Fuck the Peace Sign

"Its" is back! Thought we wouldn't be able to pull you back in. So glad to see you online again. It's been a long time.

Peace Sign = Dialectic Synthesis inside a Controlled Boundary (that they control)

Everything these guys do is an inside joke.

I have heard that the peace sign is a bunch of crap for those that know what it is really about. I will research it instead of taking the asking for the easy way out.

"Peace Sign = Dialectic Synthesis inside a Controlled Boundary (that they control)

Everything these guys do is an inside joke."

I've been studying it, but cannot see anything significant. I guess I'm not an Advanced student yet...
But learning is sure fun.

The two angular lines represent each side of the dialectic, being synthesized into the one vertical line, which is the path that the public was always designed to pursue. It's about manufacturing two conflicting sides of an issue, via the dialectical process, then synthesizing that into a predefined path (ie vector).

The rub here is that all the lines start and end inside the circle. Inside this circle is the Simulacrum, which is manufactured by the social planners. So, it doesn't matter which line you are on, because you will all end at the same place and never ever extend beyond the borders of control (ie circle).

At least, this is THEIR definition of peace. So, when the Atomic Bomb scientist published "One World or None" shortly after WWII, what they meant was that peace would only be maintained if everyone remains within the boundaries of the circle of control that they create (ie The Simulacrum).

Therefore, the Peace Sign basically defines "Peace" in their terms: when the public remains inside their bounds of control and follows their manufactured dialectics. To operate outside these contraints results in something other than Peace.

So, given the above explanation, I now take you to Edward Griffin's logo for his Freedom Force International organization.

Thats what I was going to say originally (not quite everything IP did but that the choices were manufactured and you had to remain there, while the long line represents the goal and outcome), but didnt want to sound retarded. Problem, reaction, solution. Everything was designed and made up to get the desired outcome.

Wow, I never noticed that on FFI. What does the head circle represent? or does it matter since it is inside the circle.

ST, really doesn't matter how one explains it, what's important is that you "get it," which you obviously do. That's a huge leap over the vast majority.

Not sure what the head means. But I think you're certainly correct, as it doesn't matter because its inside the circle.

The sun imagry also has significance (same as in the Obama "O"), which I addressed in another post, but will quote here:

Quote :

Obama's (who I will forever heretofore refer to as the "Underwear Model") logo is the rising sun symbology.... which refers to the new dawn. The circle, the ONE, means the global order. So we have America, represented by the red and white field, being displayed INSIDE the ONE and UNDER the sun. This means that America is inside, or part of, the new world order, and underneath this new dawn of the global order.

Now, here we have a guy (Ed Griffin) who has been involved in "opposing" the Globalist for over 50 years. Is it really reasonable to think that Griffin created that FFI logo without understanding its significance?

The sun imagry also has significance (same as in the Obama "O"), which I addressed in another post, but will quote here:

Quote :

Obama's (who I will forever heretofore refer to as the "Underwear Model") logo is the rising sun symbology.... which refers to the new dawn. The circle, the ONE, means the global order. So we have America, represented by the red and white field, being displayed INSIDE the ONE and UNDER the sun. This means that America is inside, or part of, the new world order, and underneath this new dawn of the global order.

The guy **even has his own logo**--unreal! The narcissism of these folks is truly astounding.

[On another note, I find this whole subject matter totally fascinating. Thanks, IP and ramamamallama, for providing so much good material.]

Quote :

Now, here we have a guy (Ed Griffin) who has been involved in
"opposing" the Globalist for over 50 years. Is it really reasonable to
think that Griffin created that FFI logo without understanding its
significance?

He's got a great persona and is an immensely talented writer. I'd LIKE to believe he is what he seems to be....but it's hard to believe he wouldn't realize the symbolism. If that's so, he, like so many of them, also is mocking us, as they so love to do. *Sad.*

C.

ScoutsHonor wrote:

Quote :

Now, here we have a guy (Ed Griffin) who has been involved in
"opposing" the Globalist for over 50 years. Is it really reasonable to
think that Griffin created that FFI logo without understanding its
significance?

He's got a great persona and is an immensely talented writer. I'd LIKE to believe he is what he seems to be....but it's hard to believe he wouldn't realize the symbolism. If that's so, he, like so many of them, also is mocking us, as they so love to do. *Sad.*

C.

I think that you raise a very good point. The symbolism is both a test, to see if the public can see through it, and it is also a vehicle of mockery, which seems to be something that psychopaths get-off on (eg mocking the victim).

Ronne wrote:

ScoutsHonor wrote:

Quote :

Now, here we have a guy (Ed Griffin) who has been involved in
"opposing" the Globalist for over 50 years. Is it really reasonable to
think that Griffin created that FFI logo without understanding its
significance?

He's got a great persona and is an immensely talented writer. I'd LIKE to believe he is what he seems to be....but it's hard to believe he wouldn't realize the symbolism. If that's so, he, like so many of them, also is mocking us, as they so love to do. *Sad.*

C.

I think that you raise a very good point. The symbolism is both a test, to see if the public can see through it, and it is also a vehicle of mockery, which seems to be something that psychopaths get-off on (eg mocking the victim).

They do it a lot. I find their superior airs very amusing, really. How superior can they be when they haven't got enough decency to realize that sadism, murder, total control over the lives of others, is pathetically WRONG.

WHO are the inferior ones, therefore?? HA.

ScoutsHonor wrote:

They do it a lot. I find their superior airs very amusing, really. How superior can they be when they haven't got enough decency to realize that sadism, murder, total control over the lives of others, is pathetically WRONG.

