far more extensive than financial controls, and the people and institutions involved are far wider spread than he's ever indicated.  See the guy in person if you ever can, and then you'll get a better understanding of just how scripted he is.  He's just a front-man.


I only have a casual understanding of Griffin's work so I don't know if he's a gate keeper or not.  If he blames all on the "bankers" then I would have to agree with you.  I am curious as to who you think is at the apex of the pyramid so to speak.  Care to share?

----------


## FrankRep

> I only have a casual understanding of Griffin's work so I don't know if he's a gate keeper or not.  If he blames all on the "bankers" then I would have to agree with you.  I am curious as to who you think is at the apex of the pyramid so to speak.  Care to share?


G. Edward Griffin has written on many subjects and blames more than just the bankers and the Federal Reserve. Don't get duped by IP.

----------


## emazur

> G. Edward Griffin has written on many subjects and blames more than just the bankers and the Federal Reserve. Don't get duped by IP.


Agreed.  Griffin's main theme is the battle of individualism vs. collectivism.  He doesn't pin the blame on "bankers", he goes after those who want to introduce collectivism, such as the Fabian Society.  Even if Griffin didn't know about or fully reveal who is at the core of the conspiracy, it doesn't matter b/c the fight against collectivism is what needs to be focused on, and that is what he does.  The real distraction is digging further into the rabbit whole to find out who the supposed "real" leader(s) of the conspiracy are, to the point of being so distrustful and fearful of one's own shadow that you divide the liberty movement and drive away potential supporters.

----------


## PatriotOne

> G. Edward Griffin has written on many subjects and blames more than just the bankers and the Federal Reserve. Don't get duped by IP.


Worry not.  I would have to look at Griffin's work myself before I made up my mind.  In the meantime I am curious as to IP's opinion where the rabbit hole leads.  I certainly have an opinion and use it as a gauge as to whether someone else is intentionally spreading disinformation or is on the mark.  It's obvious he is well researched and an intelligent person so he isn't allowed to be written off as an ignorant innocent.  So I ask the question......who does he think IS at the top of the pile of $#@! we call the NWO.

----------


## PatriotOne

> The real distraction is digging further into the rabbit whole to find out who the supposed "real" leader(s) of the conspiracy are, to the point of being so distrustful and fearful of one's own shadow that you divide the liberty movement and drive away potential supporters.


That certainly is a hazard but knowing who the enemy is we are fighting against is more important....otherwise people just keep putting them in power again and again and again because they don't know they are the enemy.

----------


## osan

> I can't break through the cognitive dissonance for you, you must do it yourself.


OUCH!  Major cop out/evasion.  He asked a question - you should answer, if you can.




> Think really big picture. Think dialectics.


This is good...




> Think about the need to provide a fiat-democracy to society.


I would modify that to "fiat political vision".




> When you can start to view the world in these terms, you will find the data points to support your vision.  Until then, you won't be able to see it no matter what I or anyone else says.


Tailoring facts to fit the theory?  Your statement could be taken that way.

----------


## therepublic

1.  My Father (who fought in WWII) was a member of the John Birch Society.  He had many good ideas I agreed with except that he claimed the "Jews were to blame for what was happening, and the holocaust never happened".  This statement really turned me off.

Does the John Birch Society teach this? Please explain

2.  My local Tea Party group was awesome when they first started, but now they are making a turn to the left, and have been infiltrated by someone I know the Republican Party has used before to sabotage  a grass roots organization (The Better Westside Project).  An aid of Jeb Bush's told me this man was paid to put a referendum on our City's ballot, and he was not even a resident of our County.  He is now a member and big contributor  to our local Tea Party.

A trustworthy former City Council member tried to warn our leader, but she rejected the advice...I guess because money talks.

Is that a tactic you are familiar with?  Please expound.

----------


## FrankRep

> 1.  My Father (who fought in WWII) was a member of the John Birch Society.  He had many good ideas I agreed with except that he claimed the "Jews were to blame for what was happening, and the holocaust never happened".  This statement really turned me off.


The JBS has Jewish members and has never blamed "the Jews" for the world's problems.  




*David Eisenberg, John Birch Society National Council*


David Eisenberg was born in Detroit, Michigan, in 1926. After his family relocated to southern California, he received his early education in Los Angeles schools. He served in the U.S. Army during the latter stages of World War II.

Dave graduated from Inglewood, California’s Northrop University with a degree in aeronautical engineering in 1948. The specialized training he received enabled him to obtain employment in one of our nation’s up-and-coming industries. Upon graduation, he began a brilliant 40-year career as a project engineer for the Hughes Aircraft Company at a southern California plant and later transferred to its Tucson, Arizona, facility in 1956. He retired in 1988.

In the early 1960s, Dave, who is Jewish, launched a determined personal effort to combat the work of The John Birch Society, having been assured by many that it was anti-Semitic. *He carefully examined many of the Society’s materials and eventually met with some members. Upon learning the truth, he became a proud member and has since been a fearless and effective voice against false charges hurled at our organization. Appointed to the JBS Council in 1995*, he resides with his wife, Natalie, in Tucson, Arizona.
================


*Jewish members of The John Birch Society clear record of anti-Semitism charge of Society’s President in The New York Times*


*John Birch Society*
25 June 2009


Snippets of John McManus discussing Jewish and Catholic faiths in two speeches nine years ago at a non-Birch function taken out of context

APPLETON, WIS. — June 26, 2009 — In a June 25 column, The New York Times asserts that John Birch Society President John F. McManus gave anti-Semitic talks to Catholic groups. However, the snippets the reporter lays claim to are cherry-picked from two speeches McManus gave in 2000. “They certainly are taken out of context," says JBS Jewish Member David Eisenberg.

*“As a proud Jewish member of the National Council of the John Birch Society,” Eisenberg* continued, “I must respond. I have a long time ago satisfied myself that those statements made nine years ago by John McManus have been misinterpreted. John is strictly describing what was happening to the Jewish faith during the birth of the Christian faith back in 70 AD.”

“I, too, fell victim to the smear that JBS was anti-Semitic in the 1960s,” *Eisenberg* offered. “So, it was my intention, as a proud Jewish man, to use the facts I discovered to destroy this anti-Semitic organization. After reading most of the Society's publications, seeing their movies and hearing their speakers, I asked JBS members who were co-workers if I could attend their meetings. I was welcomed to do so, and I did. After a year of personal investigation, *I found that not only was the organization not anti-Semitic and racist, but that I was in agreement with the Society.* I joined the organization and my wife did the same a year later. Our two children attended JBS Youth Camps. All four of us became Life Members. I have served as a Chapter Leader, Section Leader, Head of the Speakers' Committee, Youth Camp Counselor and Camp Director. In 1995, I was brought up as a Member of the National Council.”

“So, what are the facts with regard to the John Birch Society and anti-Semitism? Take it from this long-time Jewish member: The John Birch Society is the sworn enemy of all those who hate others on the basis of their skin color, their religious affiliation, or on the basis of any other arbitrary, collectivist categorizations. It is, instead, the most steadfast organization in America working to preserve and defend liberty and freedom for all Americans.”

*In a written response, Andy Dlinn, another Jewish JBS member wrote, “There really is nothing here. Based on his speech and my many years of association with John, there is no evidence of any anti-Semitism.”*

Dlinn was approached for membership in 1985 because of his involvement in organizations that promote liberty and free markets. He, too, was always told about the Society's purported anti-Semitism. "Although I agreed with the JBS' positions, I was very concerned whether or not the charges were true. So I actually read the early works of JBS founder Robert Welch before he started the JBS looking for clues to validate the charges. Having found none, I joined the JBS and have been a proud defender of freedom enhanced by the comprehensive tools the JBS provides. As Mr. Welch clearly states in his founding speech of the JBS, "Our hope is to make better Catholics, better Protestants, better Jews, or better Moslems out of those who belong to the Society. Our never ending concern is with morality, integrity and purpose."

Dlinn has served as volunteer chapter leader and section leader.

John McManus is available for interviews not only to refute the issue brought up by The New York Times, but to discuss the larger issue of some mainstream media outlets irresponsibly labeling dissent as “right wing extremism” or as “hate speech.”

McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966, becoming President in 1991. He has written and produced numerous books and audiovisual programs, including the popular DVD, “Overview of America,” which is a moving tribute about America’s Constitutional roots.

He has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. He is one of the Society’s few authorized spokesmen. In addition to being a regular contributor of articles to The New American magazine, he serves as its publisher. He is also publisher of the Society’s monthly Bulletin. He is currently wrapping up a speaking tour entitled “America’s Economic Meltdown,” in which he points to the Constitution for long-term solutions. His speech is based on his 1993 book “Financial Terrorism: Hijacking America Under the Threat of Bankruptcy.” Many of his predictions made in this book have come true during the current economic crisis.

Founded in 1958 and headquartered in Appleton, Wisconsin, The John Birch Society is dedicated to restoring and preserving freedom under the U.S. Constitution. Members come from all walks of life and are active throughout the 50 states on local, regional and national issues. United by a strong belief in personal freedom and limited government, plus a sense of duty, members have played a continuous and pivotal role in halting legislation and federal policies that threaten the independence of our country and the freedom of American citizens. Visit www.JBS.org for more information.


*SOURCE:*
http://www.jbs.org/press-room/5042-j...new-york-times

----------


## therepublic

Thank you for clearing that up for me.  It has been on my mind for many years.

By the way the 2nd question I asked...We did win, and like you said, not by demonstrations, but by education of the voters and local politicians. We did our research, and documented it too.  But I was shocked that not only did they pay a man to put a vote on our City ballot, but a State Judge ruled that he would decide its legality *after the vote* ( the City government had ruled it illegal to put on our ballot after we had educated them). I received one big education about how powerful and corrupt the Republican Party really is (not to exclude the Democratic Party in that same description) .

----------


## TruckinMike

> Agreed.  Griffin's main theme is the battle of individualism vs. collectivism.  He doesn't pin the blame on "bankers", he goes after those who want to introduce collectivism, such as the Fabian Society.  Even if Griffin didn't know about or fully reveal who is at the core of the conspiracy, it doesn't matter b/c the fight against collectivism is what needs to be focused on, and that is what he does.  The real distraction is digging further into the rabbit whole to find out who the supposed "real" leader(s) of the conspiracy are, to the point of being so distrustful and fearful of one's own shadow that you divide the liberty movement and drive away potential supporters.


+1000

----------


## therepublic

Thank you so much for the information.  You have been of more help than I can say here.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I only have a casual understanding of Griffin's work so I don't know if he's a gate keeper or not.  If he blames all on the "bankers" then I would have to agree with you.  I am curious as to who you think is at the apex of the pyramid so to speak.  Care to share?


It is not about who, it is about a belief system - Ron has mentioned this.  There is simply a school of though that teaches that men have to be governed (ie controlled) by other more "educated" men.  The more extreme schools of thought characterize everday humans as children, monkeys, beasts, who are to be feared.  This school of thought uses any and all mechanism to deceive the common man, and to keep them in their subservient roles.

This school of thought is well documented throughout history, and the teachings are readily available.  One just has to invest the time in finding the sources, reading them, and understanding them.  It's too bad more don't do this.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Worry not.  I would have to look at Griffin's work myself before I made up my mind.  In the meantime I am curious as to IP's opinion where the rabbit hole leads.  I certainly have an opinion and use it as a gauge as to whether someone else is intentionally spreading disinformation or is on the mark.  It's obvious he is well researched and an intelligent person so he isn't allowed to be written off as an ignorant innocent.  So I ask the question......who does he think IS at the top of the pile of $#@! we call the NWO.


There is no NWO, that's propaganda.

It's about understanding their system of control, which has been written about by many.  One of the primary control mechanisms is to control all sides of every story that is programmed into the public, and to control all of the actors and the distribution mechanisms that distribute said messages.  All sides of every issue are cultivated in advance, and designed for specific target audiences given their existing belief systems.  Griffen is just another designed character spewing a predesigned message to a particular type of group.

There is no top, there is no pyramid, everyone is trapped by this system because everyone must fill a role, including the beasts at the bottom of the heap, who are here to provide wealth to those that oppress them.

Griffin tells the monetary purists & conspiracy theorist crowds what they want to here, that's all.  Same with all of the groups that are supported by so many here.  All of this activity is counter individuality, which promotes self discovery and individual beliefs.

----------


## devil21

> There is no NWO, that's propaganda.
> 
> It's about understanding their system of control, which has been written about by many.  One of the primary control mechanisms is to control all sides of every story that is programmed into the public, and to control all of the actors and the distribution mechanisms that distribute said messages.  All sides of every issue are cultivated in advance, and designed for specific target audiences given their existing belief systems.  Griffen is just another designed character spewing a predesigned message to a particular type of group.
> 
> There is no top, there is no pyramid, everyone is trapped by this system because everyone must fill a role, including the beasts at the bottom of the heap, who are here to provide wealth to those that oppress them.
> 
> Griffin tells the monetary purists & conspiracy theorist crowds what they want to here, that's all.  Same with all of the groups that are supported by so many here.  All of this activity is counter individuality, which promotes self discovery and individual beliefs.


NWO isn't propaganda.  It's the label that encircles your entire post.  People seeking to further control those beneath them.  That is the plan of the NWO.  Currently there are too many people and nations deciding their own fates (and controlling their own resources) so those "educated elites" must control them too.  That is the NWO.  It's about bringing a central monetary scheme over everyone in order to control the entire population of the planet and all of her resources.

I don't pay attention to Griffin.  I don't follow personalities because they are usually easily corrupted.  If he is a puppet then that would make him part of the plan, though not expressly.

----------


## PatriotOne

> It is not about who, it is about a belief system - Ron has mentioned this.  There is simply a school of though that teaches that men have to be governed (ie controlled) by other more "educated" men.  The more extreme schools of thought characterize everday humans as children, monkeys, beasts, who are to be feared.  This school of thought uses any and all mechanism to deceive the common man, and to keep them in their subservient roles.
> 
> This school of thought is well documented throughout history, and the teachings are readily available.  One just has to invest the time in finding the sources, reading them, and understanding them.  It's too bad more don't do this.


That's a non-answer.  Since a "belief system" and "school of thought" requires real people/organizations to promote and fund it, who might they be?  Ideologies are non-existant without real people behind them.

----------


## PatriotOne

> It's about understanding* their* system of control, which has been written about by many.


Who are you speaking about when you say "their"?

----------


## osan

> Agreed.  Griffin's main theme is the battle of individualism vs. collectivism.  He doesn't pin the blame on "bankers", he goes after those who want to introduce collectivism, such as the Fabian Society.  Even if Griffin didn't know about or fully reveal who is at the core of the conspiracy, it doesn't matter b/c the fight against collectivism is what needs to be focused on, and that is what he does.  The real distraction is digging further into the rabbit whole to find out who the supposed "real" leader(s) of the conspiracy are, to the point of being so distrustful and fearful of one's own shadow that you divide the liberty movement and drive away potential supporters.


There's the rub.  In practical terms it is perhaps impossible to know the whole truth regarding the global power structure.  Because the stakes are perceived as being so high in the minds of many, the issues of truth become important.  When things become important enough, perceptions become distorted... maybe... there is no way to know precisely what is what as a gestalt and people either say "$#@! it" and ignore dangers or become obsessed with them.  The result is either over- or underestimation of powers, evils, goods, what have you.  All we can work with is that which we know and perhaps with those extrapolations that seem reasonable, hopefully without misjudging "reasonable".  All we can do is our best to separate the wheat from the chaff.  I would also contend that knowing it all on "_their_ side of the fence is unnecessary.  All we need to make correct decisions is to know what is right for us; to understand liberty and to resist all actions that interfere with it.  That part should be relatively easy for people to recognize and therefore act upon.  

