Controlled Opposition - A must read for everyone in the liberty movement

[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 his1972 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 correct
• your presence in the 'group' will be openly questioned and it will be suggested that you leave the 'group'
• you will be threatened
• you will be referred to as a "whack job"
• you will be accused of being dishonest or openly called a liar
• there 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?