THE HEGELIAN DIALECTIC ILLUSTRATED
[A BRIEF REFRESHER COURSE]
Commies to the Left of me
[A BRIEF REFRESHER COURSE]
Commies to the Left of me
Neocons on the Right
Here I am,
Forced toward the Marxists with you
~ Frank Lee McDeere
In my June 10, 2010 blog bit titled “X-Y-Z: The Mechanix Of Amerycan Politicz” I created a basic illustration of The Hegelian Dialectic as utilized by the Republican and Democrat parties that looked like this:
On any given issue, the so-called “conservatives” (Republican Right) set up at “Z”. The liberals (Extreme Leftists) set up at “X”.
(Left) X ----------------------------------- Z (Right)
Both parties then conduct a fake fight, and after it is all over, they have compromised to position “Y”.
X --> compromise --> Y <-- compromise <-- Z
At some later date, when this issue is taken up again, the so-called “conservatives” will now be defending “Y” – the new status quo – while the Extreme Leftists will set up at position “W”.
(Left) W ---------------------------------- Y (Right)
After the second round of compromises has taken place, we will now stand at position “X”, which is, of course, where the Extreme Leftists had intended to take us in the first place. This is a “game” that is played out by BOTH political parties to the detriment of the American people.
W --> compromise --> X <-- compromise <-- Y
This was my way of showing you how the Left/Right political force is able to continually move us ever Leftward. I said “political force” – singular - because there isn’t really two political parties, but merely one party pretending to be two. The idea of two political parties seemingly engaged in mortal combat is only a dog and pony show designed to pacify the people with a (phony) “choice”.
So, that was my illustration of how The Hegelian Dialectic works in terms of poltical party opposition. In words, I expressed The Hegelian Dialectic dynamic in its most fundamental format this way:
By establishing a condition or thesis (Z), and by setting up its opposition or antithesis (X), and by proposing a resolution or synthesis (Y), any predetermined outcome can be surreptitiously stage-managed by a government in order to move the masses in the desired direction.
In other words, The Powers That Be create a crisis or allow one to manifest (Z), then they stir up opposition to it or inflame and focus on a reaction to it (X), and finally they institute a resolution that addresses the crisis in a way that satisfies the opposition or responds to the reaction and which brings into existence a new piece of legislation or a new bureaucracy or a new power over the people that couldn’t have been foisted on the masses otherwise.
This, people, is two examples of how our brilliant masters utilize The Hegelian Dialectic as a controlling and conditioning mechanism against us. In one form or the other, it occurs routinely.
THE ILLEGAL ALIEN PROBLEM
[APPLIED HEGELIAN DIALECTICS]
My friend DiscConnected of the politically astute and humorously humorous blog Back In The USSR gave me the November 8th issue of The New American magazine (he buys ‘em and I keep ‘em – I like that arrangement) and then he told me that he was eager to know what I thought of the ‘Correction, Please!’ segment featuring an article titled “Incremental Amnesty”.
DiscConnected wasn’t entirely satisfied with the article because he felt it left a false impression that if voters go Republican rather than Democrat, the illegal immigration problem is eased. He seemed to think that the writer, William P. Hoar, may have misrepresented the issue and implied that with complete Republican control the immigration issue wouldn’t be the deplorable situation it now is, with our country overrun by illegal aliens and with the Feds suing Arizona over SB-1070, etc.
Below, in italics, is the slightly edited Email that I sent to my buddy DiscConnected after I had read the article in question. I now want to borrow this ideal scenario of The Hegelian Dialectic in order to further elucidate what I was referring to in my earlier blog bit.
DiscConnected ~
You had said that you were curious to know what I thought of it after reading the New American magazine article “Incremental Amnesty”.
Man, I gotta tell ya, I think it was excellent!
However, I did understand what you meant in saying that you felt the article wrongly left the impression that voting Republican would change things for the better in this regard.
I don’t believe that’s REALLY the impression that The New American magazine meant to give, but by focusing exclusively on the “more illegals from Mexico means more votes for the Democrat Party” angle, that is, unfortunately, the impression that a reader who doesn’t already know that TNA rejects the false Left/Right paradigm could take away from the article.