For example, if a fiat money system is interfering with liberty, who cares who owns it and what their ultimate goals are?  Yes, these _may_ be important for other reasons, but from the more immediate aspect of how such an entity trespasses upon freedom and its attendant prosperity, all we need to know is that the money system must be replaced with sound money. 

And so we could go down the list of issues that adversely affect freedom and prosperity, removing the causes piecemeal.  If we can find bad guys in the doing, great.  Try them and air them out.  But if we cannot lay our hands on incontrovertible evidence and knowledge of our enemies, obsessing about it will not help anything.  Paranoia has its place, to be sure - but just as with anything else, too much will bring harm.

We know more than enough to justify elimination of entities such as the Fed, IRS, and so forth.  I believe it is to our benefit to focus on the practical aspects of accomplishing those eliminations, hoping to uncover and eliminate some of the cockroaches in the process, but not depending on doing so for a sense of accomplishment.

The work of securing, cultivating, and protecting liberty is very consuming.  There is always someone out there working to take it from you.  It is up to all of us to stop them by any means necessary.  This truly is a life and death struggle.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> That's a non-answer.  Since a "belief system" and "school of thought" requires real people/organizations to promote and fund it, who might they be?  Ideologies are non-existant without real people behind them.


The players change constantly.  It's a moving target.  Understanding who the players is of little benefit.  That fact that there is so much emphasis on "WHO" just shows you how well the programming of obfuscation works, because that is where most are initially lead to, and stay focused on, never really understanding the techniques and the goals.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Who are you speaking about when you say "their"?


The people who happen to buy into the beleif system, whoever they are in any given instant in time.

----------


## PatriotOne

> The players change constantly.  It's a moving target.  Understanding who the players is of little benefit.  That fact that there is so much emphasis on "WHO" just shows you how well the programming of obfuscation works, because that is where most are initially lead to, and stay focused on, never really understanding the techniques and the goals.


Nonsense.  BOTH the techniques and the modern day players are important, as is it's history.  I find your answers to my direct questions intentionally ambiguous.  You have no problem calling Griffin, Schiff, Rockwell, (and even implied RP at one point) and several others I can't recall in your past posts "controlled opposition".  But when I ask your opinion on *who is doing the controlling*, you say it's not important.  I find that odd.

Don't you know the "who" IP?

----------


## osan

> Nonsense.  BOTH the techniques and the modern day players are important, as is it's history.  I find your answers to my direct questions intentionally ambiguous.  You have no problem calling Griffin, Schiff, Rockwell, (and even implied RP at one point) and several others I can't recall in your past posts "controlled opposition".  But when I ask your opinion on *who is doing the controlling*, you say it's not important.  I find that odd.


I'd have to agree on this.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Nonsense.  BOTH the techniques and the modern day players are important, as is it's history.  I find your answers to my direct questions intentionally ambiguous.  You have no problem calling Griffin, Schiff, Rockwell, (and even implied RP at one point) and several others I can't recall in your past posts "controlled opposition".  But when I ask your opinion on *who is doing the controlling*, you say it's not important.  I find that odd.
> 
> Don't you know the "who" IP?


I don't keep lists, but I DO know how to figure out "who" at any given moment, as their techniques always give them away. 

Look, I'm taking the argument that it is more important to know how to fish then to be given the fish by someone else.  Focus on learning how to fish, and the rest is rudimentary.  Their techniques always always give them away.  Wanting to know who the "who" is means that you have yet to understand their goals and techniques, and therefore will always be susceptable to their deceit.

----------


## PatriotOne

> I don't keep lists, but I DO know how to figure out "who" at any given moment, as their techniques always give them away. 
> 
> Look, I'm taking the argument that it is more important to know how to fish then to be given the fish by someone else.  Focus on learning how to fish, and the rest is rudimentary.  Their techniques always always give them away.  Wanting to know who the "who" is means that you have yet to understand their goals and techniques, and therefore will always be susceptable to their deceit.


And I am taking the position that understanding the techniques AND where the fish are are equally important.  My disciples and I will kick you and your disciples asses fishing.  While your philosophizing in some livingroom about fishing techniques, I'm taking my disciples to where the big fish are and letting them fish.  See you at the fish fry...we'll provide the fish and you can bring the beer if your disciples hadn't starved to death by then since you didn't think it important to identify to them where the fish were .

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> And I am taking the position that understanding the techniques AND where the fish are are equally important.  My disciples and I will kick you and your disciples asses fishing.  While your philosophizing in some livingroom about fishing techniques, I'm taking my disciples to where the big fish are and letting them fish.  See you at the fish fry...we'll provide the fish and you can bring the beer if your disciples hadn't starved to death by then since you didn't think it important to identify to them where the fish were .


They'll get you to kill your own, as that is what always happens.  Been that way for thousands of years.  Why should now be any diff?

Hey, but if you want to play a game, then I'll play along for a few posts.  Perhaps you can even PM me.  Just ask me about a few people you wonder about, and I'll tell you what side they're on.  If it's someone I don't know, then I may need to request some background links to read up on them.  But either way, it won't take long.  The giveaways hit one in the face like a wet fish.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Didn't receive anything, guess you don't want to play that game.  

In highschool I was always told that I had to understand the concepts behind the answers anyway, which is I guess why we were told to show our work so that we could demonstrate our understanding.  Focusing on the names of various actors is kinda like giving away a cheat sheet, as the recipient of said cheat sheet ultimately only cheats themselves in their quest for greater understanding.

----------


## PatriotOne

> Didn't receive anything, guess you don't want to play that game.  
> 
> In highschool I was always told that I had to understand the concepts behind the answers anyway, which is I guess why we were told to show our work so that we could demonstrate our understanding.  Focusing on the names of various actors is kinda like giving away a cheat sheet, as the recipient of said cheat sheet ultimately only cheats themselves in their quest for greater understanding.


But eventually you have to give the answer also... which you seem to take great lengths to avoid so I assume you don't know the answer.  And no.  I don't want to play your game by feeding you suspects and you responding like your some kind of oracle...lol.  I already know the answer to my question.  I just wanted to see if you knew...it appears ya don't so I have lost interest in our conversation.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> But eventually you have to give the answer also... which you seem to take great lengths to avoid so I assume you don't know the answer.  And no.  I don't want to play your game by feeding you suspects and you responding like your some kind of oracle...lol.  I already know the answer to my question.  I just wanted to see if you knew...it appears ya don't so I have lost interest in our conversation.


What's the question that is outstanding?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

The cybernetics of men

As you, Socrates,

Often call politics...



~ Plato

----------


## cheapseats

> What's the question that is outstanding?



WHO ARE THE CONTROLLERS? The names part of "kicking ass and taking names".  The PIGS on Animal Farm.  

"Very Important People"...people who MATTER...must be knocked off pedestals, or nothing improves. "Taking people down" is NOT necessarily the same thing as physically aggressing against people, anymore than "targeting" vulnerable Incumbents means acquiring them in actual crosshairs and pulling the trigger.  

In Governance and Commerce, FALL FROM GRACE = REVERSAL OF FORTUNE.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> WHO ARE THE CONTROLLERS? The names part of "kicking ass and taking names".  The PIGS on Animal Farm.  
> 
> "Very Important People"...people who MATTER...must be knocked off pedestals, or nothing improves. "Taking people down" is NOT necessarily the same thing as physically aggressing against people, anymore than "targeting" vulnerable Incumbents means acquiring them in actual crosshairs and pulling the trigger.  
> 
> In Governance and Commerce, FALL FROM GRACE = REVERSAL OF FORTUNE.


This question is a common one.... tell me who THEY are?  Well, that who is always changing, and moveover is utterly irrelevant, as destroying the WHO won't change the system or our condition.  The real question that should be asked is ... how does the system work and how do I identify it's weapons?  Now, having that understanding will allow one to ignore the weapon systems, and therefore defeat them.  But attacking individuals is fruitless, as the system is designed to be robust, and to survive attacks against large populations of individuals.

----------


## jmdrake

> This question is a common one.... tell me who THEY are?  Well, that who is always changing, and moveover is utterly irrelevant, as destroying the WHO won't change the system or our condition.  The real question that should be asked is ... how does the system work and how do I identify it's weapons?  Now, having that understanding will allow one to ignore the weapon systems, and therefore defeat them.  But attacking individuals is fruitless, as the system is designed to be robust, and to survive attacks against large populations of individuals.


You're back!  I thought you'd dropped off the planet!  I've been SOOOO tempted to bump this thread over the years.  Okay, so have at it.  What's your take on the current state of the liberty movement?  Lots of upheavals in and out of the liberty movement in the past twelve months.  Some of it very concerning, some of it quite exciting.  And welcome back IP!

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You're back!  I thought you'd dropped off the planet!  I've been SOOOO tempted to bump this thread over the years.  Okay, so have at it.  What's your take on the current state of the liberty movement?  Lots of upheavals in and out of the liberty movement in the past twelve months.  Some of it very concerning, some of it quite exciting.  And welcome back IP!


Thanks for the big welcome back.  Glad to know someone still remembers me 

To answer your question with an extremely short reply.... the liberty movement is controlled by intelligence operatives.  I mean, isn't that obvious by now?  I must admit that I haven't paid attention to it in quite a few years, as I got sick of the madness.  But ultimately, it was always designed to corral those who were still anchored in the US Constitution and to render them meaningless, either through exhaustion, discrediting them, or any other means imagineable.  It's been going on for a long long time, but since the turn of the century the efforts have been extended significantly.   Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Some of what you say is good, IP, but your solution has always been to neuter liberty activists.  That all is lost, so why try.  So, to me at least, it seems that you are one of the people who are attempting to render us meaningless.

If you do have concrete suggestions as to what you believe we should do, maybe now you will be forthcoming with them.

----------


## wizardwatson

> Thanks for the big welcome back.  Glad to know someone still remembers me 
> 
> To answer your question with an extremely short reply.... the liberty movement is controlled by intelligence operatives.  I mean, isn't that obvious by now?  I must admit that I haven't paid attention to it in quite a few years, as I got sick of the madness.  But ultimately, it was always designed to corral those who were still anchored in the US Constitution and to render them meaningless, either through exhaustion, discrediting them, or any other means imagineable.  It's been going on for a long long time, but since the turn of the century the efforts have been extended significantly.   Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.


Well, you didn't believe that at one time.  I remember when a former Campaign for Liberty staffer posted an article about how all the sign-waving and grassrootsy stuff we were doing in the beginning "wasn't how we win elections":

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...be-clips/page2

That thread shows the attitude at the time and I feel it was the beginning of disillusionment for many in the movement.  I subscribed to that thread a long time back.  I felt it was sort of the turning point where the political gatekeepers essentially were trying to form a consensus that electoral politics was the strategy that the movement should follow.

I remember you because you were the last post (at the time of this writing) in that thread.  You said:




> For a brief moment in time there was an organically developing movement arising from the public ranks. Now we are all witnessing the fracturing and dismantling of everything and anything that might be used as a foundation for its continued operation or growth.
> 
> Toss it all out and start over. It's all been infected.


Now that thread was short.  Not epic by RPF standards.  And Steve was right.  Winning elections requires that the grassroots follows the directives of the campaign.  But people took that as a jab that their efforts to make their own signs and blimps and stickers was counterproductive.  That we were ghetto-fying and making Ron essentially look bad and that our amateurish behavior was not wanted.

Now you, judging by your quote, took this in much the same way I did at the time.  That this was essentially a scraping off of much of what the movement consisted of at the time.  It was the beginning of a clear division in my mind.  That being that those of us who believed in electoral politics as a path would have leadership and those who believed in a more creative "R3volution" approach wouldn't and would in fact need to distance themselves, or their tactics at least, from the campaign(s).

So you said at one time there was an "organically developing movement".  Do you think those people are all gone?  Do you think they've all been brainwashed beyond hope?  It's my belief that this potential is still untapped and it's still out there.  There is an unfilled need for some kind of leadership in the form of ideas of how to cooperate.  

I personally despise this electoral politics approach and spend a lot of time thinking of how to find an alternative approach that speaks to this unmet need.  But I understand it.  If no one comes forward with alternatives what are supporters supposed to do?  But I disagree with your assessment that the movement is "controlled" by intelligence operatives.  Surely there are some snooping around.  Their budgets are so inflated that they have to find something to do.  What really plagues the movement in my opinion is the same thing that plagues all movements that can't find a solid path towards action, group think and intellectualism.  That is the real "intelligence operative".  This movement was a movement of conscience in my opinion.  But when the energy died down now all the sudden everyone's a libertarian and an economist.  The passion has been replaced by digging in to the most defensible philosophical position.

That's my opinion.  It isn't "co-opted".  I believe it's simply the same people with the same passion who have no real outlet for that passion so they've encased themselves in this crusty shell of intellectualism and have to be satisfied with the electoral political approach until someone comes up with a better idea.    

Now you mention God and the Kingdom as I read from a few of your posts in this thread.  There are a lot of Christians in this movement and in my opinion the movement is more of a movement of peace and non-violence than it is about these libertarian and economic intellectual positions.  But almost no one talks about it from that angle even though that is where the propensity to act originates for many in the movement.  You don't act from a theory, you act from your conscience.  Now if you believe in eternal law.  If you believe in the commandment to love and speak the truth and if you are gifted with intelligence you are not only capable of acting, you are obligated to act.  Choosing not to, despairing over the state of affairs, refusing to share what you have with others is not living up to your obligation.  Start a thread, teach one person, pay them if you have to, lay down a strategy, put yourself out there, but don't give up.

That organic potential is out there and I think we're at a time in history when it's very possible that it can be realized but it depends on individuals coming up with ideas and is directly inhibited by those with intuition and knowledge about this movement giving up.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Some of what you say is good, IP, but your solution has always been to neuter liberty activists.  That all is lost, so why try.  So, to me at least, it seems that you are one of the people who are attempting to render us meaningless.
> 
> If you do have concrete suggestions as to what you believe we should do, maybe now you will be forthcoming with them.


Neutering liberty activites that are part of a controlled intelligence operation is "not doing anything".  Suggesting that people stop listening to "vector leaders" is not "all lost"  Turning off the alternative media is not acquiescing.  Choosing to become a real thinking sentient human being is a real solution, and is infact the ONLY viable solution.

Our sources of sensory input are largely controlled, at least those coming from system controlled outputs.  Turning these off and perceiving the world from your own true pont of view, not within the context of what you've been told all your life, is a critical first step, and in fact, the ONLY step that frightens the controllers.

----------


## fr33

I haven't read the entire thread and don't plan to but some of the last posts do interest me enough to post on it. Some people call the sign wavers and loud mouths counter-productive and others call the politicians counter-productive. It could be that these are just natural opinions that people arrive at rather than just automatically labeling it as "controlled opposition".

There's an eternal debate going on between ancaps and other libertarians; Whether to participate or not in politics.

AnCaps, for the most part, provide no strategy for liberty within the next few generations. Neither do the political playing libertarians. 

I just want a stage to get the message out. The game show of politics seems to be one that gets the most eyes and ears paying attention to it.

