"Force the Gov't to stop aiding Communism"

[Deborah K]

In 1984 G. Edward Griffin interviewed a soviet defector. Below is Part Nine of the interview where he makes the statement in my OP title. The entire interview is well worth the watch:

YouTube - Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press 9/9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAyLHSNKuQ0&feature=related)

[Deborah K]

Bump for Interested Participant

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

In 1984 G. Edward Griffin interviewed a soviet defector. Below is Part Nine of the interview where he makes the statement in my OP title. The entire interview is well worth the watch:

YouTube - Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press 9/9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAyLHSNKuQ0&feature=related)

What was the social agenda of the *Founders or of the *Founding Fathers?

*As all nations have founders and founding fathers, when the terms are written in the higher case it is in reference to the American Founders and Founding Fathers as, unlike all the other nations in the world, the nation they created was founded on a Truth (natural law).

[Deborah K]

What was the social agenda of the *Founders or of the *Founding Fathers?

*As all nations have founders and founding fathers, when the terms are written in the higher case it is in reference to the American Founders and Founding Fathers as, unlike all the other nations in the world, the nation they created was founded on a Truth (natural law).

Did they even have one?

[InterestedParticipant]

Do you know when this interview was taped, and when it was actually released?

[FrankRep]

Do you know when this interview was taped, and when it was actually released?

IP thinks G. Edward Griffin is a Disinformation Agent / COINTELPRO.


SOURCE:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=195399&page=11&p=2172542

[Deborah K]

Do you know when this interview was taped, and when it was actually released?

Do you?

[Deborah K]

IP thinks G. Edward Griffin is a Disinformation Agent / COINTELPRO.


SOURCE:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=195399&page=11&p=2172542

Yes, I know. He provides nothing but conjecture where Griffin is concerned. But the reason I resurrected this thread is to apply IP's quote re: influence and guidance as nothing more than manipulation to Griffin. How can providing interviews such as this one equate Griffin to controlled opposition? I would like his opinion on this.

[Romulus]

IP thinks everyone is Cointel. I'm not sure how he lives, thinking that Everyone and Everything is a subversive illusion.

[InterestedParticipant]

Do you?
No, I would have to research it, that is why I am asking.

Before we get too far into this, do you understand dialectics and how they are used in society? If not, say so.

[InterestedParticipant]

IP thinks everyone is Cointel. I'm not sure how he lives, thinking that Everyone and Everything is a subversive illusion.
Actually, I know who is and who is not. They give themselves away by the techniques that they employ. In fact, they stick out like a sore thumb, as they all study the same techniques and the same rhetoric.

It is only to the uninformed who are confused, and who think it is everywhere. Unfortunately, these vector leaders are also very charismatic, and very well promoted and supported, so that the uninformed will see them as saviors and not what they really are.

You know, if people would actually invest a little time learning, they'd be able to figure it out as well. It's not too difficult. You too can dispose of the "Mystery".

[Deborah K]

No, I would have to research it, that is why I am asking.

Before we get too far into this, do you understand dialectics and how they are used in society? If not, say so.

I'm not an expert but I have studied up on it.

[Deborah K]

Actually, I know who is and who is not. They give themselves away by the techniques that they employ. In fact, they stick out like a sore thumb, as they all study the same techniques and the same rhetoric.

It is only to the uninformed who are confused, and who think it is everywhere. Unfortunately, these vector leaders are also very charismatic, and very well promoted and supported, so that the uninformed will see them as saviors and not what they really are.

You know, if people would actually invest a little time learning, they'd be able to figure it out as well. It's not too difficult. You too can dispose of the "Mystery".

I think where I am having the disconnect with you is in understanding why the very people who have informed us of who the powers that be are (in Griffin's case, the Fed) how these very people are really agents working against us.

[InterestedParticipant]

Yes, I know. He provides nothing but conjecture where Griffin is concerned. But the reason I resurrected this thread is to apply IP's quote re: influence and guidance as nothing more than manipulation to Griffin. How can providing interviews such as this one equate Griffin to controlled opposition? I would like his opinion on this.

Did you read any of my work on "containment vectors"?

Do you know what a vector leader is, and why they are important in controlling the "information space"?

Do you understand how full spectrum dominance of the information space occurs, and why it is so critical to perception management?

Has anyone read Ellul, Bernays or Marcuse's work on propaganda and how it works?

Why should anyone stay here in the face of constant ridicule while people who are too lazy to do their own research want key information, analysis and insight spoon fed to them?


Prove that you are worthy!

[InterestedParticipant]

I think where I am having the disconnect with you is in understanding why the very people who have informed us of who the powers that be are (in Griffin's case, the Fed) how these very people are really agents working against us.

Control means "total control"

Full Spectrum Dominance means dominance of every vector in the spectrum of information.


They tell us this in the movie, 1984. Just watch, read, listen to the dialog between Winston and O'brien again. The only ones given a platform to disseminate information are by definition, controlled.

I can show you the precise techniques, i can give you examples, I can research this particular interview with Griffin and explain what is going on, but until people come to grips with the simple statements, above in this post, then I will be wasting my time and yours.

[Romulus]

Actually, I know who is and who is not.

Ok give us a list. Who is cointel and who is not. And then offer solid evidence for those who you think are cointel, not suggestions based on this and that. Proof they are. Go.

[Deborah K]

:rolleyes:

Did you read any of my work on "containment vectors"?

Do you know what a vector leader is, and why they are important in controlling the "information space"?

Do you understand how full spectrum dominance of the information space occurs, and why it is so critical to perception management?

Has anyone read Ellul, Bernays or Marcuse's work on propaganda and how it works?

Why should anyone stay here in the face of constant ridicule while people who are too lazy to do their own research want key information, analysis and insight spoon fed to them?