I think the real purpose of the article was to whack the Democrats, but by focusing strictly on the current administration, the article does seem to be alluding to the idea that illegal immigration is solely a Democrat cause and you were right to call them on it.
To be sure, the Democrat Party does view illegal immigrants as an enlarging of their voter base. However, if that’s all there was to this issue, then obviously the last administration – the George W. Bush “Republican” Administration – would have done everything in its power to shut down illegal border crossing in order to prevent the Democrat Party from increasing its voter base. Right? That’s perfectly logical!
But that’s NOT what the “W” Administration did. In fact, it even incarcerated those two border patrol agents (Ramos and Compean) who had the audacity to attempt doing their jobs!
I am fully convinced that the bigger picture, when it comes to illegal immigration – and the reason BOTH parties refuse to secure our borders – is that the New World Order Cultists want to dilute as much as possible our cultural history and to thereby condition our thinking so that rather than considering ourselves a sovereign nation founded by a bunch of brilliant dead White guys who constructed a Federally limited, Constitutional form of government, we will begin to think of ourselves as “culturally diverse” and not a sovereign nation so much as a “continent” with lots of different influences acting upon it.
It’s easier to stitch together seven continents to form a global government than it is to stitch together about 195 different countries, right? (We saw this same agenda behind the formation of The European Union.)
And this would explain why BOTH parties want to leave the border porous, even if illegal immigration strengthens the voting power of one political party over the other.
However, aside from making the mistake of focusing on just one small piece of the puzzle rather than at least making mention at some point of the Bigger Picture, I thought the article was very good!
This paragraph toward the beginning really got my attention:
The [Wall Street] Journal continued: “Under the incremental scenario, the White House would embrace Republican proposals to step up immigration law enforcement and border and port security in exchange for measures such as the DREAM Act, which would give illegal immigrant children a path to citizenship through military or public service. White House officials could add an agricultural-workers program to that bill but put off dealing with the bulk of illegal immigrants until later.”
Whoa! Man, could there possibly be a better example of what I was writing about under the category X-Y-Z (Or, “The Hegelian Dialectic”) in THIS blog bit? I mean, that’s “The Hegelian Dialectic” in full bloom!
COINCIDENCE THEORISTS SEIZE THE DAY?
[Or, CRISES-R-US: CREATE YER OWN OPPORTUNITIES?]
Now, recall the infamous quote of USAP’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel:
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you didn't think you could do before.
~ Rahm Emanuel
OK, knowing that high-level Uncle Sam leadership recognizes the value of a crisis as a way of exploiting a situation and seizing the opportunity to do things it wouldn’t be able to do otherwise, ask yourself this question: Would Uncle Sam MANUFACTURE a serious crisis in order to use the opportunity to reshape the structure of America?
The answer is pretty obvious, don’t you think? If they could do it, they would do it.
Now ask yourself if it’s possible that the reason neither political party has shown any interest in securing our borders is because the crisis that an unsecure border creates might be an opportunity “to do things they didn’t think they could do before”.
In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform And Control Act which granted amnesty to illegal aliens in the United States. At that time, Ted Kennedy stated, “We will secure the borders henceforth.” And he also promised, “We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.” That’s two – count ‘em: 2 – lies that the silver spoon-fed buffoon told us. The borders were never truly secured and now legislators want to grant some form of amnesty to illegal aliens yet again.
Considering that we granted amnesty to lawbreakers in 1986, and considering that our leaders have deliberately misinterpreted the 14th Amendment to read that any child born to an illegal immigrant on American soil is automatically a full American citizen, is it any wonder that illegal aliens have continued to flock here in even greater numbers since 1986?
I believe that our immigration problem was a manufactured crisis in which both political parties participated in order to achieve the mind-set in America that I described in my Email to DiscConnected. And now we again see the political parties utilizing The Hegelian Dialectic in order to provide a pathway to citizenship (read: grant amnesty) to lawbreakers. Between that and the “Anchor Baby” law, that should keep the aliens coming in droves – which is what Uncle Sam secretly desires. The script never changes, only the cast does. The immigration crisis is but one additional stepping stone on the path to a single World Government.