I can ignore the state but my neighbors and their master, the state, will not ignore me. So I choose to use public venues to tell them how the cow eats cabbage.

In 2007 I realized that I don't need a government to live and thrive. The reason I realized this is because I watched the first GOP debate and Ron Paul appealed to my senses and encouraged me to learn about philosophy and coercive government.  I want to do the same to others that were like me because what Ron Paul did to me cannot ever be undone.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Well, you didn't believe that at one time.  I remember when a former Campaign for Liberty staffer posted an article about how all the sign-waving and grassrootsy stuff we were doing in the beginning "wasn't how we win elections":
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...be-clips/page2
> .
> .
> .
> I remember you because you were the last post (at the time of this writing) in that thread.  You said:
> 
> 
> ...


Wow, what a great quote.  Can't believe that I wrote it at the time 

But yes, that quote is still accurate, and is NOT inconsistent with what I am now saying.  There were always at least two sets of forces: (1) those controlled by established intelligence institutions, and (2) those comprised of relatively indepenendly thinking individuals who wanted our gov't to adhere to the values set forth by our founders.  But just as Michael Hudson, outspoken professor of finance, describes the FIRE economy: _the parasite consumes the host._  In this situation, the established intelligence institutions were able to employ political front actors and controlled media outlets to co-opt the larger movement, and render it *impotent*.





> I personally despise this electoral politics approach and spend a lot of time thinking of how to find an alternative approach that speaks to this unmet need.  But I understand it.  If no one comes forward with alternatives what are supporters supposed to do?  But I disagree with your assessment that the movement is "controlled" by intelligence operatives.  Surely there are some snooping around.  Their budgets are so inflated that they have to find something to do.  What really plagues the movement in my opinion is the same thing that plagues all movements that can't find a solid path towards action, group think and intellectualism.  That is the real "intelligence operative".  This movement was a movement of conscience in my opinion.  But when the energy died down now all the sudden everyone's a libertarian and an economist.  The passion has been replaced by digging in to the most defensible philosophical position.


Plato spoke openly about Politics being a form of "steersmanship"... a technique for managing and navigating the masses.

And as far as the movement being "controlled" by intelligence sources.  There is absolution no doubt about this.  NONE.  This is simply the way political groups of this size are steered and managed.  Unfortunately, this is the most challenging hurdle for anyone to overcome and see.





> Now you mention God and the Kingdom as I read from a few of your posts in this thread.  There are a lot of Christians in this movement and in my opinion the movement is more of a movement of peace and non-violence than it is about these libertarian and economic intellectual positions.  But almost no one talks about it from that angle even though that is where the propensity to act originates for many in the movement.  You don't act from a theory, you act from your conscience.  Now if you believe in eternal law.  If you believe in the commandment to love and speak the truth and if you are gifted with intelligence you are not only capable of acting, you are obligated to act.  Choosing not to, despairing over the state of affairs, refusing to share what you have with others is not living up to your obligation.  Start a thread, teach one person, pay them if you have to, lay down a strategy, put yourself out there, but don't give up.


In God and Kingdom the author (Jaques Ellul) talks about seeing the system (man's system) for what it is - a separate and mostly corrupt system that one must learn how to operate withiin to survive in man's world - but to understand that we all exist in God's Kingdom and that we adhere to hire ideals and a much richer purpose.  Not all Christians understand this, and some non-Christians do.




> That organic potential is out there and I think we're at a time in history when it's very possible that it can be realized but it depends on individuals coming up with ideas and is directly inhibited by those with intuition and knowledge about this movement giving up.


I don't share your optimism.  The power of propaganda and institutional controls are far too sophisticated.  People don't know what's true anymore, and they've lost the ability to think outside the system.  The deception has been going on for so long, and is so pervasive I just don't see how there ever could be a mass movement who could create real change.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I don't share your optimism.  The power of propaganda and institutional controls are far too sophisticated.  People don't know what's true anymore, and they've lost the ability to think outside the system.  The deception has been going on for so long, and is so pervasive I just don't see how there ever could be a mass movement who could create real change.


Soooo, let me see if I have this straight...

There is nothing that can be done short of:

A - Rely on faith to transcend this "earthly grossness".

B - Fight, and drag the unthinking mass of humanity along for the ride, kicking and screaming.

C - Give up, make a drink, get laid, and see what's on TV.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Soooo, let me see if I have this straight...
> 
> There is nothing that can be done short of:
> 
> A - Rely on faith to transcend this "earthly grossness".
> 
> B - Fight, and drag the unthinking mass of humanity along for the ride, kicking and screaming.
> 
> C - Give up, make a drink, get laid, and see what's on TV.


And here's a great example why I stopped posting here for several years.  It's dumbass response like this one.  This is a great example of how well the system has indoctrinated so many minds.  If one is not presented with authorized forms of rebellion they see that as doing nothing.  It's like a transitor, everything is either one dialectical alternative or another.  No gray.

Turning off from this system and thinking and percieving based upon ones own true experiences is an enormous leap.  But unfortunately, we've all been indoctrinated so much from such an early stage we cannot even envision what this might entail, or we merely put it in to the "religious" fallacy or some similar camp.   

Again, ceasing to allow this system to control how your brain develops is NOT doing nothing.

----------


## wizardwatson

> And here's a great example why I stopped posting here for several years.  It's dumbass response like this one.  This is a great example of how well the system has indoctrinated so many minds.  If one is not presented with authorized forms of rebellion they see that as doing nothing.  It's like a transitor, everything is either one dialectical alternative or another.  No gray.
> 
> Turning off from this system and thinking and percieving based upon ones own true experiences is an enormous leap.  But unfortunately, we've all been indoctrinated so much from such an early stage we cannot even envision what this might entail, or we merely put it in to the "religious" fallacy or some similar camp.   
> 
> Again, ceasing to allow this system to control how your brain develops is NOT doing nothing.


Well, I agree to some extent.  People do focus on externals not realizing that what prevents them from acting is not some external "enemy".  It isn't the globalists or the bankers.  Most people are in psychological submission already.  Ideals and jingoism are comfort foods.  

But my "optimism" as you say isn't based on some belief that this psychological problem doesn't exist and we just need a good idea or a leader to come along.  I simply believe people do desire to act and be free in this regard and if they are willing to pay attention they can be communicated to about this problem.

You can never know though exactly where someone is psychologically though so the tone and content of the dialogue is important.  So "doing nothing" with regards to what the current "movement" strategies are I would say isn't the issue.  Doing nothing with regards to communicating with people and coming up with ways to raise awareness of the psychological aspect is the issue.

----------


## osan

> People don't know what's true anymore, and they've lost the ability to think outside the system.  The deception has been going on for so long, and is so pervasive I just don't see how there ever could be a mass movement who could create real change.



Not knowing what is true does not imply an inability to know.  Nothing has been lost which cannot be rediscovered and claimed.  Knowing becomes a matter of will.  The honest desire to know truth is a key to attainment. When one becomes willing to question all of their assumptions regarding what is "known", the way to wisdom is well paved.

We are not helpless idiot children, consigned to our doom at the hands of Themme.  We as individuals can break the chains any time we wish if we want to and are willing to bear the risks.

All that aside, even if we are indeed doomed, we still have choices, among them being the manner in which we will meet our ends.  We can be cowards or may choose something else.  In the end the onus rests with each of us and we each make our choices by one means or another.  At the end of the day we are accountable to ourselves for our choices, and possibly to "God", whatever that might mean in actual point of truth.

While I can certainly buy the "we're doomed" possibility, I do not buy the "we have no choice" position. 


There are always choices, unpalatable as they may be in some circumstances.  It is high time we start assuming real and substantive responsibility for our lives.

Time is here.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Well, I agree to some extent.  People do focus on externals not realizing that what prevents them from acting is not some external "enemy".  It isn't the globalists or the bankers.  Most people are in psychological submission already.  Ideals and jingoism are comfort foods.  
> 
> But my "optimism" as you say isn't based on some belief that this psychological problem doesn't exist and we just need a good idea or a leader to come along.  I simply believe people do desire to act and be free in this regard and if they are willing to pay attention they can be communicated to about this problem.
> 
> You can never know though exactly where someone is psychologically though so the tone and content of the dialogue is important.  So "doing nothing" with regards to what the current "movement" strategies are I would say isn't the issue.  Doing nothing with regards to communicating with people and coming up with ways to raise awareness of the psychological aspect is the issue.


People must understand the extent to which their "thinking" is manufactured and limited.  I don't get that many understand this.  For example, so many here still think that "change" if most like affected via overt political or social action.  There seems to be little to no understanding how these social vehicles were developed, and why they exist.  I'd like to see more people asking themselves how this current social system was constructed, and why it has been designed as it is, and who were the thinkers behind this design and why did they make the choices that they did.  

Until one makes an earnest attempt at this, I simply don't see how they can understand the breadth and depth of the system and the granularity of its controls, and how those controls are leveraged to literally shape the neural networks in our brains which control our perception, worldview, and cognition.  

Get thru that process, and this system will appear utterly corrupt, unimportant, and irrelevant.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Not knowing what is true does not imply an inability to know.  Nothing has been lost which cannot be rediscovered and claimed.  Knowing becomes a matter of will.  The honest desire to know truth is a key to attainment. When one becomes willing to question all of their assumptions regarding what is "known", the way to wisdom is well paved.
> 
> We are not helpless idiot children, consigned to our doom at the hands of Themme.  We as individuals can break the chains any time we wish if we want to and are willing to bear the risks.
> 
> All that aside, even if we are indeed doomed, we still have choices, among them being the manner in which we will meet our ends.  We can be cowards or may choose something else.  In the end the onus rests with each of us and we each make our choices by one means or another.  At the end of the day we are accountable to ourselves for our choices, and possibly to "God", whatever that might mean in actual point of truth.
> 
> While I can certainly buy the "we're doomed" possibility, I do not buy the "we have no choice" position. 
> 
> 
> ...


Great post.  I agree with every aspect of it.

The problem is, too many are looking for truth by turning to cointel outlets like the Alex Jones, alternative media (in general), or organized non-profit or other false movements.

----------


## Cowlesy

> Great post.  I agree with every aspect of it.
> 
> The problem is, too many are looking for truth by turning to cointel outlets like the Alex Jones, alternative media (in general), or organized non-profit or other false movements.


If they would only just follow you to your forum, we could solve everything and break the simulcrum, find new vectors!

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> If they would only just follow you to your forum, we could solve everything and break the simulcrum, find new vectors!


People can only break the simulacrum on their own, I can't do that for them, nor do I even want to try.

Hey, Cowlesy, I'm more than happy to go away.  I don't need to post here.  I'm not even sure why I logged in again last week.  I guess it was just curiousity.  Just say the word, I'll go.

----------


## FrankRep

> People can only break the simulacrum on their own, I can't do that for them, nor do I even want to try.
> 
> Hey, Cowlesy, I'm more than happy to go away.  I don't need to post here.  I'm not even sure why I logged in again last week.  I guess it was just curiousity.  Just say the word, I'll go.


Yet you'll post again no doubt.

----------


## fr33

Being a genius isn't worth much when you are surrounded by vultures. If you are a genius then you'd recognize the state of your surroundings and how to approach it.

(not saying I'm a genius but perhaps the OP is)

----------


## jmdrake

> Thanks for the big welcome back.  Glad to know someone still remembers me 
> 
> To answer your question with an extremely short reply.... the liberty movement is controlled by intelligence operatives.  I mean, isn't that obvious by now?  I must admit that I haven't paid attention to it in quite a few years, as I got sick of the madness.  But ultimately, it was always designed to corral those who were still anchored in the US Constitution and to render them meaningless, either through exhaustion, discrediting them, or any other means imagineable.  It's been going on for a long long time, but since the turn of the century the efforts have been extended significantly.   Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.


Here is the problem.  People want something to believe in.  It's hardwired into our DNA.  That is why religion is so powerful.  I found out recently that when someone prays, they release oxytocin.  That's the same hormone that is released during sex that causes mammals to bond to each other.  It's also released other ways (hugs for example) and it builds trust.  I am a religious person, so I think we were designed that way.  An atheist might say we evolved that way.  But there's no denying that the ability to have trust, or "faith" is part of our survival skill set.

Bringing that to this thread, even in politics there is an inward desire to trust.  And that can be a good thing, or a bad thing.  For example, I have some relatives that I did convince to step outside their box and cross over and vote for Ron Paul in the primary since the democratic side wasn't having a presidential primary, and they did (and do) genuinely like Paul.  But some are still Obama supporters and in ways that don't make sense to me.  I still here "They just don't want him to succeed".  They?  They who?  I explain that an administration that admittedly spent 82 billion to create 2,000 "green jobs" can't really be working in their best interest or that the increase wars and the support of Al Qaeda in Libya and possibly Syria isn't what they thought they were getting.  Things just get quiet these days when I bring that stuff up.  But I understand.  They *need* to trust in someone to get this country back on track.

Then I think of my own support for Rand.  And yes I do support him.  I will admit my support waivered back in 2010 when I heard him in an interview give a question about Gitmo that sounded like an endorsement of torture.  In retrospect, with enough hair splitting, it wasn't.  But I caught hell back then for suggesting that there were risked to the whole "Walk and talk like a teocon" strategy.  I didn't bring up the torture interview.  It's funny, but years later I've seen at least one of the same people who gave me hell for daring question strategy back then later give Rand hell for his Romney endorsement among other things.  Some of the things that freak others out don't bother me.  If I can make peace with the most absurd thing Rand could possibly ever say, then him saying "I'm not a libertarian because I'm not for people running around half naked and smoking dope" doesn't at all bother me.  Maybe it should?  I go back to the G. Edward Griffin video An Idea Who's Time Has Come, where he basically pushed the idea of doing and saying whatever it takes to get power so that you can turn the "ship of state" around.  But every time I go there, I think about your criticism of Griffin in this thread.  And the "stealth" strategy has an obvious danger.  How can you be sure the person you are supporting who is in "stealth mode" really is on your side?

For me, Rand's currently done enough for me to believe he's on my side.  He still *says* stuff to at times draw my ire, but I haven't seen a problematic vote yet.  But there have been clear problems.  The CFL endorsed (kinda sorta) Ken Buck for senate.  Buck would later lead the charge *against* marijuana decriminalization in Colorado and Tom Tancredo, of all people, ended up on the right side of that issue.  Kerry Bentivolio, who's roll in a 9/11 truth mockumentory film made me think he had to be real, voted to increase the debt ceiling.  And I will not trust Jesse Benton until I see a formal apology from him for how he treated the organizers of PaulFest, including our own DeborahK.  (And I know that's not going to happen).

Anyway, what to do?  I don't know.  I do think people need to do more to be independent forces for change on their own.  I'm cautiously optimistic about the "Bitcoin" movement, though I haven't gotten into it myself.  I'm looking into getting into aquaponics.  People will always have to eat.  And if I just feed myself and my family, that's doing good.  I've thought about creating a self organizing "action network" type website, but I haven't done it yet.  If/when I do you will certainly be invited.

----------


## J_White

this has been an interesting thread !!
there have been many good questions raised by both sides - i mean IP on one side and many others on the other side.
part of what IP is saying makes sense to me and explains what has happened - how wind was taken out of the Liberty movement, how tactics are used by the MSM, and how some campaign insiders seem to had a different idea on how to handle the grassroots movement.
on the other hand, IP's tips have been quite vague or maybe i am not enlightened enough to understand them...yet !