Prove that you are worthy!

I am no more required to prove I am worthy of your opinion as you are to prove your worthiness to me. Ridiculous. You are full of yourself which is too bad, really. Your self delusions get in the way of your being able to accomplish what it is you intend to accomplish, which could be of some use to us if you'd just get out of your own way. :rolleyes: You are a put-off IP!

[FrankRep]

Ok give us a list. Who is cointel and who is not. And then offer solid evidence for those who you think are cointel, not suggestions based on this and that. Proof they are. Go.

So far IP has named G. Edward Griffin (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=195399&page=11&p=2172542), Judge Napolitano (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=225718&page=3&p=2485868), and the John Birch Society (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=195399&page=11&p=2172542) as COINTELPRO.

[Romulus]

:rolleyes:

I am no more required to prove I am worthy of your opinion as you are to prove your worthiness to me. Ridiculous. You are full of yourself which is too bad, really. Your self delusions get in the way of your being able to accomplish what it is you intend to accomplish, which could be of some use to us if you'd just get out of your own way. :rolleyes: You are a put-off IP!

His philosophy is more of a 'vector' than the vectors he tries to warn us about.

IP, when making accusations of who is Cointel, the burden of proof lies upon you.

[Deborah K]

Control means "total control"

Full Spectrum Dominance means dominance of every vector in the spectrum of information.


They tell us this in the movie, 1984. Just watch, read, listen to the dialog between Winston and O'brien again. The only ones given a platform to disseminate information are by definition, controlled.I can show you the precise techniques, i can give you examples, I can research this particular interview with Griffin and explain what is going on, but until people come to grips with the simple statements, above in this post, then I will be wasting my time and yours.

Controlled how? And, how does it benefit the controllers to 'leak' to the masses that they are being controlled?????

[Keller1967]

If you guys actually read what he posts you would understand why he thinks they are COINTEL, you ignore most of his other posts and now want him to hand it to you quick and easy. This isn't a quick and easy topic.

[InterestedParticipant]

Ok give us a list. Who is cointel and who is not. And then offer solid evidence for those who you think are cointel, not suggestions based on this and that. Proof they are. Go.
I only give fishing poles and instructions on how to
build fishing poles to people who want to learn how to fish
on their own. When you have achieved that goal, you will
truly be independent, will you not?

Perhaps A.J. will sell you the "Fish" that you so desperately seek.
But then, you will be beholden to him if you want more "fish",
won't you?

Be careful, we don't want this thread to go too far, for it will have to be moved to the dungeon so no one can see it.

[Romulus]

I am beholden to the truth. And you are beholden to provide factual evidence when you make accusations of who is Cointel.

If you cannot provide that then the only one who appears to be a disinfo cointel agent is you!

[Deborah K]

For Pete's sake...it's a simple question. Can't you render an opinion without giving a lesson on psy-ops?

How does the quote about guidance and influence, etc. pertain to Griffin? What is their motive for telling us that we are being controlled? If all information is controlled, then that would include all information that you yourself have acquired. Before I take your advice on spending the time delving deeper into this, you have to convince me that it is worth my time to do it. But as I already have stated to you, this need not be a lesson in how to change a person's mind, but more a revelation into the difference between how people like you and I think about things.

[InterestedParticipant]

Here, start by perusing this...

Information Operations Roadmap (2003)
DEPARMENT OF DEFENSE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
http://cryptome.org/io-roadmap.htm

Then, maybe take a look at this...


OSS - The Psychology of War
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/oss/oss.htm


Do some searching on the key terms. When you start to become more aware of the philosophy and techniques behind IO, then PM me and I will rejoin the conversation if people have some questions that indicate a genuine desire to understand.

[InterestedParticipant]

For Pete's sake...it's a simple question. Can't you render an opinion without giving a lesson on psy-ops?

How does the quote about guidance and influence, etc. pertain to Griffin? What is their motive for telling us that we are being controlled? If all information is controlled, then that would include all information that you yourself have acquired. Before I take your advice on spending the time delving deeper into this, you have to convince me that it is worth my time to do it. But as I already have stated to you, this need not be a lesson in how to change a person's mind, but more a revelation into the difference between how people like you and I think about things.
You need to convince yourself what you want to do. You want answer, go get them. Much of what you seek to know has already been revealed. I'm afraid the only one that can help you now is you.

[InterestedParticipant]

I am beholden to the truth. And you are beholden to provide factual evidence when you make accusations of who is Cointel.

If you cannot provide that then the only one who appears to be a disinfo cointel agent is you!
And you have your head buried under so much garbage and cognitive dissonance that there is absolutely no hope for you. Enjoy yourself.

[InterestedParticipant]

I think where I am having the disconnect with you is in understanding why the very people who have informed us of who the powers that be are (in Griffin's case, the Fed) how these very people are really agents working against us.
I just noticed this question and notwithstanding my most recent post, felt it was only reasonable to address it because I had not addressed it before:

First, his role was that of containment (i.e. he did not provide his audience with the entire picture nor complete historical perspective on the monetary system, leading his reader to primarily believe it started with a train ride to Jekyll Island).

Second, the book laid the seeds for the transition from a domestically controlled economy to an internationally controlled economy and monetary system. To this point, "G" was just playing out his role by seeding the new "end the fed" vector.

Third, while I would have to research this but do not have the time now, wasn't there another book that had recently been published on the FED, a book that was much more revealing? If I am correct in my recollection, the "G"s roles here was to usurp this vector and ensure that his book was the one that got attention and not the book that was more revealing.

Do you see how what appears to be truth is nothing more than more manipulation? Timing of information release has a lot to do with it.