AMERICAN OUTRAGE DIRECTED AT THE T.S.A.
[HEGELIAN DIALECTIC IN PROGRESS?]
Here I am,
Forced toward the Marxists with you
~ Frank Lee McDeere
In my June 10, 2010 blog bit titled “X-Y-Z: The Mechanix Of Amerycan Politicz” I created a basic illustration of The Hegelian Dialectic as utilized by the Republican and Democrat parties that looked like this:
On any given issue, the so-called “conservatives” (Republican Right) set up at “Z”. The liberals (Extreme Leftists) set up at “X”.
(Left) X ----------------------------------- Z (Right)
Both parties then conduct a fake fight, and after it is all over, they have compromised to position “Y”.
X --> compromise --> Y <-- compromise <-- Z
At some later date, when this issue is taken up again, the so-called “conservatives” will now be defending “Y” – the new status quo – while the Extreme Leftists will set up at position “W”.
(Left) W ---------------------------------- Y (Right)
After the second round of compromises has taken place, we will now stand at position “X”, which is, of course, where the Extreme Leftists had intended to take us in the first place. This is a “game” that is played out by BOTH political parties to the detriment of the American people.
W --> compromise --> X <-- compromise <-- Y
This was my way of showing you how the Left/Right political force is able to continually move us ever Leftward. I said “political force” – singular - because there isn’t really two political parties, but merely one party pretending to be two. The idea of two political parties seemingly engaged in mortal combat is only a dog and pony show designed to pacify the people with a (phony) “choice”.
So, that was my illustration of how The Hegelian Dialectic works in terms of poltical party opposition. In words, I expressed The Hegelian Dialectic dynamic in its most fundamental format this way:
By establishing a condition or thesis (Z), and by setting up its opposition or antithesis (X), and by proposing a resolution or synthesis (Y), any predetermined outcome can be surreptitiously stage-managed by a government in order to move the masses in the desired direction.
In other words, The Powers That Be create a crisis or allow one to manifest (Z), then they stir up opposition to it or inflame and focus on a reaction to it (X), and finally they institute a resolution that addresses the crisis in a way that satisfies the opposition or responds to the reaction and which brings into existence a new piece of legislation or a new bureaucracy or a new power over the people that couldn’t have been foisted on the masses otherwise.
This, people, is two examples of how our brilliant masters utilize The Hegelian Dialectic as a controlling and conditioning mechanism against us. In one form or the other, it occurs routinely.
THE ILLEGAL ALIEN PROBLEM
[APPLIED HEGELIAN DIALECTICS]
My friend DiscConnected of the politically astute and humorously humorous blog Back In The USSR gave me the November 8th issue of The New American magazine (he buys ‘em and I keep ‘em – I like that arrangement) and then he told me that he was eager to know what I thought of the ‘Correction, Please!’ segment featuring an article titled “Incremental Amnesty”.
DiscConnected wasn’t entirely satisfied with the article because he felt it left a false impression that if voters go Republican rather than Democrat, the illegal immigration problem is eased. He seemed to think that the writer, William P. Hoar, may have misrepresented the issue and implied that with complete Republican control the immigration issue wouldn’t be the deplorable situation it now is, with our country overrun by illegal aliens and with the Feds suing Arizona over SB-1070, etc.
Below, in italics, is the slightly edited Email that I sent to my buddy DiscConnected after I had read the article in question. I now want to borrow this ideal scenario of The Hegelian Dialectic in order to further elucidate what I was referring to in my earlier blog bit.
DiscConnected ~
You had said that you were curious to know what I thought of it after reading the New American magazine article “Incremental Amnesty”.
Man, I gotta tell ya, I think it was excellent!
However, I did understand what you meant in saying that you felt the article wrongly left the impression that voting Republican would change things for the better in this regard.
I don’t believe that’s REALLY the impression that The New American magazine meant to give, but by focusing exclusively on the “more illegals from Mexico means more votes for the Democrat Party” angle, that is, unfortunately, the impression that a reader who doesn’t already know that TNA rejects the false Left/Right paradigm could take away from the article.