----------


## devil21

> People must understand the extent to which their "thinking" is manufactured and limited.  I don't get that many understand this.  For example, so many here still think that "change" if most like affected via overt political or social action.  There seems to be little to no understanding how these social vehicles were developed, and why they exist.  I'd like to see more people asking themselves how this current social system was constructed, and why it has been designed as it is, and who were the thinkers behind this design and why did they make the choices that they did.  
> 
> Until one makes an earnest attempt at this, I simply don't see how they can understand the breadth and depth of the system and the granularity of its controls, and how those controls are leveraged to literally shape the neural networks in our brains which control our perception, worldview, and cognition.  
> 
> Get thru that process, and this system will appear utterly corrupt, unimportant, and irrelevant.


You're really just referencing Bernays' work.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You're really just referencing Bernays' work.


Yes, 'm referencing quite a few people's work  And yes, I'm not smart enough to see-what-I-am-saying on my own... many have written of it and I'll I've done is taken the time to research the various works and to learn how to understand doublespeak and the language of elites and elite academia.  Removing all of the filters that the system has installed is the first, and the hardest part, of the process, as these become biologically etched in ones brain (ie. network of synapses).

----------


## bolil

Whoa, are we mere Bokonists?

----------


## jmdrake

> You're really just referencing Bernays' work.


Interesting.  Never heard of him...until now.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html

----------


## devil21

> Interesting.  Never heard of him...until now.
> 
> http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html


Im genuinely surprised you weren't already familiar with Bernays!  

Propaganda is definitely one of the "manuals" of the elite.  Along with:

Tragedy and Hope by Quigley
http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf

The Psychopathology of Everyday Life by Freud
http://www.scribd.com/doc/140561486/...ryday-Life-pdf

None are "light reading" but very important to understanding how the system is designed around us and if one wishes to make a difference, sadly they also have to incorporate much of the material.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Whoa, are we mere Bokonists?


Looking more like it every day...

----------


## osan

> Whoa, are we mere Bokonists?


Most people of Empire have been nothing more than that since forever, all pretenses to greater truths notwithstanding.

OTOH, some institutions of Empire appear to be complementary to Bokonism. The Catholic Church appears to be a prime example: peddling lies that, once accepted, makes people miserable and profoundly unhealthy.

----------


## jmdrake

> Im genuinely surprised you weren't already familiar with Bernays!  
> 
> Propaganda is definitely one of the "manuals" of the elite.  Along with:
> 
> Tragedy and Hope by Quigley
> http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf
> 
> The Psychopathology of Everyday Life by Freud
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/140561486/...ryday-Life-pdf
> ...


There's a lot I still don't know.  That's why coming to this place is still worth it.    Thanks for the reading list.  I'm familair with Tragedy and Hope and "really need to read that" list.

----------


## J_White

a recent movie comes to mind.
In Promised Land they show how the company salespersons take land for natural gas extraction.
i know there is a controversy regarding the methods used.
in the movie they show how an "activist" comes to the people with evidence to rile them up against the company - which does happen.
and then in the end it is shown that the "activist" had shown manipulated and false evidence - lo and behold people dump the activist and his claims against the company, which benefits the company.
the main protagonist then realizes that the activist was also working for the company !!

----------


## afwjam

Interesting read IP.
What do you think of Taoism?

----------


## bolil

> Most people of Empire have been nothing more than that since forever, all pretenses to greater truths notwithstanding.
> 
> OTOH, some institutions of Empire appear to be complementary to Bokonism. The Catholic Church appears to be a prime example: peddling lies that, once accepted, makes people miserable and profoundly unhealthy.


The 'liberty' movement proffers another example.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Interesting read IP.
> What do you think of Taoism?


Tasism is just another form of living inside someone else's circle [of control]...

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Whoa, are we mere Bokonists?


As long as we trust other "men" to create our entire system of being then we're eventually going to end up in a system-of-deceipt.

----------


## afwjam

> Tasism is just another form of living inside someone else's circle [of control]...


A disappointing response, do you think there is nothing to be learned from any outside sources of information? I only brought it up because some of your philosophies reminded me of some taoist reading I have done.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> A disappointing response, do you think there is nothing to be learned from any outside sources of information? I only brought it up because some of your philosophies reminded me of some taoist reading I have done.


Sorry about dissappointing you ... yeah, I admit that I'm not investing a lot of effort here.

I didn't mean to deride any effort you've made to study Tao.  I spend an incredible amount of time reading about various systems of control masked in a million different frames of propaganda, so I should be the last person to critique anyone else who invests time in this kind of research.  I applaud it, and I agree that there is much to take away.  My point is mainly that one should always be weary of how these various systems can be employed to control others.  In general, all systems are inconsistent, and therefore irrational, which allows them to be "gamed" by whoever is creating the rules of said system.  So, while doing your research, just look for these techniques and uncover them.  This way, you can take away those learning that benefit you while protecting yourself from any mechanisms of control.

----------


## afwjam

> Sorry about dissappointing you ... yeah, I admit that I'm not investing a lot of effort here.
> 
> I didn't mean to deride any effort you've made to study Tao.  I spend an incredible amount of time reading about various systems of control masked in a million different frames of propaganda, so I should be the last person to critique anyone else who invests time in this kind of research.  I applaud it, and I agree that there is much to take away.  My point is mainly that one should always be weary of how these various systems can be employed to control others.  In general, all systems are inconsistent, and therefore irrational, which allows them to be "gamed" by whoever is creating the rules of said system.  So, while doing your research, just look for these techniques and uncover them.  This way, you can take away those learning that benefit you while protecting yourself from any mechanisms of control.


So you have not read the Tao Te Ching? I find that by exposing myself to as much information as possible I get a broad spectrum from which it is easier to synthesis my one true path. You would acknowledge that besides matters of the heart and spirit one must seek outside input upon which to build ones beliefs. I had already believed a lot of what you have said in this thread about the social prison we have been confined to even when we think we hadn't, you have been using Plato's Cave analogy with great effectiveness of words, I was thoroughly enthralled. I do agree with some that the fault of your plight is a lack of action, you saying the identification and avoidance of the mechanisms being the "action", people need  something to believe in, a future positive action to achieve. Maybe this is already sufficiently covered for you in your own personal faith, however I wonder if there is not more you might be willing to share in this light, besides your witness identifying the mechanisms of collectivism and control.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> So you have not read the Tao Te Ching? I find that by exposing myself to as much information as possible I get a broad spectrum from which it is easier to synthesis my one true path. You would acknowledge that besides matters of the heart and spirit one must seek outside input upon which to build ones beliefs. I had already believed a lot of what you have said in this thread about the social prison we have been confined to even when we think we hadn't, you have been using Plato's Cave analogy with great effectiveness of words, I was thoroughly enthralled. I do agree with some that the fault of your plight is a lack of action, you saying the identification and avoidance of the mechanisms being the "action", people need  something to believe in, a future positive action to achieve. Maybe this is already sufficiently covered for you in your own personal faith, however I wonder if there is not more you might be willing to share in this light, besides your witness identifying the mechanisms of collectivism and control.


The only action necessary is to believe in oneself, and to stop looking for outside systems of belief, especially well-developed systems promoted by establishments.  I continue to be amazed and disappointed that everyone sees the propsed path as inaction, as it is the path that starves the parasite of the energy that it needs to survive and will kill its existance faster and more painlessly than any other approach.  This is NOT inaction.

The Tao Te Ching is fundamentally based upon the unity of opposites (the idea that things that seem to be opposed are actually united in a deeper sense) - similar to the concepts that early Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus (the father of dialectical thought) brought to the West.  These concepts are employed as mechanisms of control for the masses.  Marx/Engels employed them, giving us Dialectical Materialism.  To my knowledge, only Hegel showed us how to employ them FROM the individual [outward] in order to learn more about our world.  So, no, I don't suscribe to Tao.

Let's go back to Ellul for a refresher....this is good stuff to read from time to time....




> *The Presence of the Kingdom: A Review*
> (This is my review of the book "The Presence of the Kingdom" by Jacques Ellul)
> http://lampfortheworld.blogspot.com/...om-review.html
> 
> 
> In this book, the author simply explores and answers the question,* “How should the Christian live in the modern world?*” In this age of technological advancement and mass media, Ellul vigorously pleads for Christians to live out their identity as the salt of the earth and light of world to this decaying and darkened society. *Christ calls His followers to function as “visible signs” of the presence and reality of God's kingdom here on earth.*
> 
> In order to fulfill their mission, Christians ought not to separate themselves from the culture as most pietists do. However, they ought not to be triumphalistic either, engaging themselves deeply into the culture in order to conquer it or “redeem” it. *While modern men are fascinated with, even enslaved by, technology and progress, Christians, however, should be preoccupied with God's kingdom and His righteous rule in the world, living as loyal subjects of King Jesus in all areas of life by the power of His Spirit*. They should never forget that God has placed them in this fallen world in order to bear witness to Him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. This seems to be Ellul's main message in this book.
> 
> ...

----------


## talkingpointes

> The only action necessary is to believe in oneself, and to stop looking for outside systems of belief, especially those well-developed systems delivered by others.  I continue to be amazed and disappointed that everyone sees this path as inaction, as it is the path that starves the parasite of the energy that it needs to survive and will kill its existing faster and more painlessly than any other approach.  This is NOT inaction.
> 
> The Tao Te Ching is fundamentally based upon the unity of opposites (the idea that things that seem to be opposed are actually united in a deeper sense) - similar to the concepts that early Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus (the father of dialectical thought) brought to the West.  These concepts are employed as mechanisms of control for the masses.  Marx/Engels employed them, giving us Dialectical Materialism.  To my knowledge, only Hegel showed us how to employ them FROM the individual [outward] in order to learn more about our world.


Wonderful conversation and series of posts. I haven't seen you around here in a while, glad to see you back. Unless of course I'm wrong about that. Either way, carry on.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Self indulgent, navel gazing, twaddle.

Explain the various shades of philosphical gray, as a bunch of cops are beating you senseless for looking at them wrong.

And as the people who rely on you, suffer, because you have been taken from them.

That's just how this high school drop out, dumbass, sees it.

Feel free to continue whatever public mental masturbation you are engaged in.




> And here's a great example why I stopped posting here for several years.  It's dumbass response like this one.  This is a great example of how well the system has indoctrinated so many minds.  If one is not presented with authorized forms of rebellion they see that as doing nothing.  It's like a transitor, everything is either one dialectical alternative or another.  No gray.
> 
> Turning off from this system and thinking and percieving based upon ones own true experiences is an enormous leap.  But unfortunately, we've all been indoctrinated so much from such an early stage we cannot even envision what this might entail, or we merely put it in to the "religious" fallacy or some similar camp.   
> 
> Again, ceasing to allow this system to control how your brain develops is NOT doing nothing.

----------


## afwjam

> The only action necessary is to believe in oneself, and to stop looking for outside systems of belief, especially well-developed systems promoted by establishments.  I continue to be amazed and disappointed that everyone sees the propsed path as inaction, as it is the path that starves the parasite of the energy that it needs to survive and will kill its existance faster and more painlessly than any other approach.  This is NOT inaction.
> 
> The Tao Te Ching is fundamentally based upon the unity of opposites (the idea that things that seem to be opposed are actually united in a deeper sense) - similar to the concepts that early Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus (the father of dialectical thought) brought to the West.  These concepts are employed as mechanisms of control for the masses.  Marx/Engels employed them, giving us Dialectical Materialism.  To my knowledge, only Hegel showed us how to employ them FROM the individual [outward] in order to learn more about our world.  So, no, I don't suscribe to Tao.
> 
> Let's go back to Ellul for a refresher....this is good stuff to read from time to time....


I agree with what you are saying and some passages of the Tao Te Ching echo it, that is why I brought it up. I agree with you that what you propose is very effective and in fact not inaction. Educational out reach like what you are doing here are important actions. Your absolutely right about needing a deeper understanding of ourselves and the systems at play around us. There are many ways to accomplish this which I would like to explore further. 

Interesting reading, I do think we need to work harder on being the salt of the earth and the light of this world. Although I don't entirely subscribe to Christian theology, I find the part about me being cast in to this world of sin to be particularly depressing. I truly believe that my life and this world are a gift and blessing to us, we are very very lucky. We would have to admit that Christianity is part of the dialectic itself and maybe not working effectively to free us from systems of control all though there is tremendous truth and knowledge to be gained, kinda like the Tao Te Ching. 

There are many different actions to take as a response to the threat of collectivism and violence. The most important being an understanding of the situation and the mechanisms in use, like you said starving it of its energy. However with so many blind leading the blind we much find a way that people may learn the truth for themselves. This is what you were doing in this thread and I think you piqued the curiosity of many onlookers. As you rationally explain it is something one has to "learn" for themselves, not something that can be taught. However we can help people learn as you are doing here. How else can we help people learn and empower themselves thereby starving the enemy. Maybe we can use some of the tactics against them?

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> I agree with what you are saying and some passages of the Tao Te Ching echo it, that is why I brought it up. I agree with you that what you propose is very effective and in fact not inaction. Educational out reach like what you are doing here are important actions. Your absolutely right about needing a deeper understanding of ourselves and the systems at play around us. There are many ways to accomplish this which I would like to explore further. 
> 
> Interesting reading, I do think we need to work harder on being the salt of the earth and the light of this world. Although I don't entirely subscribe to Christian theology, I find the part about me being cast in to this world of sin to be particularly depressing. I truly believe that my life and this world are a gift and blessing to us, we are very very lucky. We would have to admit that Christianity is part of the dialectic itself and maybe not working effectively to free us from systems of control all though there is tremendous truth and knowledge to be gained, kinda like the Tao Te Ching. 
> 
> There are many different actions to take as a response to the threat of collectivism and violence. The most important being an understanding of the situation and the mechanisms in use, like you said starving it of its energy. However with so many blind leading the blind we much find a way that people may learn the truth for themselves. This is what you were doing in this thread and I think you piqued the curiosity of many onlookers. As you rationally explain it is something one has to "learn" for themselves, not something that can be taught. However we can help people learn as you are doing here. How else can we help people learn and empower themselves thereby starving the enemy. *Maybe we can use some of the tactics against them*?


My first reaction to the bolded question is a great big NO.

How can we help with bringing truth into the open by making use of lies?  _edit: That would mean taking on "the end justifies the means" which would destroy any confidence in the end once the lies were brought to light, even if it worked, which I don't believe it would._

----------


## afwjam

> My first reaction to the bolded question is a great big NO.
> 
> How can we help with bringing truth into the open by making use of lies?  _edit: That would mean taking on "the end justifies the means" which would destroy any confidence in the end once the lies were brought to light, even if it worked, which I don't believe it would._


I certainly don't mean deception and lies, but maybe learning from what they do and use similar methods to spread truth, for example music.

----------


## jmdrake

> The only action necessary is to believe in oneself, and to stop looking for outside systems of belief, especially well-developed systems promoted by establishments.  I continue to be amazed and disappointed that everyone sees the propsed path as inaction, as it is the path that starves the parasite of the energy that it needs to survive and will kill its existance faster and more painlessly than any other approach.  This is NOT inaction.
> 
> The Tao Te Ching is fundamentally based upon the unity of opposites (the idea that things that seem to be opposed are actually united in a deeper sense) - similar to the concepts that early Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus (the father of dialectical thought) brought to the West.  These concepts are employed as mechanisms of control for the masses.  Marx/Engels employed them, giving us Dialectical Materialism.  To my knowledge, only Hegel showed us how to employ them FROM the individual [outward] in order to learn more about our world.  So, no, I don't suscribe to Tao.
> 
> Let's go back to Ellul for a refresher....this is good stuff to read from time to time....