Bye for now.

[Deborah K]

You need to convince yourself what you want to do. You want answer, go get them. Much of what you seek to know has already been revealed. I'm afraid the only one that can help you now is you.

You could have just stated that in the beginning when I first broached the question - in the other thread. I think the reason you refuse to offer opinions about this is because you are more interested in controlling the discussion and you fear that you will lose control if someone else begins to win the debate. After all, you seem to be fixated on "control".

[Mini-Me]

Control means "total control"

Full Spectrum Dominance means dominance of every vector in the spectrum of information.


They tell us this in the movie, 1984. Just watch, read, listen to the dialog between Winston and O'brien again. The only ones given a platform to disseminate information are by definition, controlled.

I can show you the precise techniques, i can give you examples, I can research this particular interview with Griffin and explain what is going on, but until people come to grips with the simple statements, above in this post, then I will be wasting my time and yours.

It's obvious by our discussion of the concept that full spectrum dominance is an idea that someone before us has imagined and put forth, and it makes sense to assume that the establishment would consider it a goal. It's a megalomaniac's wet dream, and I have no doubt that a pathocracy would pursue it. (Over time, a pathocracy becomes a logical necessity of centralized power, due to the existence and nature of sociopaths. The amount of force, fraud, corruption, war, violence, secrecy, deception, etc. in the world today is sufficient to demonstrate we've long since reached that point.)

There are even quotes from historical figures clearly acknowledging this goal, such as:
[Note: I was going to put in the CIA quote about their job being done when everything every American believes is false, but I can't find it. I think everyone here is familiar with it though.]
There are other quotes claiming at least partial success (although the credibility of those claims needs to be tempered by the hubris of the speaker, too):

The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.

I have little doubt that the MSM is completely, or at least almost completely, controlled. Furthermore, it makes sense that at least some figures outside of the mainstream sphere are controlled, because the establishment ignoring that little detail would entirely defeat the premise of full spectrum dominance. ;) However, just because the idea has been put forth, and just because significant inroads have been made, doesn't by itself mean it's been entirely accomplished. The world's a big place, after all. I always do my best to steer clear of unnecessary and potentially damaging associations (such as JBS membership, etc...not that I even agree with them about everything) "just in case," but at the same time, I wouldn't feel comfortable telling people with confidence that they're controlled. It's possible, and being widely "discredited" is consistent with that, but then again, that's also consistent with people and organizations who are not controlled.

Getting to my point: I'm having trouble understanding why you're so confident that they've been 100% successful and that there are no holes in the simulacrum. You seem to assume complete success at full spectrum dominance a priori (correct me if I'm wrong), when I don't see evidence for that. I know you've also implied firsthand knowledge of the system before in past posts - and asked other people if they've seen it firsthand - and I understand why that would shape your thinking, but for obvious reasons the rest of us don't have access to the same personal experience. You said that anyone with a platform to disseminate information is controlled, yet this forum gives you a platform to disseminate information, and I'm pretty sure you wouldn't argue that you're controlled. Jacques Ellul's books were published, and they are sold on Amazon, so he was also given a platform to disseminate information. Unless both you and Ellul are controlled as well, you are both prima facie counterexamples that demonstrate how not everyone in a position to speak to people is necessarily controlled. Following from this, why is it logically necessary for Griffin to be controlled? Is his platform really that much bigger than Ellul's, for example? If so, where's the cutoff of platform size beyond which you have no doubt that someone is controlled?

You can and should cite Griffin's rhetorical techniques as evidence, but at the same time, I don't think you really have to be a Rhodes scholar, social engineer, RAND crony, Tavistock crony, etc. to employ propaganda techniques. As Andrew-Austin observed in another thread, not all of these techniques of propaganda are really all that sophisticated, and people can employ them subconsciously (or even accidentally). If they really were all that sophisticated, they'd be indistinguishable from honest discussion. Ironically, even as it stands, I think it's naturally harder than you suggest to cleanly distinguish them from honest discussion. Honest observations, insights, etc. can be mistaken for deliberate propaganda, and people can even use propaganda techniques inadvertantly: You recently accused me of using them against you, after all. On the flip side of this, Liberty Eagle has argued that you use them against people here, and I do agree with her, though I don't want to elaborate at length because you'll perceive it as an attempt to discredit you, and belaboring the point is an unnecessary diversion from the topic at hand. I'm just saying this to illustrate the point that apparent propaganda techniques may not always be as "tell-tale" as you believe.

Anyway, if Griffin is using propaganda techniques, it's certainly worthwhile to point this out, but depending on the severity, etc., it may not necessarily be conclusive proof that he's a controlled agent. In Beck's case, in AJ's case, etc., the evidence of both psychological manipulation and co-opting are compelling enough for me to agree with you*, but I haven't seen the same from Griffin (as of yet). I really have no personal stake in him though, and I'm more just vaguely curious: I think his insights are valuable (though most are no longer new to me), but I don't fully trust anyone at all, and he very well could be running a containment vector and/or telling the truth about the problem and giving the establishment's prepackaged "solution" for us.** I haven't come to any conclusions though, but I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt...not in the sense of trusting them (which would be foolish), but in the sense of not making accusations I'm not sure about.

*...and in their cases, in the off-chance that they're not technically controlled, it hardly matters. Either way, I'm convinced they perform the same role that actual controlled opposition would.
**As a side note, because social engineers are as fallible as anyone else, I don't think "doing what they want us to do" is necessarily going to lead to a dead end; leading us down some specific path might even end up backfiring on them. I wouldn't count on it, and it's certainly worth trying to figure out their Xanatos gambit, but I do think it's possible for manipulation to backfire.