I think the real purpose of the article was to whack the Democrats, but by focusing strictly on the current administration, the article does seem to be alluding to the idea that illegal immigration is solely a Democrat cause and you were right to call them on it.
To be sure, the Democrat Party does view illegal immigrants as an enlarging of their voter base. However, if that’s all there was to this issue, then obviously the last administration – the George W. Bush “Republican” Administration – would have done everything in its power to shut down illegal border crossing in order to prevent the Democrat Party from increasing its voter base. Right? That’s perfectly logical!
But that’s NOT what the “W” Administration did. In fact, it even incarcerated those two border patrol agents (Ramos and Compean) who had the audacity to attempt doing their jobs!
I am fully convinced that the bigger picture, when it comes to illegal immigration – and the reason BOTH parties refuse to secure our borders – is that the New World Order Cultists want to dilute as much as possible our cultural history and to thereby condition our thinking so that rather than considering ourselves a sovereign nation founded by a bunch of brilliant dead White guys who constructed a Federally limited, Constitutional form of government, we will begin to think of ourselves as “culturally diverse” and not a sovereign nation so much as a “continent” with lots of different influences acting upon it.
It’s easier to stitch together seven continents to form a global government than it is to stitch together about 195 different countries, right? (We saw this same agenda behind the formation of The European Union.)
And this would explain why BOTH parties want to leave the border porous, even if illegal immigration strengthens the voting power of one political party over the other.
However, aside from making the mistake of focusing on just one small piece of the puzzle rather than at least making mention at some point of the Bigger Picture, I thought the article was very good!
This paragraph toward the beginning really got my attention:
The [Wall Street] Journal continued: “Under the incremental scenario, the White House would embrace Republican proposals to step up immigration law enforcement and border and port security in exchange for measures such as the DREAM Act, which would give illegal immigrant children a path to citizenship through military or public service. White House officials could add an agricultural-workers program to that bill but put off dealing with the bulk of illegal immigrants until later.”
Whoa! Man, could there possibly be a better example of what I was writing about under the category X-Y-Z (Or, “The Hegelian Dialectic”) in THIS blog bit? I mean, that’s “The Hegelian Dialectic” in full bloom!
COINCIDENCE THEORISTS SEIZE THE DAY?
[Or, CRISES-R-US: CREATE YER OWN OPPORTUNITIES?]
Now, recall the infamous quote of USAP’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel:
You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you didn't think you could do before.
~ Rahm Emanuel
OK, knowing that high-level Uncle Sam leadership recognizes the value of a crisis as a way of exploiting a situation and seizing the opportunity to do things it wouldn’t be able to do otherwise, ask yourself this question: Would Uncle Sam MANUFACTURE a serious crisis in order to use the opportunity to reshape the structure of America?
The answer is pretty obvious, don’t you think? If they could do it, they would do it.
Now ask yourself if it’s possible that the reason neither political party has shown any interest in securing our borders is because the crisis that an unsecure border creates might be an opportunity “to do things they didn’t think they could do before”.
In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform And Control Act which granted amnesty to illegal aliens in the United States. At that time, Ted Kennedy stated, “We will secure the borders henceforth.” And he also promised, “We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.” That’s two – count ‘em: 2 – lies that the silver spoon-fed buffoon told us. The borders were never truly secured and now legislators want to grant some form of amnesty to illegal aliens yet again.
Considering that we granted amnesty to lawbreakers in 1986, and considering that our leaders have deliberately misinterpreted the 14th Amendment to read that any child born to an illegal immigrant on American soil is automatically a full American citizen, is it any wonder that illegal aliens have continued to flock here in even greater numbers since 1986?
I believe that our immigration problem was a manufactured crisis in which both political parties participated in order to achieve the mind-set in America that I described in my Email to DiscConnected. And now we again see the political parties utilizing The Hegelian Dialectic in order to provide a pathway to citizenship (read: grant amnesty) to lawbreakers. Between that and the “Anchor Baby” law, that should keep the aliens coming in droves – which is what Uncle Sam secretly desires. The script never changes, only the cast does. The immigration crisis is but one additional stepping stone on the path to a single World Government.
AMERICAN OUTRAGE DIRECTED AT THE T.S.A.