Wow!  Great read.  I've not read such a good primer on true Christianity outside of the Bible itself.  Another book on my must read list.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Self indulgent, navel gazing, twaddle.
> 
> Explain the various shades of philosphical gray, as a bunch of cops are beating you senseless for looking at them wrong.
> 
> And as the people who rely on you, suffer, because you have been taken from them.
> 
> That's just how this high school drop out, dumbass, sees it.
> 
> Feel free to continue whatever public mental masturbation you are engaged in.


Yes, Natural Man's system is incredibly evil.  And Yes, we ALL suffer from Natural Man's system.  I have suffered greatly.... greatly from this system.  I am not immune.  I could sit here and try to garner empathy for what has happened to me and to those close to me, but I'm not taking that path.  That does not mean that I am a navel gazer twaddler who spouts meaningless philosophical mumbo jumbo.  The fact is that I've taken on the system in a major way, head on, on a national level at very high levels, taking a path that should have created significant change.  But the system buried the effort as well many around me (some literally), and hit me hard as well.  After years of soul searching and self-study, I  happen to think that the path I discuss is the optimal approach.  That does not mean that some will still continue to suffer greatly.  And for that, I am deeply empathetic and sorry.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I agree with what you are saying and some passages of the Tao Te Ching echo it, that is why I brought it up. I agree with you that what you propose is very effective and in fact not inaction. Educational out reach like what you are doing here are important actions. Your absolutely right about needing a deeper understanding of ourselves and the systems at play around us. There are many ways to accomplish this which I would like to explore further. 
> 
> Interesting reading, I do think we need to work harder on being the salt of the earth and the light of this world. Although I don't entirely subscribe to *Christian theology*, I find the part about me being cast in to this world of sin to be particularly depressing. I truly believe that my life and this world are a gift and blessing to us, we are very very lucky. We would have to admit that Christianity is part of the dialectic itself and maybe not working effectively to free us from systems of control all though there is tremendous truth and knowledge to be gained, kinda like the Tao Te Ching. 
> 
> There are many different actions to take as a response to the threat of collectivism and violence. The most important being an understanding of the situation and the mechanisms in use, like you said starving it of its energy. However with so many blind leading the blind we much find a way that people may learn the truth for themselves. This is what you were doing in this thread and I think you piqued the curiosity of many onlookers. As you rationally explain it is something one has to "learn" for themselves, not something that can be taught. However we can help people learn as you are doing here. How else can we help people learn and empower themselves thereby starving the enemy. Maybe we can use some of the tactics against them?


Yes, Christian theology has been corrupted by man.  Ellul goes beyond the propaganda.

----------


## afwjam

> Yes, Christian theology has been corrupted by man.  Ellul goes beyond the propaganda.



I look forward to reading the book, I am adding it to a list of many books you brought up in this thread. Do you have any further recommended reading or thoughts on how we might help people to learn how to overcome the mechanisms that oppress them?

----------


## KerriAnn

> Yes, Natural Man's system is incredibly evil.  And Yes, we ALL suffer from Natural Man's system.  I have suffered greatly.... greatly from this system.  I am not immune.  I could sit here and try to garner empathy for what has happened to me and to those close to me, but I'm not taking that path.  That does not mean that I am a navel gazer twaddler who spouts meaningless philosophical mumbo jumbo.  The fact is that I've taken on the system in a major way, head on, on a national level at very high levels, taking a path that should have created significant change.  But the system buried the effort as well many around me (some literally), and hit me hard as well.  After years of soul searching and self-study, I  happen to think that the path I discuss is the optimal approach.  That does not mean that some will still continue to suffer greatly.  And for that, I am deeply empathetic and sorry.


I hope I can organize my thoughts enough to make sense... 

I have been searching for a way to make the greatest change. I came to the Ron Paul movement because I strongly believe that every man should be free. Completely free. How do you give freedom to men, when they can be so wicked towards one another? How do you punish one man for being wicked towards another? In order to punish, you must give power to some men to do so. And there is where the corruption begins. No matter what type of system you employ to do this, it will in time become so corrupted that you must wipe it out and start all over again or else the system will take freedom away from the men who deserve it. And so a cycle begins, and never ends, men becoming too powerful, men becoming unhappy and restless, rebelling against the system they are trapped in and more suffering and so on.

I started wondering, what can stop this? Who am I and what can I do to stop this suffering? I am so small on the outside compared to the world. But I feel big on the inside, I want to change it so badly. 

I watched a documentary about Amit Goswami. He believes that Quantum Physics has proved that nothing physical is real at all. It is all just a manifestation of our consciousness. And we are not separate either, we are all God, and time and space are a construction of our own consciousness that we have trapped ourselves in.

So if I am God, (not I in the individual sense, but I as in all of us), then I CAN change things. I can't quite grasp how, and I think it's because I have not overcome the sense that I am separate from you, or anything else that I see. But I feel that it is true, that if we change our perception and realize that we are not separate, that we are all God, then we will understand that... well... I haven't gotten that far yet. Maybe we will come to the conclusion that none of this matters. The freedom of men, the suffering of men, it is all out of our reach, uncontrollable, and maybe it is just an illusion anyway.

Here is a link to my blog... I haven't posted to it much, but I would appreciate feedback on it, if anyone has the time to read it: 

http://didjuno.blogspot.com/

The top and most recent post is called Letting Go, and it's about me coming to terms with my lack of control over the world. I also posted that one here on the forums.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I look forward to reading the book, I am adding it to a list of many books you brought up in this thread. Do you have any further recommended reading or thoughts on how we might help people to learn how to overcome the mechanisms that oppress them?


Many.

If you can isolate the area of interest, then I'll try to provide reading/resource lists to the best of my knowledge.

But I will say this, for those willing to invest the time, and also to learn to read Double Speak, you will find that ALL aspects of this system is discussed in excruciating detail.  Nothing is hidden.  The arrogance is amazing.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I hope I can organize my thoughts enough to make sense... 
> 
> I have been searching for a way to make the greatest change. I came to the Ron Paul movement because I strongly believe that every man should be free. Completely free. *How do you give freedom to men, when they can be so wicked towards one another?* How do you punish one man for being wicked towards another? In order to punish, you must give power to some men to do so. And there is where the corruption begins. No matter what type of system you employ to do this, it will in time become so corrupted that you must wipe it out and start all over again or else the system will take freedom away from the men who deserve it. And so a cycle begins, and never ends, men becoming too powerful, men becoming unhappy and restless, rebelling against the system they are trapped in and more suffering and so on.
> 
> I started wondering, what can stop this? Who am I and what can I do to stop this suffering? I am so small on the outside compared to the world. But I feel big on the inside, I want to change it so badly. 
> 
> I watched a documentary about Amit Goswami. He believes that Quantum Physics has proved that nothing physical is real at all. It is all just a manifestation of our consciousness. And we are not separate either, we are all God, and time and space are a construction of our own consciousness that we have trapped ourselves in.
> 
> So if I am God, (not I in the individual sense, but I as in all of us), then I CAN change things. I can't quite grasp how, and I think it's because I have not overcome the sense that I am separate from you, or anything else that I see. But I feel that it is true, that if we change our perception and realize that we are not separate, that we are all God, then we will understand that... well... I haven't gotten that far yet. Maybe we will come to the conclusion that none of this matters. The freedom of men, the suffering of men, it is all out of our reach, uncontrollable, and maybe it is just an illusion anyway.


If I look to Ellul's writing, based on Christ's originally philosophy, then it is Man's responsibility to aggressively question all of man's systems.  My words - To take an almost hostile approach to what is presented to us by other men.  




> Here is a link to my blog... I haven't posted to it much, but I would appreciate feedback on it, if anyone has the time to read it: 
> 
> http://didjuno.blogspot.com/
> 
> *The top and most recent post is called Letting Go, and it's about me coming to terms with my lack of control over the world. I also posted that one here on the forums*.


No no no....

We control how the synapses in our brains develop, and therefore how we perceive and therefore act in the world.  My suggestion to withdraw from this system comes from our need to physically modify the synapse networks in our own brains (what the intelligence agencies call 'rewiring'). It is only if we rewire ourselve that we'll be able to clearly see the system for what it is and to turn away from it and create new systems that are not deceptive and based in evil.  

Bottom line, we have ALL the power, and they have NONE.  We just can't see it, because they are running this super sophisticated technocracy that controls our synaptical networks, which in turn, controls how we view ourselves, them, and the world.

----------


## KerriAnn

> If I look to Ellul's writing, based on Christ's originally philosophy, then it is Man's responsibility to aggressively question all of man's systems.  My words - To take an almost hostile approach to what is presented to us by other men.  
> 
> 
> No no no....
> 
> We control how the synapses in our brains develop, and therefore how we perceive and therefore act in the world.  My suggestion to withdraw from this system comes from our need to physically modify the synapse networks in our own brains (what the intelligence agencies call 'rewiring'). *It is only if we rewire ourselve that we'll be able to clearly see the system for what it is and to turn away from it and create new systems that are not deceptive and based in evil.* 
> 
> Bottom line, we have ALL the power, and they have NONE.  We just can't see it, because they are running this super sophisticated technocracy that controls our synaptical networks, which in turn, controls how we view ourselves, them, and the world.


So, if we figure out how to rewire ourselves, individually, then what have we achieved? Must we ALL rewire our brains before we can change everything?

So if I rewire my brain successfully... and you yours, but no one else follows suit, then what? We die and nothing happens? Are we stuck in this loop of suffering until we collectively figure out how to rewire?

----------


## devil21

> So, if we figure out how to rewire ourselves, individually, then what have we achieved? Must we ALL rewire our brains before we can change everything?
> 
> *So if I rewire my brain successfully... and you yours, but no one else follows suit, then what? We die and nothing happens? Are we stuck in this loop of suffering until we collectively figure out how to rewire?*


You're mostly already there right now.  All that matters is your effort to wake up others and do the right thing.

----------


## KerriAnn

> You're mostly already there right now.  All that matters is your effort to wake up others and do the right thing.


But then I feel small again. One person in this huge world, only having a very small amount of influence over the people I see everyday. It makes me frustrated, and sad. I know some people might say that it is like waves or ripples in a pond, but I feel more like it is waves in an ocean, the waves are unpredictable and I have absolutely no control over which way they go, and how they end up. It feels hopeless!

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> But then I feel small again. One person in this huge world, only having a very small amount of influence over the people I see everyday. It makes me frustrated, and sad. I know some people might say that it is like waves or ripples in a pond, but I feel more like it is waves in an ocean, the waves are unpredictable and I have absolutely no control over which way they go, and how they end up. It feels hopeless!

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> *So, if we figure out how to rewire ourselves, individually, then what have we achieved?* Must we ALL rewire our brains before we can change everything?
> 
> So if I rewire my brain successfully... and you yours, but no one else follows suit, then what? We die and nothing happens? Are we stuck in this loop of suffering until we collectively figure out how to rewire?


*Freedom of thought and action... that's what you will have achieved.   And it will snowball!

They are so very weak, and fear mass rewiring and system withrawel more than anything else.  Their system will collapse as people withdraw.  This weapon system (and that's what this is, a weapon system developed in the bowels of the military intelligence academia establishment) requires OUR participation to work.  Withrawel (and clear insight, which leads to uncorrupted thought) is the only method for its self-destruction.*

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You're mostly already there right now.  All that matters is your effort to wake up others and do the right thing.


The worst thing one can do is assume that they are at the end point.  I continue to be amazed at what I uncover.  Continued vigilance and humility are key here.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

Here's a good read that will help one understand how the system of inputs configures our brains and creates irrational and illogical blind spots (ie. things that we cannot see no matter how visible).

*Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are
Joseph LeDoux*
http://www.amazon.com/Synaptic-Self-.../dp/0670030287






> Ranging widely through philosophy, literature, and the history of science, LeDoux examines how we have conceptualized the relationship between brain and self through the centuries.* His own contribution, based on two decades of research, begins with the startlingly simple premise that the self-the essence of who a person is-intricately reflects patterns of interconnectivity between neurons in the brain. Synapses, the spaces between neurons, are not only the channels through which we think, act, imagine, feel, and remember, but also the means by which we encode our most fundamental traits, preferences, and beliefs, allowing us to function as a single, integrated individual-a synaptic self.*
> 
> As LeDoux brilliantly argues, a synaptic self does not exclude other ways of understanding existence-spiritual, aesthetic, moral-but rather it enriches and broadens these avenues by providing a neurological/psychological construct grounded in the latest research in biology. Rather than join the age-old debate on whether nature or nurture is more determinative, LeDoux posits that both genes and experience contribute to synaptic connectivity. Mind expanding in every sense of the word, Synaptic Self represents an important breakthrough in one of the last frontiers of medical research.



I found this video, but admit that I have yet to watch this series review .....








> *A CONVERSATION WITH/Joseph LeDoux; Taking a Clinical Look at Human Emotions*
> By CLAUDIA DREIFUS
> Published: October 08, 2002
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/08/he...-emotions.html
> 
> 
> On a recent balmy evening, Dr. Joseph LeDoux, a professor of neuroscience at New York University, strode to the stage of the Cornelia Street Cafe in Greenwich Village and read from his latest book, ''The Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are.''
> 
> Astonishingly, the audience -- graduate students, publishing executives and scientists --greeted Dr. LeDoux's performance with enthusiasm usually reserved for rock stars.
> ...

----------


## afwjam

> Many.
> 
> If you can isolate the area of interest, then I'll try to provide reading/resource lists to the best of my knowledge.
> 
> But I will say this, for those willing to invest the time, and also to learn to read Double Speak, you will find that ALL aspects of this system is discussed in excruciating detail.  Nothing is hidden.  The arrogance is amazing.


Well I have just ordered Ellul's book, I will read it after I finish Enemies of Eros by Gallagher. I would love a list of books that you think would best serve as a primer to identifying the system and circumventing it. Obviously Im interested in your perspective and how you got there as Im sure others are too, I am willing to read and learn.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Well I have just ordered Ellul's book, I will read it after I finish Enemies of Eros by Gallagher. I would love a list of books that you think would best serve as a primer to identifying the system and circumventing it. Obviously Im interested in your perspective and how you got there as Im sure others are too, I am willing to read and learn.


Not to be evasive, but the list is extremely large, covering a wide array of fields.  Further, they each have to be put in context and grouped according to area of interest.  Bottom line, delivering a reading list that makes sense is no easy task.  You're going to have to narrow it down for me to provide value in return.

But before you can get into any meat, meat that is intended for elite eyes and brains, you need to understand how to read and interpret Double Speak, because that's how the books of any merit are written.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Well I have just ordered Ellul's book, I will read it after I finish Enemies of Eros by Gallagher. I would love a list of books that you think would best serve as a primer to identifying the system and circumventing it. Obviously Im interested in your perspective and how you got there as Im sure others are too, I am willing to read and learn.


A suggestion for your next read... another great Ellul publications...