[Deborah K]

I just noticed this question and notwithstanding my most recent post, felt it was only reasonable to address it because I had not addressed it before:

First, his role was that of containment (i.e. he did not provide his audience with the entire picture nor complete historical perspective on the monetary system, leading his reader to primarily believe it started with a train ride to Jekyll Island).



Have you read the book? :confused:


Second, the book laid the seeds for the transition from a domestically controlled economy to an internationally controlled economy and monetary system. To this point, "G" was just playing out his role by seeding the new "end the fed" vector.

Huh?? He laid the groundwork for an internationally controlled economy?????? So are you implying our country can't go back to the way it functioned BEFORE the Fed?


Third, while I would have to research this but do not have the time now, wasn't there another book that had recently been published on the FED, a book that was much more revealing? If I am correct in my recollection, the "G"s roles here was to usurp this vector and ensure that his book was the one that got attention and not the book that was more revealing.

Do you see how what appears to be truth is nothing more than more manipulation? Timing of information release has a lot to do with it.

Bye for now

Griffin's book has been out for nearly two decades and only recently became popular amongst those in this movement.

At any rate, if what you say is true, that anyone who gets a platform is being controlled, then any competition he may have had in getting the Fed info out was also controlled.

[powerofreason]

Force the government? The government is the master of force. Force is all government knows. Good luck.

[Deborah K]

It's obvious by our discussion of the concept that full spectrum dominance is an idea that someone before us has imagined and put forth, and it makes sense to assume that the establishment would consider it a goal. It's a megalomaniac's wet dream, and I have no doubt that a pathocracy would pursue it. (Over time, a pathocracy becomes a logical necessity of centralized power, due to the existence and nature of sociopaths. The amount of force, fraud, corruption, war, violence, secrecy, deception, etc. in the world today is sufficient to demonstrate we've long since reached that point.)

There are even quotes from historical figures clearly acknowledging this goal, such as:
[Note: I was going to put in the CIA quote about their job being done when everything every American believes is false, but I can't find it. I think everyone here is familiar with it though.]
There are other quotes claiming at least partial success (although the credibility of those claims needs to be tempered by the hubris of the speaker, too):


I have little doubt that the MSM is completely, or at least almost completely, controlled. Furthermore, it makes sense that at least some figures outside of the mainstream sphere are controlled, because the establishment ignoring that little detail would entirely defeat the premise of full spectrum dominance. ;) However, just because the idea has been put forth, and just because significant inroads have been made, doesn't by itself mean it's been entirely accomplished. The world's a big place, after all. I always do my best to steer clear of unnecessary and potentially damaging associations (such as JBS membership, etc...not that I even agree with them about everything) "just in case," but at the same time, I wouldn't feel comfortable telling people with confidence that they're controlled. It's possible, and being widely "discredited" is consistent with that, but then again, that's also consistent with people and organizations who are not controlled.

Getting to my point: I'm having trouble understanding why you're so confident that they've been 100% successful and that there are no holes in the simulacrum. You seem to assume complete success at full spectrum dominance a priori (correct me if I'm wrong), when I don't see evidence for that. You said that anyone with a platform to disseminate information is controlled, yet this forum gives you a platform to disseminate information, and I'm pretty sure you wouldn't argue that you're controlled. Jacques Ellul's books were published, and they are sold on Amazon, so he was also given a platform to disseminate information. Unless both you and Ellul are controlled as well, you are both prima facie counterexamples that demonstrate how not everyone in a position to speak to people is necessarily controlled. Following from this, why is it logically necessary for Griffin to be controlled? Is his platform really that much bigger than Ellul's, for example? If so, where's the cutoff of platform size beyond which you have no doubt that someone is controlled?

You can and should cite Griffin's rhetorical techniques as evidence, but at the same time, I don't think you really have to be a Rhodes scholar, social engineer, RAND crony, Tavistock crony, etc. to employ propaganda techniques. As Andrew-Austin observed in another thread, not all of these techniques of propaganda are not really all that sophisticated, and people can employ them subconsciously (or even accidentally). If they really were all that sophisticated, they'd be indistinguishable from honest discussion. Ironically, even as it stands, I think it's naturally harder than you suggest to cleanly distinguish them from honest discussion. Honest observations, insights, etc. can be mistaken for deliberate propaganda, and people can even use propaganda techniques inadvertantly: You recently accused me of using them against you, after all. On the flip side of this, Liberty Eagle has argued that you use them against people here, and I do agree with her, though I don't want to elaborate at length because you'll perceive it as an attempt to discredit you, and belaboring the point is an unnecessary diversion from the topic at hand. I'm just saying this to illustrate the point that apparent propaganda techniques may not always be as "tell-tale" as you believe.

Anyway, if Griffin is using propaganda techniques, it's certainly worthwhile to point this out, but depending on the severity, etc., it may not necessarily be conclusive proof that he's a controlled agent. In Beck's case, in AJ's case, etc., the evidence of both psychological manipulation and co-opting are compelling enough for me to agree with you, but I haven't seen the same from Griffin (as of yet). I really have no personal stake in him though, and I'm more just vaguely curious: I think his insights are valuable (though most are no longer new to me), but I don't fully trust anyone at all, and he very well could be running a containment vector and/or telling the truth about the problem and giving the establishment's prepackaged "solution" for us.* I haven't come to any conclusions though, but I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt...not in the sense of trusting them (which would be foolish), but in the sense of not making accusations I'm not sure about.

*As a side note, because social engineers are as fallible as anyone else, I don't think "doing what they want us to do" is necessarily going to lead to a dead end; leading us down some specific path might even end up backfiring on them. I wouldn't count on it, and it's certainly worth trying to figure out their Xanatos gambit, but I do think it's possible for manipulation to backfire.