[HEGELIAN DIALECTIC IN PROGRESS?]
.
.
[Oh, Mammy! Where do I apply for a T.S.A. Screener job? Hell, I'll gain weight, cut my hair, and paint my nails!]
[Oh, Mammy! Where do I apply for a T.S.A. Screener job? Hell, I'll gain weight, cut my hair, and paint my nails!]
.
Item: The TSA said people are chosen for additional screening at random and strictly for security reasons.
Item: Not all air travelers are selected for full-body scans -- the majority required only to walk through more common metal detectors. Passengers picked for body scans can opt for a pat-down instead. But once they have been randomly selected for the enhanced searches, they can't opt-out of both the scan and the pat-down. ...
“Just because you buy a plane ticket doesn't mean you have to subject yourself to awful security measures. It's not a waiver of your rights," said [Patricia] Stone, 44. "The TSA is security theater. They're not protecting us."
Item: On the eve of one of the nation's busiest travel days, a poll has found that 61% of likely voters oppose the newly enhanced security measures at the country's airports. The poll by Zogby International of 2,032 likely voters also found that 48% said they would probably seek alternatives to flying because of the new measures.”
Item: “SCREW BIG SIS”: Man Strips Down In TSA Opt-Out Protest
.
Item: Not all air travelers are selected for full-body scans -- the majority required only to walk through more common metal detectors. Passengers picked for body scans can opt for a pat-down instead. But once they have been randomly selected for the enhanced searches, they can't opt-out of both the scan and the pat-down. ...
“Just because you buy a plane ticket doesn't mean you have to subject yourself to awful security measures. It's not a waiver of your rights," said [Patricia] Stone, 44. "The TSA is security theater. They're not protecting us."
Item: On the eve of one of the nation's busiest travel days, a poll has found that 61% of likely voters oppose the newly enhanced security measures at the country's airports. The poll by Zogby International of 2,032 likely voters also found that 48% said they would probably seek alternatives to flying because of the new measures.”
Item: “SCREW BIG SIS”: Man Strips Down In TSA Opt-Out Protest
.
.
Item: Ron Paul: Crotch Groped By TSA, Calls For Boycott Of Airlines -- “If we tolerate this,” Congressman Ron Paul said, “there’s something wrong with us.”
Item: Full-body scanners popping up at courthouses
Now the old boy may be barely breathing
Item: Ron Paul: Crotch Groped By TSA, Calls For Boycott Of Airlines -- “If we tolerate this,” Congressman Ron Paul said, “there’s something wrong with us.”
Item: Full-body scanners popping up at courthouses
Now the old boy may be barely breathing
But the heart of USA, the heart of USA is still beating
Yeah! In Cleveland Hopkins International Airport
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport!
Uh! Heart of USA!
~ Mary N. Tumunny
Boy, it does my heart good to see the American people finally rising up in righteous indignation over the Transportation Security Administration’s un-Constitutional infringement of our privacy rights.
In one sense it’s pretty pathetic that it didn’t occur until the T.S.A. began implementing its “enhanced pat-down” procedures. An informed citizenry would have erupted with this same level of disgust and outrage the moment these full-body Nude-O-Vision scanners were installed in airports. My anger was expressed immediately! I didn’t need to wait until these T.S.A. thugs began their “hand jive”, or “five-digit security clearance measures” before I went ballistic and started boycotting. I know when my Fourth Amendment rights are being trampled! (See my July 17th blog bit, “Drawing The Line For Uncle Sam”.)
But considering how uninformed and uninspired most Americans are, I suppose I should just be grateful that something – anything – was able to rouse them from their deep, apathetic slumbering. It shouldn’t have taken the T.S.A.’s T.S.A. (Totalitarian Sexual Abuse) to awaken the Americonned people – they should have risen up in righteous indignation months ago. But, heck, I’m just grateful that there’s still even an irregular murmur of a heartbeat in the American body that the T.S.A. Chief son-of-a-gun John Pistole was able to shock back into regularity.
I know a cat named Way-Out Johnny
Yeah! In Cleveland Hopkins International Airport
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport!
Uh! Heart of USA!