*The Technological Society*
http://www.amazon.com/The-Technologi.../dp/0394703901



Technique - the bedrock of the modern world, June 7, 2004
By Jonathan Armstrong "enantidromian" (Denver, CO United States) 

Before proceeding with this review, let me just say that no fewer than a hundred pages could be trimmed from its content without diluting its message at all. Many of the examples used in the book are extremely dated; while I think I'm fairly well read, I confess that I'm not really up on the vicissitudes and catfights of French academic sociology in the early 1960's (to give but one example). With that being said, this book is worth well worth the time spent reading its 436 pages.

This is undoubtedly one of the most important books of the twentieth century, and if you accept its thesis you won't be able to look at the political milieu in the same way ever again. (If you agree with it and it doesn't change the way you look at things, you haven't grasped its importance.) Most political theorists take ideology to be a central point from which "real world" consequences emanate. In other words, a Communist or libertarian ideology in practical use will produce a particular type society and individual divorced from the actual technical workings of the society. Liberals and conservatives both speak of things in such a manner as if ideology is the prima facie cause of existence - but as Ellul shows in painstaking detail, this is wrong. What almost everyone fails to grasp is the pernicious effect of technique (and its offspring, technology) on modern man.

Technique can loosely be defined as the entire mass of organization and technology that has maximum efficiency as its goal. Ellul shows that technique possesses an impetus all its own and exerts similar effects on human society no matter what the official ideology of the society in question is. Technique, with its never-ending quest for maximum efficiency, tends to slowly drown out human concerns as it progresses towards its ultimate goal. "...the further economic technique develops, the more it makes real the abstract concept of economic man." (p. 219) Technique does not confine itself merely to the realm of technical production, but infiltrates every aspect of human existence, and has no time for "inefficiencies" caused by loyalties to family, religion, race, or culture; a society of dumbed-down consumers is absolutely essential to the technological society, which must contain predictable "demographics" in order to ensure the necessary financial returns. "The only thing that matters technically is yield, production. This is the law of technique; this yield can only be obtained by the total mobilization of human beings, body and soul, and this implies the exploitation of all human psychic forces." (p. 324).

Ellul thoroughly shows that much of the difference in ideology between libertarians and socialists becomes largely irrelevant in the technological society (this is not to say that ideology is unimportant, but rather that technique proceeds with the same goals and effects.) This will doubtlessly please no one; liberals want to believe that they can have privacy and freedom despite a high degree of central planning, and libertarians want to believe that a society free of most regulation and control is possible in an advanced technological society. Libertarian fantasies seem especially irrelevant given the exigencies of a technological society; as Ellul notes, as technique progresses it simply cannot function without a high degree of complexity and regulation. "The modern state could no more be a state without techniques than a businessman could be a businessman without the telephone or the automobile... not only does it need techniques, but techniques need it. It is not a matter of chance, nor a matter of conscious will; rather, it is an urgency..." (p. 253-254). Can anyone really doubt Ellul here, especially seeing as how twenty-plus years of conservative promises to downsize government still result in more regulation and bureaucracy with every passing year? Planning, socialism, regulation, and control are the natural consequences of technique; an increasingly incestuous relationship between industry and the State is inevitable. "The state and technique - increasingly interrelated - are becoming the most important forces in the modern world; they buttress and reinforce each other in their aim to produce an apparently indestructible, total civilization." (p. 318).

This is not an optimistic book. Given that the nature of technique is one of a universal leveling of human cultures, needs, and desires (replacing real needs with false ones and the neighborhood restaurant with McDonalds), Ellul is certainly pessimistic. He does not propose any remedies for the Skinnerist nightmares of technique somehow leading to a Golden Age of humanity, where people will enjoy maximal freedom coupled with minimal want: "...we are struck by the incredible naivete of these scientists... they claim they will be in a position to develop certain collective desires, to constitute certain homogeneous social units out of aggregates of individuals, to forbid men to raise their children, and even to persuade them to renounce having any... at the same time, they speak of assuring the triumph of freedom and of the necessity of avoiding dictatorship... they seem incapable of grasping the contradiction involved, or of understanding that what they are proposing." (p. 434).

----------


## InterestedParticipant



----------


## osan

> Here's a good read that will help one understand how the system of inputs configures our brains and creates irrational and illogical blind spots (ie. things that we cannot see no matter how visible).
> 
> *Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are*


Another nitwit reductionist making assertions that cannot be proven.

FAIL.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

Have heard this said about Alex Jones, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz , Glenn Beck..   but who knows.

----------


## devil21

Gov't funded internet shills exposed:

http://www.insanemedia.net/forum-shi...r-n-7015a/2924

Surely we have some of them here on RPF too.  Very interesting!  Both links worth a read!!

http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2012/10/...eyre-real.html

----------


## devil21

The REAL members still remaining on RPF should remember that the tactics in the original post are heavily in use here right now.

----------


## wizardwatson

> The REAL members still remaining on RPF should remember that the tactics in the original post are heavily in use here right now.


I have this thread subscribed from ages ago.  You bumped a dinosaur.

If they do have a presence here I think we're probably filed under "mission accomplished".  

Not much going on.

----------


## Zippyjuan



----------


## Indy Vidual

We have been neutered, penetrated and left alone to slowly bleed?

----------


## idiom

> We have been neutered, penetrated and left alone to slowly bleed?


Nah, the shepherd retired without a replacement. And everyone went back to their lives.

----------


## acptulsa

> I have this thread subscribed from ages ago.  You bumped a dinosaur.
> 
> If they do have a presence here I think we're probably filed under "mission accomplished".  
> 
> Not much going on.


You are kidding, right?

You haven't noticed the racists are still keeping their hand in, trying to offend every demographic in Rand Paul's name?  You haven't seen all the people screeching that Trump supporters will only listen to us if we're extra nice and polite, when they only listen to Trump and Trump is the only guy who gives Howard Stern a run for his money?  You haven't seen the trumpeted headlines every time the pollsters find a way to cook our numbers down a little more?  You haven't seen the messages of doom and gloom from people who allegedly understand how the pols are being manipulated and allegedly remember the major swings we saw Ron's numbers take when it came close to primary time, and suddenly inaccurate poll numbers were a danger to the pollsters' reputations?  You surely noticed that two percent of us give a $#@! about Trump, yet he has been the subject of thirty percent of the new threads, right?

I mean, you have noticed, right?

Oh, they still love us and want us to be unhappy.  Trust me.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> You are kidding, right?
> 
> You haven't noticed the racists are still keeping their hand in, trying to offend every demographic in Rand Paul's name?  You haven't seen all the people screeching that Trump supporters will only listen to us if we're extra nice and polite, when they only listen to Trump and Trump is the only guy who gives Howard Stern a run for his money?  You haven't seen the trumpeted headlines every time the pollsters find a way to cook our numbers down a little more?  You haven't seen the messages of doom and gloom from people who allegedly understand how the pols are being manipulated and allegedly remember the major swings we saw Ron's numbers take when it came close to primary time, and suddenly inaccurate poll numbers were a danger to the pollsters' reputations?  You surely noticed that two percent of us give a $#@! about Trump, yet he has been the subject of thirty percent of the new threads, right?
> 
> I mean, you have noticed, right?
> 
> Oh, they still love us and want us to be unhappy.  Trust me.


Uh, Tulsa, NO ONE wants to listen to people who are behaving like lunatic $#@!s.  Just sayin'.

----------


## acptulsa

> Uh, Tulsa, NO ONE wants to listen to people who are behaving like lunatic $#@!s.  Just sayin'.


Well, it's a good thing you're stalking me, then.  This way they can avoid your posts and my posts at the same time.

----------


## LibertyEagle

lol.  Fair enough.  Although, not stalking you.  You're just one of the few posting this early.

----------


## afwjam

Bump in memory of IP, hope you are still out there buddy.

----------


## jmdrake

> Bump in memory of IP, hope you are still out there buddy.


Yep.  IP was (is I hope) very prescient.

----------


## fr33

> We have been neutered, penetrated and left alone to slowly bleed?


Yes that's where the liberty movement is. Actually we probably were just a smaller movement than we thought we were at one time and we are coming to grip with it. The political establishment is shook up though. Your average conservative republican seems way different than just a few years ago. It's probably just because Obama had 8 years. 8 years ago conservative republican voters would have bought this new Red Scare hook line and sinker along with supporting ISIS in Syria if not for Obama being president. It's been pleasantly shocking to me to hear Republicans resist that foolishness.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Bump in memory of IP, hope you are still out there buddy.





> Yep.  IP was (is I hope) very prescient.


Still paying attention, fellas.  Still working toward a better world.  Just have had little to no time for online swamps.  

Funny looking at these old threads.  Don't think I'd change a word of what I said.  Perhaps more relevant and appropriate now, then when written

*Update on my perspectives. * 

- RP is part of the swamp/cabal (or whatever u want to call it)
- I'm 70/30 on Trump being a Patriot.  Sometimes I'm confused by his actions.  But then, it's no easy task dealing with these swamp creature.  I'm giving him time, and my support.
- We are winning.  Tide has turned.  
- Internet behemoths need to be disintermediated... fast.
- Q Anon is BS... as diversion... sideshow.
- Our Gov't is less of a problem then those in the shadows outside gov't (media, internet moguls, arms dealers, human trafficers, corp psychopaths, etc)
- Clinton Foundation & UraniumOne was less about money and more about weakening the USA by denying access to key resources and moving it into the hands of the Globalists.  
- Globalists plans are now visible for everyone to see.  Attacks on multiple fronts.  A great challenge.   But Patriots have stepped up.  Don't buy into Alt media, almost all of it is controlled.

----------


## osan

> *Update on my perspectives. * 
> 
> - RP is part of the swamp/cabal (or whatever u want to call it)


Buh_who?_  Ron Paul?  I must be missing something.




> - I'm 70/30 on Trump being a Patriot.  Sometimes I'm confused by his actions.  But then, it's no easy task dealing with these swamp creature.  I'm giving him time, and my support.


I think you're on the right track.  Witnessed a lot of hatred for him even here.  I suspect that were those people to get a briefing on global political reality, they might not be quite so harsh.  Nobody can credibly deny that the man has inherited a mess of epic proportions.  Nobody, not even the much vaunted Ron Paul would be able to breeze through and make all things right.

Speaking of the crap with which Trump must deal as prezzy, I have been told that there is talk out there that our shiny new president has appropriated a special Marine strike force of some 2000+++ members who raided a CIA data center a few days ago.  No idea whether this is true, but I hope like hell that it is.  If it is, it would go a long way toward assuaging my doubts and suspicions about the man; suspicions I hold not because he is Trump or due to what he has said or even done, but because this is politics.




> - We are winning.  Tide has turned.


Winning what, exactly?




> - Internet behemoths need to be disintermediated... fast.


Engrish, prease.




> - Q Anon is BS... as diversion... sideshow.


See previous point.




> - Our Gov't is less of a problem then those in the shadows outside gov't (media, internet moguls, arms dealers, human trafficers, corp psychopaths, etc)


Seems a distinction without a difference.




> - Clinton Foundation & UraniumOne was less about money and more about weakening the USA by denying access to key resources and moving it into the hands of the Globalists.


BINGO.  Give that poster a cigar.  A GOOD one, too.




> - Globalists plans are now visible for everyone to see.  Attacks on multiple fronts.  A great challenge.   But Patriots have stepped up.  Don't buy into Alt media, almost all of it is controlled.


Hope you are right about those stepping up.  I do see some of it, but it seems so meager.  But as you point out, media are seemingly paddling for all they are worth to get us to believe that those of the liberty ilk are few, far between, and dangerously psychotic.

----------


## nikcers

> Buh_who?_  Ron Paul?  I must be missing something.


The left is literally attacking Rand Paul because he is arguing for real tax cuts, they even have this 10 million dollar ad campaign they are pushing against him telling him to keep his word- they are trying to make him back down and not fight for a real tax cut.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> *Update on my perspectives. * 
> 
> - RP is part of the swamp/cabal (or whatever u want to call it)
> - I'm 70/30 on Trump being a Patriot.  Sometimes I'm confused by his actions.  But then, it's no easy task dealing with these swamp creature.  I'm giving him time, and my support.
> - We are winning.  Tide has turned.  
> - Internet behemoths need to be disintermediated... fast.
> - Q Anon is BS... as diversion... sideshow.
> - Our Gov't is less of a problem then those in the shadows outside gov't (media, internet moguls, arms dealers, human trafficers, corp psychopaths, etc)
> - Clinton Foundation & UraniumOne was less about money and more about weakening the USA by denying access to key resources and moving it into the hands of the Globalists.  
> - Globalists plans are now visible for everyone to see.  Attacks on multiple fronts.  A great challenge.   But Patriots have stepped up.  Don't buy into Alt media, almost all of it is controlled.


Yes, the Pauls are bad, Trump's good, and we should focus not on policy but on this invisible Goldstein called globalism.

Good lord...




> we are winning


The post above is proof positive of the opposite.

----------


## devil21

> Yes, the Pauls are bad, Trump's good, and we should focus not on policy but on this invisible Goldstein called globalism.


The Pauls are not "bad" and IP didn't say they were.  I think when IP says the Pauls are part of the cabal he means that the Pauls are Freemasons.  Ron is definitely a mason, dunno about Rand but I'd assume so.  If you research what Freemasonry is (and I know you have...ahem '33'), there are two paths a mason can choose.  The left hand path or the right hand path.  The Pauls take the right path.  The proverbial "good cops" of the age old good cop/bad cop paradigm.  The lights in the dark that are necessary to provide choices and the exercise of free will for the masses.

----------


## timosman

> The Pauls are not "bad" and IP didn't say they were.  I think when IP says the Pauls are part of the cabal he means that the Pauls are Freemasons.  Ron is definitely a mason, dunno about Rand but I'd assume so.  If you research what Freemasonry is (and I know you have...ahem '33'), there are two paths a mason can choose.  The left hand path or the right hand path.  The Pauls take the right path.  The proverbial "good cops" of the age old good cop/bad cop paradigm.  *The lights in the dark that are necessary to provide choices and the exercise of free will for the masses.*


You don't want to have people jumping off the bridges.

----------


## osan

> The Pauls are not "bad" and IP didn't say they were.  I think when IP says the Pauls are part of the cabal he means that the Pauls are Freemasons.  Ron is definitely a mason, dunno about Rand but I'd assume so.  If you research what Freemasonry is (and I know you have...ahem '33'), there are two paths a mason can choose.  The left hand path or the right hand path.  The Pauls take the right path.  The proverbial "good cops" of the age old good cop/bad cop paradigm.  The lights in the dark that are necessary to provide choices and the exercise of free will for the masses.


What the hell?

GOOD cop?  Seriously?  No such thing.  All cops are bad cops because the very definition of "cop" is badness itself.  In a very different world there could be good cops - what I would likely rather call "guardians".  Were our police guardians of the right things, I would have little to no problem with them.  They are nothing like that.  They are bandits, murderers, perjurers, fraud, bullies, and so on down the dreary list of qualities that agents of the Tyrant typically manifest.


As for free will, the "masses", which is to say the Meaners, have no interest in such things, save along very narrowly determined lines such as where Johnny can stick his little WankyBit.  Beyond that frightfully close channel, free will not only meets with disinterest, but with open hostility.  The Meaner wants his slavery, so long as you don't call it that.

----------


## osan

> You don't want to have people jumping off the bridges.


Meh... speak for yourself.