Nice post. Agree with most of it.

[LibForestPaul]

Force the government? The government is the master of force. Force is all government knows. Good luck.

No. Individuals control the government. So one forces the government by forcing those that exert their will upon the government. i.e. Force those that control the congress, control the media, control the president. They are certainly not as large a number of those that comprise the government.

[Deborah K]

Force the government? The government is the master of force. Force is all government knows. Good luck.

Take the time to watch the video where he makes this statement.

[InterestedParticipant]

You could have just stated that in the beginning when I first broached the question - in the other thread. I think the reason you refuse to offer opinions about this is because you are more interested in controlling the discussion and you fear that you will lose control if someone else begins to win the debate. After all, you seem to be fixated on "control".
This is not an environment conducive to real open discussion and tangible learning. Too many players here have unstated objectives, adding unnecessary noise so as to thwart the conversation.

People know how to find me if they want to engage in meaningful discussion on this topic in a positive environment where people will attain the answers that they seek.

[Romulus]

Controlled how? And, how does it benefit the controllers to 'leak' to the masses that they are being controlled?????

IP, can you answer this? A clear straight forward answer. Whats their objective for 'cointel' to let us know we are controlled. Why in your opinion would they attempt to 'awaken' us to that.

[InterestedParticipant]

IP, can you answer this? A clear straight forward answer. Whats their objective for 'cointel' to let us know we are controlled. Why in your opinion would they attempt to 'awaken' us to that.
It's "Precession of Simulacra"

[Romulus]

It's "Precession of Simulacra"

IMO is not that, its an exit. Enough people exit their system then it does not exist. There's no logical reason to show people the exit thinking they wont go there.

I think if you look deep enough into anything you see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear.

http://www.the-biomatrix.net/inkblot.gif

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Did they even have one?

Chaos it is then. We hold these Truths to be self evident that chaos rules, dude!

[InterestedParticipant]

When looking at images related to "G", the following images are all one needs to see, assuming one understands the philosophical framework driving these images.

Freedom Force Int'l Logo
http://www.sergiopaez.com/images/freedomforce_logo.jpg


Self Explanatory
http://www.dkelley.net/Membership_Badges/Frauenschaft/Deutsches_Frauenwerk_8100.JPG


Doing a vector analysis on his work, is only another set of affirmation. Open your eyes, and stop listening to the noise makers on this forum.

[FrankRep]

Freedom Force Int'l Logo
http://www.sergiopaez.com/images/freedomforce_logo.jpg


Self Explanatory
http://www.dkelley.net/Membership_Badges/Frauenschaft/Deutsches_Frauenwerk_8100.JPG


Doing a vector analysis on his work, is only another set of affirmation. Open your eyes, and stop listening to the noise makers on this forum.

What are you trying to imply, IP? Are you calling G. Edward Griffin a secret Nazi?

[InterestedParticipant]

I am talking about the hinge on which the philosophical enterprise swings, as created by Plato, Socrates, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Sorel, and Sartre. This is what this imagery represents. It is elitist, and it does not represent self-rule but top-down rule through scientific techniques.

Elitists think they can safely implement such imagery and not be exposed to the public, while other elitists will recognize the meaning, because they've been trained in philosophical history.

Your inability to understand what I am presenting here simply shows your lack of education into these areas, and therefore you inability to diagnose the systems that are being used against you. It is why it was so important to dumb down the education system. Now, they can rub images of control in front of our noses, even get us to support the men who flaunt these images, and we are too unaware to know what we are actually supporting.

The lack of understanding here is beyond frightening.

[FrankRep]

http://www.sergiopaez.com/images/freedomforce_logo.jpg

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/logo.cfm

Freedom Force International: About Our Symbol

A SYMBOL FOR FREEDOM
by G. Edward Griffin


During the Vietnam War, there was a powerful anti-war movement in the United States and Western Europe. Although the idealistic participants did not know it, the program was a Soviet stratagem directed from Moscow. The Leninist goal was to foster disunity and conflict within target nations and to create internal political pressure for their disarmament. That would have given the Soviets a nuclear superiority and allowed them to blackmail the free world into submission. The innocents were drawn mostly from college campuses where Leninist professors had implemented the party line by scaring the wits out of them with visions of global annihilation - not realizing that, if disarmament actually had been pursued, the chances of a nuclear attack against the United States and Western Europe would have been greatly increased. (This has been documented by numerous Soviet defectors and government investigations during the Cold War, but one of the most comprehensive and scholarly references for this history is The Soviet Peace Offensive, published by the Western Goals Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, in 1982.)

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pics/peace.gif

The so-called “peace symbol” for this movement was a circle containing a vertical line and two downward sloping lines, one on each side. Pacifists had been told that the symbol was created in 1958 for use in the Aldermaster Easter Peace Walk in England. Supposedly, the design was a combination of semaphore signs for the letters N and D, standing for Nuclear Disarmament. The reality, however, is quite different. It was fashioned after a medieval symbol of Satanism, depicting the broken cross of Christianity. The “witch’s foot” or “raven’s foot,” as it was called in Europe, was then adopted by the Muslim world. When the Saracens invaded Spain in 711 A.D., the broken cross decorated their shields. In 1099 A.D., the Saracens fought the Crusaders under the same symbol. The symbol was chosen for the Aldermaster Easter Peace Walk by its well-known organizer, Bertrand Russell. The story about the semaphore symbols was an afterthought. Russell was fiercely opposed to all religion, but particularly Christianity. He had been an officer in the Communist Teachers League of England. The Daily Worker, which was the official newspaper of the Communist Party in the U.S., quoted Russell as saying: “There is no hope in anything but the Soviet way.” Russell was also a prominent member of the Fabian Society. After 1958, the so-called peace symbol became an indispensable accessory for just about every Communist-led movement throughout the Western world.