WHO are the inferior ones, therefore?? HA.

As long as we acquiesce to these clowns, we won't have peace, security, privacy, wealth, liberty, or anything else for that matter.

This is the logo for Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It was apparently developed and used before the Obama logo.

LLS wrote:

This is the logo for Shanghai Cooperation Organization. It was apparently developed and used before the Obama logo.

And people think that the Obama Campaign's advertising agency just pulled that logo out of their a$$. While I'm not adept enough to understand all of this symbolism, I'm sure people like Aristotle and Plato were around after it had been developed and understood it.

In this Shanghai example we've got the image of the World crashing down on the stripes from the Stars n Stripes (World replacing America), all encircled (the global order) as the Sun shines in the background (the new dawn).

Ultimately, everyone gets innundated with their programming, even the Chinese....doesn't matter if it is TV, Internet, Magazines, a Statue or a Logo, it all has a purpose under their stupid system of control.

Quote :

As long as we acquiesce to these clowns, we won't have peace, security, privacy, wealth, liberty, or anything else for that matter.

It's quite difficult, figuring out how to oppose them. At this point, the best I've been able to come up with is simply resisting in principle, never buying their insane superior view of themselves, and remembering that life is really beautiful--it was meant to be beautiful, and not ugly, as they would have it.

It's really bizarre, what they've done to this world! If I'd read OUR situation in a novel I'd probably have dismissed it as "exaggerated melodrama", I'm sure....(I wish )

ScoutsHonor wrote:

Quote :

As long as we acquiesce to these clowns, we won't have peace, security, privacy, wealth, liberty, or anything else for that matter.

It's quite difficult, figuring out how to oppose them. At this point, the best I've been able to come up with is simply resisting in principle, never buying their insane superior view of themselves, and remembering that life is really beautiful--it was meant to be beautiful, and not ugly, as they would have it.

It's really bizarre, what they've done to this world! If I'd read OUR situation in a novel I'd probably have dismissed it as "exaggerated melodrama", I'm sure....(I wish )

Small point, but it's a big point..... but I'd say that acquiescing is very different then opposing. To oppose means to likely fall into one of their dialectics, which they are very good as synthesizing. To not acquiesce means to not accept the Simulacrum altogether and to do ones best to live in the "Desert of the Real."

So, I don't oppose them, I just try to do my best to ignore them, which I believe diffuses their perceived power.

Quote :

Small point, but it's a big point..... but I'd say that acquiescing is very different then opposing. To oppose means to likely fall into one of their dialectics, which they are very good as synthesizing. To not acquiesce means to not accept the Simulacrum altogether and to do ones best to live in the "Desert of the Real."

So, I don't oppose them, I just try to do my best to ignore them, which I believe diffuses their perceived power.

Far as I know, I'm not accepting the simulacrum at all. The problem is that doing "nothing" is so very hard on one's pride, if you know what I mean. I suspect that SOME form of resistance would be the best thing for my peace of mind--otherwise, to put it very bluntly, I just feel like a doormat.

As I said in another post recently, "They" keep on pushing us into a smaller and smaller space."
So I'm trying to avoid that feeling of claustrophobia ... if I can.

IP wrote:

Peace Sign = Dialectic Synthesis inside a Controlled Boundary (that they control)Everything these guys do is an inside joke.

Interesting, also called false dichotomy i think.

matterik wrote:

IP wrote:

Peace Sign = Dialectic Synthesis inside a Controlled Boundary (that they control)Everything these guys do is an inside joke.

Interesting, also called false dichotomy i think.

Yup, our Information Operations (IO) friends are great at this stuff.. experts, in fact. Here's what I found in Wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Quote :

"The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix "di" in "dilemma" means "two".

When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses."

I like the fact that this Wikipedia reference refers to the fallacy of false choice, which you'll hear me refer to as a "containment vector," where not all of the choices are presented, or, some choices or pieces of critical information are deliberately withheld.

In any event, each slice of the spectrum (within the spectrum of Full Spectrum Dominance), is supplied with its own uniquely designed false dichotomy, or dialectic. The key for the social planners, is to make sure that all of the dialectics synthesize to the same goal.

So, whether you're left, right, libertarian, or whatever, there will be a custom-built dialectic for your slice of the spectrum, but each dialectic will synthesize to the same end goals. It's like every market segment (spectrum slice) gets its own custom gun, but they are all aimed at the same target without knowing it.

stilltrying wrote:

Wow, I never noticed that on FFI. What does the head circle represent? or does it matter since it is inside the circle.

Here's one interpretation of the head of the circle. A walk into history shows that it was the Nazi emblem.

Deutscher Frauenhilfsdienst (“German Women’s Auxiliary Service”)		Ed Griffin's Freedom Force Int'l

Now here is the logo for City Lights bookstore, an old established bastian of the far left in San Francisco.





They're using the same logo as Freedom Force. So, we have an organization on the RIGHT, and a strong bastion of the LEFT who are BOTH using the small symbolism. If this is not an indication of how strong the dialectic is, and its pending synthesis of LEFT and RIGHT, then I don't know what is.

incognito wrote:

Great forum research, Rama!! This is exactly the explanatory material that is needed for understanding the oh so sneaky Hegelian Dialectic, as I believe is currently being practiced under our noses with the Arizona Senate bill 1070.**
Thanks for posting!!

Further, can you explain what/where this symbol (above) comes from? It's certainly classic!

*****
**(See forum post under "Domestic Affairs", Arizona's Bill SB1070).

Agree about the AZ bill. RFID anyone? This was someone's FB avatar.