----------


## devil21

> What the hell?
> 
> GOOD cop?  Seriously?  No such thing.  All cops are bad cops because the very definition of "cop" is badness itself.  In a very different world there could be good cops - what I would likely rather call "guardians".  Were our police guardians of the right things, I would have little to no problem with them.  They are nothing like that.  They are bandits, murderers, perjurers, fraud, bullies, and so on down the dreary list of qualities that agents of the Tyrant typically manifest.
> 
> 
> As for free will, the "masses", which is to say the Meaners, have no interest in such things, save along very narrowly determined lines such as where Johnny can stick his little WankyBit.  Beyond that frightfully close channel, free will not only meets with disinterest, but with open hostility.  The Meaner wants his slavery, so long as you don't call it that.


The good/bad cop analogy is the easiest way to describe the esoteric principle.  Don't take the term too literally.

----------


## osan

> The good/bad cop analogy is the easiest way to describe the esoteric principle.  Don't take the term too literally.


Ah OK... pardon me, please.

----------


## devil21

> Ah OK... pardon me, please.


It's cool.  In fact, in a way, your comments are very accurate in that the esoteric philosophy is that most people are inclined to "bad" behavior to gain higher status than their peers.  You seem to agree with that.  A 'Ron Paul' is a choice to go the other direction and be of service to others instead of service to self.  Most don't take that path but the path is made available.  I hope that makes sense.

----------


## osan

> It's cool.  In fact, in a way, your comments are very accurate in that the esoteric philosophy is that most people are inclined to "bad" behavior to gain higher status than their peers.  You seem to agree with that.  A 'Ron Paul' is a choice to go the other direction and be of service to others instead of service to self.  Most don't take that path but the path is made available.  I hope that makes sense.



I'd be a bit careful with those thoughts.  I don't view service to self the way most others seem.  For me, and here I speak in "all else equal" terms, service to self _IS_ service to others.  You should take care of yourself first and foremost.  If everyone did that, the world would likely be a far better place. Now, if you want to talk about self-service run amok with morbitity, then yes it is not a good thing.

----------


## devil21

> I'd be a bit careful with those thoughts.  I don't view service to self the way most others seem.  For me, and here I speak in "all else equal" terms, service to self _IS_ service to others.  You should take care of yourself first and foremost.  If everyone did that, the world would likely be a far better place. Now, if you want to talk about self-service run amok with morbitity, then yes it is not a good thing.


Can you imagine a presidential election with no voices like a Ron or Rand, or going back to a Perot, or other examples of voices of reason?  When there are all the same cookie cutter candidates then there's no choices, even if the sane choices are ignored.

----------


## Dark_Horse_Rider

I don't think so. . . about good cop bad cop comparison.

Ron simply understands the principles of Liberty

----------


## timosman

> I don't think so. . . about good cop bad cop comparison.
> 
> Ron simply understands the principles of Liberty


I think he understands much more than that.

----------


## osan

> Can you imagine a presidential election with no voices like a Ron or Rand, or going back to a Perot, or other examples of voices of reason?  When there are all the same cookie cutter candidates then there's no choices, even if the sane choices are ignored.


Not sure how this relates to the notion of service to self.  Anyhow, I'd rather have them present than not.  However, my expectations regarding the benefits of such people are greatly tempered due to the observable fact that the average man chooses idiocy and FAIL over anything I would regard as worthy of a man's pursuit.

But that's just me.

----------


## devil21

> Not sure how this relates to the notion of service to self.  Anyhow, I'd rather have them present than not.  However, my expectations regarding the benefits of such people are greatly tempered due to the observable fact that the average man chooses idiocy and FAIL over anything I would regard as worthy of a man's pursuit.
> 
> But that's just me.


It doesn't much, I guess.  More a continuation of the topic in general.  

As the "turning" approaches and the control agenda continues to increase speed, the right path option must be made available for karmic and choice reasons.  The people must _consent_ to the outcome instead of it being forced upon them.  Most people think it is being forced upon them but the truth is that it is not!  It is all based on consent, whether by inaction, continuing to live in ignorance or participation/acceptance.

----------


## osan

> As the "turning" approaches and the control agenda continues to increase speed, the right path option must be made available for karmic and choice reasons.


I do not disagree.




> The people must _consent_ to the outcome


As well as the path toward it.




> instead of it being forced upon them.


Yeah well, good luck with that...




> Most people think it is being forced upon them but the truth is that it is not!


Depends on the "it" in question.  Also, I believe it is a mix of force and consent obtained through fraud.  The force is always implied.  For great sea changes, it is almost never openly forced at first.  This is the strategy for getting the critical mass on board with the idea in question.  Once that is attained, the implications of force become more strident, less subtle, and eventually give way to actual physical force being applied to the few percent of individuals who are not on the bandwagon.

This is why all government, "democracy" or otherwise, is a fraudulent nonsense.  Until the sovereignty of the individual is respected, we live in tyranny.  As I always repeat unto the nausea of all around me, one is either free or is something else.  There are no degrees of freedom, but only of servitude.  Freedom is an all-or-nothing deal.  The vast and overwhelming majority of people wandering the earth have no knowledge of this.  How many people in places like America think that they are free.  We are decidedly not free, though the quality of our serfdom allows us more latitude than that in most other nations.  Gilding the cage and making is more expansive does not negate the fact that one is still in a cage.




> It is all based on consent, whether by inaction, continuing to live in ignorance or participation/acceptance.



Not quite.  It is _largely_ based on consent, as per my brief description of the general process, above.

The saddest bit in all of this is that we could be free before midnight tonight, were we to stand united as the Freemen we were born to be and said "no more!"  But alas, taken as a statistical gestalt the human race is the breed of Weakmen, bent over hunched and proud of it. What was that which I believe Voltaire quipped about men revering their chains?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I don't think so. . . about good cop bad cop comparison.
> 
> Ron simply understands the principles of Liberty


The Pauls are part of the mechanism of control.  Good vs Bad is not really a surface for discussion - it is irrelevant. In today's cybernetic world, it is about control of the information that enters the human brain.  To maintain control, the system in power much control all vectors of information.  So, all alt media, all mainstream media, all youtube channels (with any meaningful traction), all gov't opposition groups, religious entities, academic institutions, corporate PR, etc.

Next, if you want Global control, then all existing instituions of domestic influence must be destroyed.  So, the NFL is being detroyed via the Lebensborn actor by name of Kaepernick.  Political and Media class is being destroy by incompentence and sex/pedophilia scandal.  Money system is being destroyed by ridiculous inflation and cyrptocurrencies.  Domestic bond being broken by cointel freaks such as Gulen and his army of muslem brotherhood terrori8sts for money and his nationwide charter school system who is recruiting and radicalizing american youth.  Look at the big picture, always see the big picture.

----------


## devil21

> I do not disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> As well as the path toward it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah well, good luck with that...
> ...


I don't know how deep we want to go on this topic but I sorta decided against it with my last reply.  Actually, all can still be sovereign but that road is not well defined or easy.  I assume you know about how the birth registration process creates the legal chains that bind everyone, through essentially mind control, in modern times.  That process can be undone and a man can return to true sovereignty, even in the absence of the masses throwing off their chains.  I agree that much of the system is based on fraud, not to mention legal presumptions that were essentially conjured out of nothing, by people in funny hats, long before any of us were even alive.  The karmic catch is that the remedies must always be made available.  They're not easy but they are available.  Most aren't prepared to undertake that, however, and as you said the quality of our serfdom makes it unlikely.  It is worth remembering that the higher quality of our serfdom is based in the reserve status of the dollar and that is on the way out.  It is also a substantial driver behind the control agenda itself.  

Btw, I'm mostly writing from the occultist philosophical viewpoint and not necessarily my own opinion/viewpoint.  I'm more of an interested observer and educator these days than activist, I guess.  Humans are interesting creatures to study

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> The post above is proof positive of the opposite.


The power of networks is king.  The power of Human networks trumps all other networks.  

We are seeing the a vast population who are asking questions now, and who are actively working toward a future that is not the same future the Globalists want.  Hence, we're seeing an incredibly powerful network arise that is taking us down a different path.  This network is unstoppable, and the Globalists know this, as they are experts in network theory.

In short, it is over for them.  The writing is already on the wall.  And they know this, at least the ones at the very top, the ones who really understand science.  The variables are: (1) time until this eventuallity occurs; (2) the pain and suffering we must all go thru.  But their day is over.  No doubt about that whatsoever.

PS.  I meant to mention, in my above post, an old post about Vectors, and how they are important in understanding the mechanisms of control/influence.  Here is the link to that old thread. It's worth reviewing.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...u-Know-This-)&

----------


## osan

> I don't know how deep we want to go on this topic but I sorta decided against it with my last reply.


Why?  It's a good philosophic issue that runs face-first into the practical as well.




> Actually, all can still be sovereign but that road is not well defined or easy.


I AM sovereign.  I don't ask permission.  I don't go through processes.  That is all bull$#@! designed to cause people to implicate themselves in the system.

That all said, I recognize that much in the way of my exercise of sovereignty would result in imprisonment, mutilation, or death for me.  Trespass upon my rights does not imply that the rights are no longer extant.  It only means that I am violated by evil men.




> I assume you know about how the birth registration process creates the legal chains that bind everyone, through essentially mind control, in modern times.


I am familiar with the process, yes.  I was never part of it.  I never had a birth certificate.




> That process can be undone and a man can return to true sovereignty, even in the absence of the masses throwing off their chains.


We should not need to go through any such processes.  Those have been foisted upon us.




> I agree that much of the system is based on fraud, not to mention legal presumptions that were essentially conjured out of nothing, by people in funny hats, long before any of us were even alive.


That is the ugly truth.




> The karmic catch is that the remedies must always be made available.


I very seriously doubt Theye believe in karma or that they otherwise give a damn about it.  Theire actions shout it loudly.




> Btw, I'm mostly writing from the occultist philosophical viewpoint and not necessarily my own opinion/viewpoint.  I'm more of an interested observer and educator these days than activist, I guess.  Humans are interesting creatures to study


Actually, I find most humans mercilessly boring.  The perfect predictability of their utterly corrupt selves I find endlessly tedious.  Thank God for the spectrum of characteristics that allow, however sparingly, for intellect, honor, trustworthiness, and decency to exist all in a single package.  Honestly, I would not piss on a meaner were I to find him on fire.

----------


## devil21

> Why?  It's a good philosophic issue that runs face-first into the practical as well.


Mostly because of the context of the thread and the difficulty effectively writing about philosophic/esoteric topics so that concepts like the "good/bad" above aren't misinterpreted.




> I AM sovereign.  I don't ask permission.  I don't go through processes.  That is all bull$#@! designed to cause people to implicate themselves in the system.
> 
> That all said, I recognize that much in the way of my exercise of sovereignty would result in imprisonment, mutilation, or death for me.  Trespass upon my rights does not imply that the rights are no longer extant.  It only means that I am violated by evil men.
> 
> I am familiar with the process, yes.  I was never part of it.  I never had a birth certificate.


If you are not a registered "product" in the system then you are essentially already lawfully sovereign and the topic doesn't much apply to you in the first place.  It is the registration that sets the foundation for the remainder of the mind control and authorization of force against people that are not the wiser to the situation they are actually in.




> We should not need to go through any such processes.  Those have been foisted upon us.


I agree and that is where the fraud aspect arises.  It is, however, still the reality of the situation if one does not wish to end up imprisoned, mutilated or dead.




> Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.





> That is the ugly truth.
> 
> I very seriously doubt Theye believe in karma or that they otherwise give a damn about it.  Theire actions shout it loudly.


Perhaps currently there is no real regard for karmic principles but the origins of the system were indeed heavily based on it.  Quietly, much of Freemasonry's higher degrees are rooted in Hindu spiritualism, which of course heavily emphasizes karma and balance.  Whether Harry Reid, per se, gives a $#@! about karma while ordering BLM to kick the Bundys off their land so it can be turned over to Chinese mining and solar power interests is likely pointless to ponder.




> Actually, I find most humans mercilessly boring.  The perfect predictability of their utterly corrupt selves I find endlessly tedious.  Thank God for the spectrum of characteristics that allow, however sparingly, for intellect, honor, trustworthiness, and decency to exist all in a single package.  Honestly, I would not piss on a meaner were I to find him on fire.


Indeed predictable but once you are aware of the ongoing programming it's interesting to watch it take effect.  It's just a shame that they generally take the rest of us down with them.

----------


## osan

> Mostly because of the context of the thread and the difficulty effectively writing about philosophic/esoteric topics so that concepts like the "good/bad" above aren't misinterpreted.


That is where care in one's choice of words and sentence structure comes in. 




> Indeed predictable but once you are aware of the ongoing programming it's interesting to watch it take effect.


For about five minutes.  The depthless rot of the average man gets old very rapidly.  The amazing bit, to me anyhow, is how consistently and easily men are corrupted.  Most would trade their soul for tokens.  




> It's just a shame that they generally take the rest of us down with them.


It is a most curious aspect of the architecture of things that this is so.  It leads me to wonder whether the architect is a sadist.

----------


## merkelstan

Love this thread.  Thanks everyone!

----------


## MelissaCato

I dunno, but when I play my birthdate and 33 together I get lucky on the Roulette Wheel at the Casino. lol I went to the Hollywood Casino 2 times now and won on just a $25.00 bet the first time there. Second time visiting I bet $50.00 and won. I'm hoping next time I'm in the area I have an extra $100.00 on me to visit the Casino. lol

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> I AM sovereign.  I don't ask permission.  I don't go through processes.  That is all bull$#@! designed to cause people to implicate themselves in the system.


I don't mean to pick on you, or single you out.  But I would just like to use this part of what you said to explain something. . I'm going to be a little direct.  But, I don't mean anything personal by it.  OK?

When u say u don't ask permission, permission to do what?  I mean, what do u think you would even think to do that would require permission?  The problem is that the bounds of your thinking is so well controlled I highly doubt you have the ability to think of anything that would require permission.

You see, the mechanism of control are focused on controlling/limting the boundary of thought.  Such that you would never even think of doing anything that's outside the acceptable limits of control.  That's the power of the system.  It's invisible, as you can't even see the boundaries.  In fact, you don't even know that they are there.  

Our brains are institutionalized.  This institutionalization causes physical boundaries to be formed in the neural networks of the mind.  Hence, if you don't have a neutal net in your brain to perceive something, you simply won't perceive it.

So, you can't even know what you don't know.

We discuss issues based upon the frames created by others. Then we take sides, and argue amongst each other within those frames. It's far deeper than I've seen discussed on these forums, unfortunately.

We follow Ron Paul, because he was handed to us on a silver platter.  We discuss the issues he presents because he tells us what they are.  He take the same positions he takes on these issues because he gives us the arguments. 

We support Tea Party groups because it was given to us as a pre-formed anti-stuff-we-hate group.  Only to be lead around by the nose, catalogged, and walked intro a trap where we can be targeted.

When is the last time anyone really had an organic thought that was not based on inputs provided directly by an establishment idol, whether that idol was presented as a pro or anti establishment figure head?

Don't fool yourselves, it's almost impossible not to be a sheep in an environment where almost all of our inputs are controlled from cradle to grave.

----------


## osan

> I don't mean to pick on you, or single you out.  But I would just like to use this part of what you said to explain something. . I'm going to be a little direct.  But, I don't mean anything personal by it.  OK?