(For more information about the origins of the peace symbol, see Oliver Day Street, Symbolism of the Three Degrees (New York: George H. Duran Co., 1922); also Cathy Burns, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated (Mt. Carmel, PA: Sharing, 1998), pp. 234-236; also Carl Liungman, Dictionary of Symbols (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1991), p. 253.)

The recent war in the Middle East has once again brought the symbol back onto our streets. Once again, well-intentioned participants flock behind this banner totally unaware of its origins. They do not question the agendas of the individuals leading these demonstrations. They do not question how this movement has sprung up simultaneously throughout the entire Western World, exactly the same as during the Vietnam War, and they are not curious about the tremendous funding and coordination that such movements require. They do not recognize the old-line Marxist-Leninist slogans against capitalism spouted by their leaders. Therefore, they are not aware that most of these organizations have been aligned with the Leninist branch of world collectivism for decades. For them, it is sufficient only to know that the cry is for peace.

In the Vietnam War, we were given a false choice of supposedly being hawks or doves. We were expected to be either for the war or against it. Considering that the conflict was fought as a war of containment in which victory was not the goal, we actually were given a choice of being in favor of pulling out of the war and turning Vietnam over to the Vietcong quickly or doggedly staying in the war and turning the country over to the Vietcong slowly. That was no real choice at all. Yet those were the false options that divided so much of the free world at that time.

Once again, we find ourselves being maneuvered into that same trap. We are being asked to choose between two horrible options that are not real choices at all. We are expected to be either for peace or for war with no questions allowed. The war in the Middle East, we are told, is necessary to protect us from terrorism. Yet, for reasons explained in The Issues section of this web site, it has little to do with overcoming an enemy. That may be what makes it acceptable to voters who are afraid for their safety, but at the strategic level, it is motivated primarily by economic lust for oil reserves, a contest for power between two powerful collectivist camps (The Leninists and the Rhodesians), and a desire to expand the role of the UN in world affairs. If we continue to follow this path, the war will be relatively limited in scope but prolonged. Real victory will not be the goal. The predictable outcome of all the destruction and bloodshed on both sides will be the establishment of regimes just as totalitarian as the ones they will replace -- to say nothing of the accelerated loss of liberty in what is left of the free world.

What has all this to do with our symbol? It has everything to do with it. Let us recall the origin of the so-called peace symbol. Satanists are fond of opposites. They reverse graphic designs; create new words by spelling old ones backward; they even play music backward to create eerie sounds and hidden messages. OK, two can play that game. If we turn this symbol upside down, we immediately see a figure of man reaching upward. What a powerful image it is - the upward reach of mankind: reaching up for good over evil; light over darkness, enlightenment over deception; freedom over slavery. I knew immediately it was what I was seeking to symbolize Freedom Force.

Then, much to my dismay, I discovered that the Nazis had used that same symbol (with side lines drawn upward) on their badges. They placed a swastika at the top of the figure, but it was similar to the concept I thought I had invented. Drat! The ideology of freedom is the exact opposite of Nazism, and there was no way I was going to adopt that symbol. But the idea of an upward reach was too good to discard. I began to look for a way to preserve the concept without relying on symbols of Satanism or Communism or Nazism. After experimenting with various lines and angles, the solution suddenly popped onto the page. It was a vertical line for man, a V for the upward reach, and a circle in the middle of the V, which completed the image by putting a head on the shoulders of man. The head, of course, represents the power of reason, and it created a symbol quite different in appearance from all the others.

It is important to understand that this is not a variation or adaptation of a Satanic symbol. A vertical line with upward angles was an ancient symbol for man long before it was turned upside down and used by Satanists. When Satanists take the cross of Christianity and turn it upside down, that does not mean that the cross is now their symbol. They do not own something just because they desecrate it. Likewise, when they turn the symbol of man upside down, that does not mean that the symbol now belongs to them. To the contrary, it continues to be exactly what it always has been: a depiction of man, and all we have done is add our own touch to make a powerful symbol for freedom.

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pics/holdinghands.jpg

Imagine a throng of men and women standing in unison, arms stretched upward, palms facing inward, showing their solidarity by displaying such a positive and powerful gesture. The concept is compelling. It is now my hope that “The upward reach” will become the universal symbol of our movement.

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pics/walk.jpg

These peace marchers in New York on May 31, 1961, were typical of thousands of good-intentioned people in the U.S. and Western Europe who were hoodwinked into supporting a cause that was the opposite of what they thought. The so-called peace symbol they display is a satanic symbol, called the Witch's Foot, used in medieval times and during the Saracen Crusades as an emblem depicting the broken cross of Christianity.

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/pics/PeaceDemo2003Feb.jpg

Thirty-two years later, the symbol was back on the streets of the Western world, as illustrated by this newspaper article dated February 16, 2003. This time the protest was against the war in Iraq. Once again, innocent idealists were being led by Leninist organizations with a hidden agenda that has nothing to do with peace.
...

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/logo.cfm


Freedom Force symbol. This represents the upward reach of man.

[Nemesis]

In 1984 G. Edward Griffin interviewed a soviet defector. Below is Part Nine of the interview where he makes the statement in my OP title. The entire interview is well worth the watch:

YouTube - Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press 9/9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAyLHSNKuQ0&feature=related)


Well we deserve it! If we hadn't messed with Soviet Russia back in their Civil War, about 1919 to 1921 they wouldn't be pissed at us.

This is just "blowback" for our fucking with them about 90 years ago.

[FrankRep]

Well we deserve it! If we hadn't messed with Soviet Russia back in their Civil War, about 1919 to 1921 they wouldn't be pissed at us.