~ Mary N. Tumunny
Boy, it does my heart good to see the American people finally rising up in righteous indignation over the Transportation Security Administration’s un-Constitutional infringement of our privacy rights.
In one sense it’s pretty pathetic that it didn’t occur until the T.S.A. began implementing its “enhanced pat-down” procedures. An informed citizenry would have erupted with this same level of disgust and outrage the moment these full-body Nude-O-Vision scanners were installed in airports. My anger was expressed immediately! I didn’t need to wait until these T.S.A. thugs began their “hand jive”, or “five-digit security clearance measures” before I went ballistic and started boycotting. I know when my Fourth Amendment rights are being trampled! (See my July 17th blog bit, “Drawing The Line For Uncle Sam”.)
But considering how uninformed and uninspired most Americans are, I suppose I should just be grateful that something – anything – was able to rouse them from their deep, apathetic slumbering. It shouldn’t have taken the T.S.A.’s T.S.A. (Totalitarian Sexual Abuse) to awaken the Americonned people – they should have risen up in righteous indignation months ago. But, heck, I’m just grateful that there’s still even an irregular murmur of a heartbeat in the American body that the T.S.A. Chief son-of-a-gun John Pistole was able to shock back into regularity.
I know a cat named Way-Out Johnny
Got a masculine chick named Homeland Janie
He can walk and stroll and screw with you
And do that crazy hand jive, too
.
Mama, mama, look at T.S.A.
Doing the hand jive with sister Mae
Grandma gave baby sister a dime
She go’n get hand jive one mo’ time
.
Hand jive
Hand jive
Hand jive
Hand jive
Hand jive
Hand jive
Do that crazy hand jive
~ Bill Bord
I have stated previously on this blog that once a person understands Uncle Sam’s endgame and the way The Hegelian Dialectic is utilized, it is sometimes possible to predict in advance changes in the political landscape.
Let me give you an example. I am NOT saying that I’m convinced this is how things will play out; I’m merely speculating - making an educated guess - about how this COULD possibly end up. Of course, there are other routes that might be selected by the New World Order Cultists, but you can be certain of one thing: our masters WILL find some way to use this crisis, this uprising of the Americonned people in a way that further promotes the New World Order agenda.
It’s certainly possible that the T.S.A. (following Council on Foreign Relations member Janet Napolitano’s instructions) suddenly implemented this new “enhanced pat-down” security measure (“Z”) in a deliberate attempt to anger the Americonned people enough (“X”) to accept some resolution that will be proposed in due time (“Y”). We might well be seeing the utilization of The Hegelian Dialectic in a “manufactured crisis” developing right before our eyes.
Here is an idea that has occurred to me as I have watched this story unfolding daily:
In May of 2005, the ‘Real ID Act’ was passed. This new Federal law demanded that all states begin issuing driver’s licenses and identification cards that conform to Department of Homeland Security guidelines and could be linked to a Federal database. In actuality, the Feds were requiring the states to participate in the creation of a National I.D. card. This was undoubtedly a step toward Biometric identification and greater control of the people.
It’s not a stretch to imagine that biometric identification cards would have been but one more step toward the eventual computer-chipping of citizens (and my more Biblically-informed readers will recognize that this would have likely been synonymous with “the mark of the beast”).
But a funny thing happened on the way to Federal tyranny: Some states rebelled, primarily due to the cost of conforming to the Federal demands. With little choice available to them, the Feds pushed back the deadline date for the states to come under compliance of the ‘Real ID Act’ to December of 2009. But as even more states began to rebel and to pass legislation at the state level essentially “nullifying” the Fed’s ‘Real ID Act’, the Feds dropped the issue -- for now. Although the law is still on the books, Uncle Sam and Aunt Janet have chosen not to enforce this tyrannical law. (After all, what were they going to do? Bring back our troops from the Middle East and order them to take up arms against the rebelling states?)
The recent outrage against the T.S.A.’s full-body scanning and enhanced pat-downs was not just an airline customer issue. Many commercial pilots also began to loudly protest this invasion of privacy. How did the T.S.A. respond to pilot protest? Here’s how:
Item: Pilots and flight attendants had been calling on the TSA to revise its “enhanced security screening” for crew, arguing that since they already go through extensive security checks, they should not have to go through new full-body scanners or be subjected to pat-downs (ATW Daily News, Nov. 16).