Fair enough.




> When u say u don't ask permission, permission to do what?  I mean, what do u think you would even think to do that would require permission?  The problem is that the bounds of your thinking is so well controlled I highly doubt you have the ability to think of anything that would require permission.


Methinks you presume too much.  Also, I failed to be comprehensive in my statement.  I don't ask permission to do many things for which most others do.  For example, I carried a concealed weapon in NYC for 20 years without a permit.  That said, I also assiduously maintained the concealment because I didn't want to be shot by some twitchy coward with a badge and gun.  Even when doing as one pleases in spite of statutory prohibition, for example, it behooves the individual to take cautions not to be caught as a pragmatic measure because the "state" is a mindless beast that will take away your life if it deems fit to do so, even if on the mere whim of its caprice.





> You see, the mechanism of control are focused on controlling/limting the boundary of thought.


I agree, but it has not worked well with me.




> Such that you would never even think of doing anything that's outside the acceptable limits of control.


I do such things frequently.  You should have seen me long years ago doing 145 mph down Georgia Rd. in Freehold NJ. 




> That's the power of the system.  It's invisible, as you can't even see the boundaries.  In fact, you don't even know that they are there.


I agree that this is the reality for most people, but not for all.  It certainly has not been the case with me.




> Our brains are institutionalized.


Some are.  Not all.




> This institutionalization causes physical boundaries to be formed in the neural networks of the mind.


Development of language does the precise same thing.




> Hence, if you don't have a neutal net in your brain to perceive something, you simply won't perceive it.


A bit too broadly stated.  There are many things one can learn to perceive when the motivation exists.  We are very clever beings in a great many ways.  Much of our prospects as individuals ride on our attitudes and determination.




> So, you can't even know what you don't know.


In broader terms, that is largely the boat in which all humans find themselves, but not in all situations.  It is not that difficult to expand awareness of one's ignorance through the furtherance of learning.  In fact this seems to happen of its own accord when one's positive learning - the accumulation of knowledge and skill - reaches certain thresholds.




> We discuss issues based upon the frames created by others. Then we take sides, and argue amongst each other within those frames. It's far deeper than I've seen discussed on these forums, unfortunately.


We also smash frames often enough and blaze trails right through the old boundaries of thought.  This is how some of the more profound scientific breakthroughs have been made.  Relativity theory is a very good example of this.  When uncle Albert postulated that C was the universal limiting velocity in all frames of reference, the world changed.




> We follow Ron Paul, because he was handed to us on a silver platter.


I can speak for no other man, but this was most definitely not the reason I cottoned to Ron Paul.  I took to him because his positions closely reflected my own.  Furthermore, being older and more experienced than myself, not to mention most likely a whole lot smarter, he helped me learn to better articulate my own thoughts on the various relevant matter on which he spoke and wrote.




> We discuss the issues he presents because he tells us what they are.  He take the same positions he takes on these issues because he gives us the arguments.


Oh hell no.  Not even close.




> When is the last time anyone really had an organic thought that was not based on inputs provided directly by an establishment idol, whether that idol was presented as a pro or anti establishment figure head?


I have them daily.  Don't you?




> Don't fool yourselves, it's almost impossible not to be a sheep in an environment where almost all of our inputs are controlled from cradle to grave.


Depends on how you define "sheep".  By my working definition, I cannot agree with your proposition.  There is a big difference between slavishly complying and hiding all appearance of challenge for the sake of faking out the agents or tyranny who will gladly kill me, were I to make certain open gestures of defiance, such as carrying a firearm without permission in NYC.

Furthermore, I do not defy for defiance's sake, as that is nothing better than childishness.  Rather, I do defy the tyrant for well considered reasons all based on objective criteria and the fact that I refuse to abide trespass any further than I must to preserve life and limb.  If I want to make moonshine, I fire up the still.  If I were enamored of cannabis, which I am most decidedly not, I would acquire and indulge.  And so it goes down the list.

----------


## Origanalist

> Meh... speak for yourself.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to osan again.

----------


## TER



----------


## shakey1

> You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to osan again.


I will accommodate.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to osan again.


I guess this was directed at me?  If so, the first sentences in my post were specifically written in order to communicate my desire NOT to make this personal.  Geesh. Read the post that I wrote.

You'll have to try a lot harder to get me on my back foot.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Fair enough.


Again, my post was not about u.  I just used your post to make a point.  So, I'm not going to go section by section through it, but do wanna pick out one example.



> I do such things frequently.  You should have seen me long years ago doing 145 mph down Georgia Rd. in Freehold NJ.


So, you're driving in a car designed, manufactured and distributed by the system, on roads designed and built by the system, with a drivers llicense and vehicle registration to the state gov't run by the system?  Doesn't sound too organic to me.  Sorry.

Again, not trying to pick on you. But unfortunately, you've kinda volunteered to be the Guinny pig.  Just trying to illustrate how immersed our brains are in this tightly controlled world.

Give me an example of exaptation, then you'll get my attention.

----------


## Origanalist

> I guess this was directed at me?  If so, the first sentences in my post were specifically written in order to communicate my desire NOT to make this personal.  Geesh. Read the post that I wrote.
> 
> You'll have to try a lot harder to get me on my back foot.


No, sorry. It wasn't directed at you. You can quit leaning forward now.

----------


## osan

> Again, my post was not about u.  I just used your post to make a point.  So, I'm not going to go section by section through it, but do wanna pick out one example.
> 
> So, you're driving in a car designed, manufactured and distributed by the system, on roads designed and built by the system, with a drivers llicense and vehicle registration to the state gov't run by the system?  Doesn't sound too organic to me.  Sorry.
> 
> Again, not trying to pick on you. But unfortunately, you've kinda volunteered to be the Guinny pig.  Just trying to illustrate how immersed our brains are in this tightly controlled world.
> 
> Give me an example of exaptation, then you'll get my attention.


We don't live _in vacuo_.  It is, therefore, impossible to escape the influences of others.  Short of sticking an ICBM up my ass and shooting myself into deep, dark, cold space, others will have some rub upon me.  Your central proposition seems unconnected with anything real.

We are all products of our environments in some ways and measures.  That does not perforce mean that we are incapable of self-determination within a given context.  It is precisely that a man is free that he can choose whatever he pleases within the envelope of human possibility.  I could choose to do things that would get me killed or imprisoned.  I choose to do otherwise, not because I am incapable, not because I am unaware, but because I understand the consequences of certain acts  and decide that those paths are not for me.

To assert that I am a hopeless prisoner, incapable of altering my circumstance and status just because I buy a car and drive it down the road is absurd.

----------


## devil21

> We don't live _in vacuo_.  It is, therefore, impossible to escape the influences of others.  Short of sticking an ICBM up my ass and shooting myself into deep, dark, cold space, others will have some rub upon me.  Your central proposition seems unconnected with anything real.


That is what the Agent Smith character of the Matrix personifies.

----------


## osan

> That is what the Agent Smith character of the Matrix personifies.



Could you elaborate a bit.  I'm not very bright.

----------


## devil21

> Could you elaborate a bit.  I'm not very bright.


The Agent Smith character of the Matrix movies.  If you haven't seen the film(s) then the reference won't mean anything to you.



Agent Smith is a representation of _everyone else_, the products of the system, and how they are attacking, silencing, snitching out, etc those that do not conform to the system.  If you've watched the Matrix movies you see that literally anyone can suddenly become an Agent Smith.  They are the ones that are impossible to escape, as you referenced.

----------


## PursuePeace

> I don't mean to pick on you, or single you out.  But I would just like to use this part of what you said to explain something. . I'm going to be a little direct.  But, I don't mean anything personal by it.  OK?
> 
> When u say u don't ask permission, permission to do what?  I mean, what do u think you would even think to do that would require permission?  The problem is that the bounds of your thinking is so well controlled I highly doubt you have the ability to think of anything that would require permission.
> 
> You see, the mechanism of control are focused on controlling/limting the boundary of thought.  Such that you would never even think of doing anything that's outside the acceptable limits of control.  That's the power of the system.  It's invisible, as you can't even see the boundaries.  In fact, you don't even know that they are there.  
> 
> Our brains are institutionalized.  This institutionalization causes physical boundaries to be formed in the neural networks of the mind.  Hence, if you don't have a neutal net in your brain to perceive something, you simply won't perceive it.
> 
> So, you can't even know what you don't know.
> ...


No amount of indoctrination or institutionalization of the brain or control from outside forces can stifle the human spirit's progression towards learning the supreme value and absolute necessity of freedom.

Just because we are physically living in a particular environment/society/system doesn't mean our brains aren't out there in the raw wilderness in full survival mode living off of the land. Free as can be.

----------


## timosman



----------


## osan

> The Agent Smith character of the Matrix movies.  If you haven't seen the film(s) then the reference won't mean anything to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Agent Smith is a representation of _everyone else_, the products of the system, and how they are attacking, silencing, snitching out, etc those that do not conform to the system.  If you've watched the Matrix movies you see that literally anyone can suddenly become an Agent Smith.  They are the ones that are impossible to escape, as you referenced.


Ah, OK got it.  I'm not always too quick on the uptake.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> We don't live _in vacuo_.  It is, therefore, impossible to escape the influences of others.  Short of sticking an ICBM up my ass and shooting myself into deep, dark, cold space, others will have some rub upon me.  Your central proposition seems unconnected with *anything real*..


Define "real"




> We are all products of our environments in some ways and measures.  That does not perforce mean that we are incapable of self-determination within a given context.  It is precisely that a man is free that he can choose whatever he pleases within the envelope of human possibility.  I could choose to do things that would get me killed or imprisoned.  I choose to do otherwise, not because I am incapable, not because I am unaware, but because I understand the consequences of certain acts  and decide that those paths are not for me.
> 
> To assert that I am a hopeless prisoner, incapable of altering my circumstance and status just because I buy a car and drive it down the road is absurd.


You are a hopeless prisoner because you have yet to do the research necessary to understand how you are controlled.  That's crystal clear, and unarguable.  I've stated in this forum what to research, but people won't do it.  

Let me be clear, you're not making any decisions that are relevant to the system that haven't already been made for you.  Yes, this is a bounded set of choices, so it feels like self-determination. But, it is bounded.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> No amount of indoctrination or institutionalization of the brain or control from outside forces can stifle the human spirit's progression towards learning the supreme value and absolute necessity of freedom.
> 
> Just because we are physically living in a particular environment/society/system doesn't mean our brains aren't out there in the raw wilderness in full survival mode living off of the land. Free as can be.


I completely and totally agree with this.  That's why there is hope.  Our brains are the most complex organ in the Universe, and are capable of anything.  Yet, we allow scientific methods to limit and constrain our abilities to such an extent, that we can't even see the boundaries, they are invisible.

----------


## timosman

> You are a hopeless prisoner because you have yet to do the research necessary to understand how you are controlled.  That's crystal clear, and unarguable.  I've stated in this forum what to research, but people won't do it.


Why don't you give us a short version?

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Could you elaborate a bit.  I'm not very bright.


Do not listen to a damn thing Devil21 says.  Nothing.

And please, do not waste any time or energy being misdirected by this Hollywood fantasy called the Matrix Trilogy.  Another vector obfuscation meant to derail the public.  The only thing worth a damn in that movie series is when Neo picks Baudrillard's "Simulacru & Simulation" book off the shelf when the White Rabbit girl shows up at the door. 

Read that Book!  Forget about the movie.

----------


## InterestedParticipant

> Why don't you give us a short version?


My posts in this forum ARE the short version.  Read them.  They are more relevant today than when I wrote them 10yrs ago.

----------


## devil21

> Do not listen to a damn thing Devil21 says.  Nothing.
> 
> And please, do not waste any time or energy being misdirected by this Hollywood fantasy called the Matrix Trilogy.  Another vector obfuscation meant to derail the public.  The only thing worth a damn in that movie series is when Neo picks Baudrillard's "Simulacru & Simulation" book off the shelf when the White Rabbit girl shows up at the door. 
> 
> Read that Book!  Forget about the movie.


Funny.  You didn't even spell the name of the book correctly.  Seems to happen surprisingly often for such a learned character as yourself.  Oh well.

I think perhaps you over-complicate, when the situation is really quite simple and does not require reading books written by communist french philosophers that claim the first Gulf War never happened and that 9/11 was brought on by cave dwellers that hated capitalism.

----------


## osan

> Define "real"


This is not a metaphysical discussion.  Let us keep things practical.





> You are a hopeless prisoner because you have yet to do the research necessary to understand how you are controlled.  That's crystal clear, and unarguable.  I've stated in this forum what to research, but people won't do it.


You are entitled to your beliefs, however mistaken.  I've lived at the bottoms of many rabbit holes most likely since before you were born.  I don't think you hold any basis in hand for assessing my states of perception.




> Let me be clear, you're not making any decisions that are relevant to the system that haven't already been made for you.  Yes, this is a bounded set of choices, so it feels like self-determination. But, it is bounded.


Upon what do you base this assertion?  I don't think you know the first thing about me.  Perhaps you are endowed with ESP-like abilities?

I pick my battles.  I defy in the places and in the ways I deem fitting to my interests.  I may be an idiot, but I'm no fool.

----------


## devil21

To be clear, I get the gist of what IP is saying regarding the book, at least.  Makers of the Matrix movies said that book influenced their movies.  Book author said the movies were garbage.  Seems not even the readers and writer of the book agree on what it was about lol.

We are at a point where most things are illusion.  Instead of actual money, we have mental representations of money, for instance.  Stock markets are rigged illusions.  Much of what we consider the "economy" is an illusion that was at one time a real construct.  The real has been replaced with simulation of real, that mostly only exists in the mind.  Now, it's the mental construct of an economy that lives on, not so much an actual economy.  I've been saying that for a long time regarding economic issues.  The same principle applies to other aspects of life also but I focus on economics and I'm sure IP doesn't follow any of our posts enough to know where our perspectives come from.  

Where my interpretation of Agent Smith coincides is that even if one (neo) is aware of the situation, they are still constrained by everyone else that believes the illusion to still be real.  Digital credits in a computer as real money, for instance.  Everyone else becomes Agent Smith at different points in life.  The cashier at the store, the plumber that won't work without a credit card swipe up front, etc.

----------


## Ender

> To be clear, I get the gist of what IP is saying regarding the book, at least.  Makers of the Matrix movies said that book influenced their movies.  Book author said the movies were garbage.  Seems not even the readers and writer of the book agree on what it was about lol.
> 
> We are at a point where most things are illusion.  Instead of actual money, we have mental representations of money, for instance.  Stock markets are rigged illusions.  Much of what we consider the "economy" is an illusion that was at one time a real construct.  The real has been replaced with simulation of real, that mostly only exists in the mind.  Now, it's the mental construct of an economy that lives on, not so much an actual economy.  I've been saying that for a long time regarding economic issues.  The same principle applies to other aspects of life also but I focus on economics and I'm sure IP doesn't follow any of our posts enough to know where our perspectives come from.  
> 
> Where my interpretation of Agent Smith coincides is that even if one (neo) is aware of the situation, they are still constrained by everyone else that believes the illusion to still be real.  Digital credits in a computer as real money, for instance.  Everyone else becomes Agent Smith at different points in life.  The cashier at the store, the plumber that won't work without a credit card swipe up front, etc.



Yep.

And I consider The Matrix to be one of the most important movies made in the last several decades.

----------