This is just "blowback" for our fucking with them about 90 years ago.

Wall Street bankers funded the Bolshevik Revolution. ;)


Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
Antony C. Sutton

http://www.amazon.com/Street-Bolshevik-Revolution-Antony-Sutton/dp/089968324X


http://oneheartbooks.com/images/books/large/wall_street_bolshevik_lrg.jpg

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/23/f7/765e228348a042341baef010.L.jpg


Woodrow Wilson and a Passport for Trotsky
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/chapter_02.htm#WOODROW%20WILSON%20AND%20A%20PASSPO RT%20FOR%20TROTSKY

Read it Online:
http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html

[InterestedParticipant]

A SYMBOL FOR FREEDOM
by G. Edward Griffin
You just proved my case!

This is total propaganda, the kind that is only issued by an IO operator.

What utter nonsense, trying to keep the people looking into things that are irrelevant and will not help them out of their predicament. They always send the people down the road of magical thinking, and then get them to blame Freemasons or some other ridiculous group.

This thread has become a parody of itself, mostly because those that are attempting to counter my arguments about "G" are actually making the argument for me. You are proving yourselves wrong, and you don't even realize it. "G"'s own work exposes him.

Ugh, all I can do is hope that people will finally invest the time to research what it is that they do not know, so that they may ultimately understand the deception being perpetrated on them by people they thought they could trust.

You can start at this thread I recently posted here.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=230820

[FrankRep]

You just proved my case!

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/logo.cfm


Freedom Force symbol. This represents the upward reach of man.

How is this propaganda and how does it prove your case?

[NerveShocker]

Hmm... who do I believe Interested Participant or G. Edward Griffen.. Just kidding ;)
Don't worry IP I don't want your vast knowledge on psy-ops or whatever.. and if I did I don't know that I'd go to you.
I'll just stick to economics and other things since I think they are bigger (and definitely real) problems, but enjoy your research.

[InterestedParticipant]

Hmm... who do I believe Interested Participant or G. Edward Griffen.. Just kidding ;)
Don't worry IP I don't want your vast knowledge on psy-ops or whatever.. and if I did I don't know that I'd go to you.
I'll just stick to economics and other things since I think they are bigger (and definitely real) problems, but enjoy your research.
So, tell me, have you read Marx? Do you understand why our current system of production and consumption and exchange was created, and the forces behind it? ... and how this system integrates into the large societal goals and how those societal goals are synthesized into the imagery that I am referencing above? You're smart-ass remark is not warranted by your own knowledge of what it is you proclaim to study. Economics is not an isolated piece of the pie.


http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/logo.cfm


Freedom Force symbol. This represents the upward reach of man.

How is this propaganda and how does it prove your case?
"This represents the upward reach of man"

There is your answer. It is inherent in their own propaganda. Yea, it certainly does represent the "upward reach", or should I say the "reach" that is limited by their control systems.

Look for the double-speak, man! Open your eyes, it's right in front of you.

[FrankRep]

"This represents the upward reach of man"

There is your answer. It is inherent in their own propaganda. Yea, it certainly does represent the "upward reach", or should I say the "reach" that is limited by their control systems.

Look for the double-speak, man! Open your eyes, it's right in front of you.

More facts, Less speculation please.

:rolleyes:

[InterestedParticipant]

More facts, Less speculation please.

:rolleyes:
I'm hitting you over the head with it. I'm not sure what else to do. His own language, his own imagery, gives himself away as an elitist.

At some point you're going to really have to understand the dialectical thinking process, and how elitist that process is, and how it is used against the public. I really think that this is the stumbling block here. When you get that, a lot of things are going to make sense, including what JBS' role is.

Maybe look here (http://wwws.forummotion.com/current-information-operations-io-f1/fuck-the-peace-sign-t13.htm), but this might just add confusion.

[Romulus]

Symbols are often used interchangeably. Their definition is not always black or white. They are just that. Native Americans used the swastika. This does not mean Hitler was partial to them. Once again IP you're looking into an inkblot and drawing your own conclusions.

Riddle me this.. you're at a blackjack table. The dealer says only I have the Aces, Jacks, Queens and Kings. What do you do? You stop playing, find another table or leave the casino altogether, right?

This is what Patriots (you call them Cointel) are telling us. There is no logical conclusion to tell us the games rigged if they are controlled. It serves NO advantage to them or the system.

And how is it that your conclusions that your arriving at aren't controlled and already made for YOU? Maybe all that stuff you read about psy-ops is just another vector to keep philosophical intellectuals like you lost in a very rare, widely unknown minutia of a self sustaining perpetual vector?

It's seems that is where you are at.

[Deborah K]

Chaos it is then. We hold these Truths to be self evident that chaos rules, dude!

Why do you think chaos is the only alternative to the deliberate avoidance of social planning? If a society starts with the premise of liberty - live and let live, as long as you don't hurt anyone - then why must that necessarily result in chaos?

[Deborah K]

IMO is not that, its an exit. Enough people exit their system then it does not exist. There's no logical reason to show people the exit thinking they wont go there.

I think if you look deep enough into anything you see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear.

http://www.the-biomatrix.net/inkblot.gif

Excellent point.

[Deborah K]

I am talking about the hinge on which the philosophical enterprise swings, as created by Plato, Socrates, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Sorel, and Sartre. This is what this imagery represents. It is elitist, and it does not represent self-rule but top-down rule through scientific techniques.

Elitists think they can safely implement such imagery and not be exposed to the public, while other elitists will recognize the meaning, because they've been trained in philosophical history.