TSA Administrator John Pistole on Friday told Bloomberg’s “In Business” that its decision recognizes the “trusted position and relationship that the pilots have in charge of the aircraft,” and noted that pilots will now go through an “alternative, identity-based screening as opposed to the physical screening.” Pistole explained this means pilots will “present an airline ID, with a positive validation, at the checkpoint.” By doing that, he said, it will “eliminate the need for additional physical screening” and enable TSA “to provide the focus on those who may be a possible risk.”
This got me to thinking . . . if airline passenger protests continue to mount, what if the T.S.A. at some point down the road made a similar agreement with airline customers? What if Janet Napolitano and her Homeland Security Goon Squad proposed the idea that Americans with biometric identification cards conforming to Homeland Security guidelines could avoid the full-body scanning Nude-O-Vision machines and the T.S.A. “Hand Jive”? That is, with a biometric National ID card and a clean personal history, you, the customer, would in a sense also be able to take advantage of an “alternative, identity-based screening as opposed to the physical screening” just as the pilots do.
Or to put it another way: It is well within the realm of possibility that the true purpose of the new T.S.A. procedures is to ignite our ire enough that we will eagerly accept, as a replacement, a yet to be proposed “compromise” resulting in the fulfillment of Uncle Sam’s and Aunt Janet’s National Identification Card agenda.
This is one way that the Feds might be able to get the states to acquiesce to the ‘Real ID Act’ which the states have, up until now, rebelled against and essentially “nullified”.
I repeat, I am not saying that I am convinced this is how this situation will eventually be used by The Feds in order to gain what they want (i.e., greater control and surveillance of the American people), but I do offer it as a very real, logical possibility. This may or may not be an accurate prediction of the denouement to this whole sordid affair, but I offer it as an example of how an informed person can analyze political events and an explanation for why it is possible for a person to sometimes accurately predict future political moves. All it takes is an awareness of the endgame and the imagination to conceive of how The Hegelian Dialectic might be employed to manipulate us, step-by-step, toward the “New World Order” and the checkmate trap that awaits us.
I leave you with the following passages from 1) The Constitution of the United States of America, and 2) The Heritage Guide To The Constitution:
1) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
~ The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
2) In the case with which the Framers of the Constitution would have been most familiar, James Otis defended several colonial smugglers against seizures made through the use of “writs of assistance”, which permitted the customs agents to search any place in which smuggled goods might be concealed, even if there was no particular suspicion the goods were there. Though Otis lost the case, no less an authority than John Adams saw the dispute as the spark of the American Revolution: “Then and there was the child ‘Independence’ born.”
~ The Heritage Guide To The Constitution; page 324
~ Stephen T. McCarthy
D-FensDogg of the 'Loyal American Underground'
YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.
~ Bill Bord
I have stated previously on this blog that once a person understands Uncle Sam’s endgame and the way The Hegelian Dialectic is utilized, it is sometimes possible to predict in advance changes in the political landscape.
Let me give you an example. I am NOT saying that I’m convinced this is how things will play out; I’m merely speculating - making an educated guess - about how this COULD possibly end up. Of course, there are other routes that might be selected by the New World Order Cultists, but you can be certain of one thing: our masters WILL find some way to use this crisis, this uprising of the Americonned people in a way that further promotes the New World Order agenda.
It’s certainly possible that the T.S.A. (following Council on Foreign Relations member Janet Napolitano’s instructions) suddenly implemented this new “enhanced pat-down” security measure (“Z”) in a deliberate attempt to anger the Americonned people enough (“X”) to accept some resolution that will be proposed in due time (“Y”). We might well be seeing the utilization of The Hegelian Dialectic in a “manufactured crisis” developing right before our eyes.
Here is an idea that has occurred to me as I have watched this story unfolding daily:
In May of 2005, the ‘Real ID Act’ was passed. This new Federal law demanded that all states begin issuing driver’s licenses and identification cards that conform to Department of Homeland Security guidelines and could be linked to a Federal database. In actuality, the Feds were requiring the states to participate in the creation of a National I.D. card. This was undoubtedly a step toward Biometric identification and greater control of the people.