Your inability to understand what I am presenting here simply shows your lack of education into these areas, and therefore you inability to diagnose the systems that are being used against you. It is why it was so important to dumb down the education system. Now, they can rub images of control in front of our noses, even get us to support the men who flaunt these images, and we are too unaware to know what we are actually supporting.

The lack of understanding here is beyond frightening.

Your analysis of symbols gives no consideration to the fact that the meaning of symbols often changes. Take the swastika for example: Until the Nazis used this symbol, the swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.

Years ago I read a book called 'Man and his symbols' by Carl Jung. It's definitely worth reading.

[InterestedParticipant]

Your analysis of symbols gives no consideration to the fact that the meaning of symbols often changes. Take the swastika for example: Until the Nazis used this symbol, the swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.
The Nazi's were just another manifestation of an ongoing theme, started by Plato and Socrates. It is a symbol of elite design, which is what Plato/Socrates were all about: management of society by a small panel of expert versus self-rule. That's what we're talking about here, right? Who supports what, a system of self-rule versus oppression. This man is on the side of elite oppression, there are red flags everywhere, but you refuse to see them, even when they are waved in front of your face. Maybe that elitist bloodline of yours has genetically kept you from seeing what it is that you cannot.

PS. I'm adding Deborah & Romulus to my ignore list. It's obvious they are unwilling to read anything that I reference, or pursue any of the knowledge that is being passed-on to them. My conclusion is that they are both a time-sync with absolutely no upside.

[Deborah K]

The Nazi's were just another manifestation of an ongoing theme, started by Plato and Socrates. It is a symbol of elite design, which is what Plato/Socrates were all about: management of society by a small panel of expert versus self-rule. That's what we're talking about here, right? Who supports what, a system of self-rule versus oppression. This man is on the side of elite oppression, there are red flags everywhere, but you refuse to see them, even when they are waved in front of your face. Maybe that elitist bloodline of yours has genetically kept you from seeing what it is that you cannot.

PS. I'm adding Deborah & Romulus to my ignore list. It's obvious they are unwilling to read anything that I reference, or pursue any of the knowledge that is being passed-on to them. My conclusion is that they are both a time-sync with absolutely no upside.

Elitist bloodline? Back on your ignore list? Whateverrrrrr. :rolleyes:


It is a symbol of elite design,

Reallyyyyy????????


The swastika is an ancient symbol that has been used for over 3,000 years. (That even predates the ancient Egyptian symbol, the Ankh!) Artifacts such as pottery and coins from ancient Troy show that the swastika was a commonly used symbol as far back as 1000 BCE.

During the following thousand years, the image of the swastika was used by many cultures around the world, including in China, Japan, India, and southern Europe. By the Middle Ages, the swastika was a well known, if not commonly used, symbol but was called by many different names:

•China - wan
•England - fylfot
•Germany - Hakenkreuz
•Greece - tetraskelion and gammadion
•India - swastika

Though it is not known for exactly how long, Native Americans also have long used the symbol of the swastika. The Navajo Indians also had a similar symbol - depicting their gods of the mountains, rivers, and rain.

The Hindus associated it with the sun and wheel of birth and rebirth. It is an emblem of the Hindu god Vishnu, one of the supreme Hindu deities.

The symbol itself may still be found as an architectural element, decorating sufficiently aged temples to whatever deity is involved.

Archaeological evidence of swastika-shaped ornaments dates from the Neolithic period. It occurs mainly in the modern day culture of India, sometimes as a geometrical motif and sometimes as a religious symbol. It remains widely used in Eastern religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.

The Original Meaning

The word "swastika" comes from the Sanskrit svastika - "su" meaning "good," "asti" meaning "to be," and "ka" as a suffix.

Until the Nazis used this symbol, the swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.

Even in the early twentieth century, the swastika was still a symbol with positive connotations. For instance, the swastika was a common decoration that often adorned cigarette cases, postcards, coins, and buildings. During World War I, the swastika could even be found on the shoulder patches of the American 45th Division and on the Finnish air force until after World War II.

So much for elite design. :rolleyes:

[InterestedParticipant]

Just for clarity, the image that we are discussing is variation on a peace sign. Something that looks like...

http://www.natvan.com/images/rune1.gif


For those wishing to know what a Swastika is, it looks like the following image, but that is NOT what we are discussing here, and has no relevance to these discussions or this thread.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:3ZI07xnomhhrjM:https://amsu-english.wikispaces.com/file/view/swa.png/33650219/swa.png

[Deborah K]

IP, I am of the opinion that symbols have no power other than that which we give them. In addition to that, and as I have already mentioned, the meaning of symbols is often co-opted, or changed to mean something else, hence the example of the swastika. In the case of Griffin, that symbol is the correct version of peace as opposed to the wrong version:

http://i45.tinypic.com/290vcxg.png

I know I will now be accused of drinking Griffin's koolaid, but I'm quite sure his usage of the symbol is in reference to peace.

[Romulus]

Symbols are often used interchangeably. Their definition is not always black or white. They are just that. Native Americans used the swastika. This does not mean Hitler was partial to them. Once again IP you're looking into an inkblot and drawing your own conclusions.

Riddle me this.. you're at a blackjack table. The dealer says only I have the Aces, Jacks, Queens and Kings. What do you do? You stop playing, find another table or leave the casino altogether, right?

This is what Patriots (you call them Cointel) are telling us. There is no logical conclusion to tell us the games rigged if they are controlled. It serves NO advantage to them or the system.

And how is it that your conclusions that your arriving at aren't controlled and already made for YOU? Maybe all that stuff you read about psy-ops is just another vector to keep philosophical intellectuals like you lost in a very rare, widely unknown minutia of a self sustaining perpetual vector?

It's seems that is where you are at.

care to respond to this IP?