It’s not a stretch to imagine that biometric identification cards would have been but one more step toward the eventual computer-chipping of citizens (and my more Biblically-informed readers will recognize that this would have likely been synonymous with “the mark of the beast”).
But a funny thing happened on the way to Federal tyranny: Some states rebelled, primarily due to the cost of conforming to the Federal demands. With little choice available to them, the Feds pushed back the deadline date for the states to come under compliance of the ‘Real ID Act’ to December of 2009. But as even more states began to rebel and to pass legislation at the state level essentially “nullifying” the Fed’s ‘Real ID Act’, the Feds dropped the issue -- for now. Although the law is still on the books, Uncle Sam and Aunt Janet have chosen not to enforce this tyrannical law. (After all, what were they going to do? Bring back our troops from the Middle East and order them to take up arms against the rebelling states?)
The recent outrage against the T.S.A.’s full-body scanning and enhanced pat-downs was not just an airline customer issue. Many commercial pilots also began to loudly protest this invasion of privacy. How did the T.S.A. respond to pilot protest? Here’s how:
Item: Pilots and flight attendants had been calling on the TSA to revise its “enhanced security screening” for crew, arguing that since they already go through extensive security checks, they should not have to go through new full-body scanners or be subjected to pat-downs (ATW Daily News, Nov. 16).
TSA Administrator John Pistole on Friday told Bloomberg’s “In Business” that its decision recognizes the “trusted position and relationship that the pilots have in charge of the aircraft,” and noted that pilots will now go through an “alternative, identity-based screening as opposed to the physical screening.” Pistole explained this means pilots will “present an airline ID, with a positive validation, at the checkpoint.” By doing that, he said, it will “eliminate the need for additional physical screening” and enable TSA “to provide the focus on those who may be a possible risk.”
This got me to thinking . . . if airline passenger protests continue to mount, what if the T.S.A. at some point down the road made a similar agreement with airline customers? What if Janet Napolitano and her Homeland Security Goon Squad proposed the idea that Americans with biometric identification cards conforming to Homeland Security guidelines could avoid the full-body scanning Nude-O-Vision machines and the T.S.A. “Hand Jive”? That is, with a biometric National ID card and a clean personal history, you, the customer, would in a sense also be able to take advantage of an “alternative, identity-based screening as opposed to the physical screening” just as the pilots do.
Or to put it another way: It is well within the realm of possibility that the true purpose of the new T.S.A. procedures is to ignite our ire enough that we will eagerly accept, as a replacement, a yet to be proposed “compromise” resulting in the fulfillment of Uncle Sam’s and Aunt Janet’s National Identification Card agenda.
This is one way that the Feds might be able to get the states to acquiesce to the ‘Real ID Act’ which the states have, up until now, rebelled against and essentially “nullified”.
I repeat, I am not saying that I am convinced this is how this situation will eventually be used by The Feds in order to gain what they want (i.e., greater control and surveillance of the American people), but I do offer it as a very real, logical possibility. This may or may not be an accurate prediction of the denouement to this whole sordid affair, but I offer it as an example of how an informed person can analyze political events and an explanation for why it is possible for a person to sometimes accurately predict future political moves. All it takes is an awareness of the endgame and the imagination to conceive of how The Hegelian Dialectic might be employed to manipulate us, step-by-step, toward the “New World Order” and the checkmate trap that awaits us.
I leave you with the following passages from 1) The Constitution of the United States of America, and 2) The Heritage Guide To The Constitution:
1) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
~ The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
2) In the case with which the Framers of the Constitution would have been most familiar, James Otis defended several colonial smugglers against seizures made through the use of “writs of assistance”, which permitted the customs agents to search any place in which smuggled goods might be concealed, even if there was no particular suspicion the goods were there. Though Otis lost the case, no less an authority than John Adams saw the dispute as the spark of the American Revolution: “Then and there was the child ‘Independence’ born.”
~ The Heritage Guide To The Constitution; page 324
~ Stephen T. McCarthy
D-FensDogg of the 'Loyal American Underground'
YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.
.
