The Good The Bad and The Ugly

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Iron Mountain Report: A Hoax or Betrayal?


Iron Mountain A Hoax or Betrayal?
By: Paula Demers
In 1961, the Kennedy administration ordered a "Top Secret" study to determine what problems the United States would face if the world moved from an era of war to a golden age of peace. In other words, how to bring America into the New World Order. By 1963 the selection of the specialist had been made. This study group consisted of 15 experts in various academic disciplines who were selected for their expertise in their various fields. The first and last meetings were in an underground nuclear survival retreat called Iron Mountain.
In the same year that this "Top Secret" study was called, 1961, The Department of State put out a publication (#7277) called "Freedom From War, The United States Program for a General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World". This publication describes a three step program to disarm the American military, shut down bases and have one military under the United Nations. This "military" would be the world wide police force to be used as "peace keepers" throughout the world. The plan would include that "all weapons of mass destruction" be eliminated with the exception of "those required for a United Nations Peace Force" (page 12 paragraph one). In order to "keep the peace, all states will reaffirm their obligations under the UN Charter to refrain from the threat of use of any type armed force" (page 16, Paragraph eight) To support the UN Charter, the average citizen will need to be disarmed; so they cannot defend themselves against these "peace keepers". You don't have to watch much news to see that today, the UN forces are used as "peace keepers" throughout the world, disarming people so they can't defend themselves against oppressive governments. To quote Sarah Brady, Chair of Handguncontrol, Inc. "Our Task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
I also want to point out the interesting things that happened in the mid 1960's: The protests against the war in Vietnam. The protests against Nuclear Arms. The protests for arms reduction......Much of these protests were done by college students. Many who graduated and became the doctors, lawyers, people in politics, and even the President for today.
In 1963, the same year as the selection of specialists for this "Top Secret" study, President John F. Kennedy made an astounding statement. On November 13, while speaking at Columbus University, Pres. Kennedy stated, "The high office of the President of the United States of America has been used to foment a plot to destroy America's freedom, and before I leave office, I must inform the citizens of their plight! Ten days later, President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed.

The study was completed in 1966. President Johnson gave the order that the report was never to be released, due to the nature of the conclusions reached. The purpose of this Report was to see what it would take to bring the United States into a New World Order. The "experts" decided that the American people were not intelligent enough to understand what "big brother" had decided for them; and what "big brother" would need to do to accomplish what was decided for them. If the truth came out too soon, the American people would be able to stop it.
To quote directly from the cover letter of this report: (paragraph three) "Because of the unusual circumstances surrounding the establishment of this Group, and in view of the nature of its finding, we do not recommend that this Report be released for publication...such actions would not be in the PUBLIC INTEREST (emphasis mine)..a lay reader, unexposed to the exigencies of higher political or military responsibility, will misconstrue the purpose of this project, and the intent... We urge that the circulation of the Report be closely restricted to those who's responsibilities require that they be apprised of its contents..." Those who responsibilities require they know? Would this be the people who will be working to bring us into a New world Order?
One man involved in the study elected to release it to the general public. He did it at great risk to himself using the name John Doe. Mr. Do must have believed the American people were smart enough to decide for themselves if they wanted to loose their freedom to a "golden age of peace". After John Doe released the information, the Establishment renounced it saying it was a hoax. There are not many copies of this Report left. Some large libraries have copies and it would be worth the effort to check it out. This in itself would be proof it is not a hoax.
There are very interesting terms used and repeated throughout the report. Some of these include "general condition of peace", "functions of war", "change social structure", "problems of peace", "transition of world peace", replacing the "function of war", "saving the species" (man), "disarmament transition", "social control", "selective population control", "gross population control" and "loss of national sovereignty".
The stated purpose of this Report (taken from the first paragraph of the cover letter) is:
to consider the problems involved in the contingency of a transition to a general condition of peace, and
To recommend procedures for dealing with this contingency. " We will do our best to capture the basic message in this report.
This 34 page report basically deals with the "functions of War" and how to replace those "functions" with other options. So there can be peace and the "species" (man) can survive.
The introduction of this Report shows some interesting observations this group came up with during their 2 1/2 year study. If there came a "condition of world peace" (paragraph three) it would change the social structures of all the nations of the world. There is nothing that has happened to compare with the change that would occur in such an instance. They point out that there would be consequences to peace. Not just the economy, but every other aspect of life would be touched also. It would touch the "political, sociological, cultural, and ecological" aspects. The reason they included these aspects in their study is that the world (at that time) was totally unprepared to cover all the demands that would come in these areas in such a situation of peace. They conclude that at the end of the report they give their recommendations for what they believe to be a "practical and necessary course of action." (paragraph six)
These 15 experts set you straight in the first section that they are doing to be totally objective in their study. (Section one, paragraph five) They made a "continuously self-conscious effort" to keep the values of "good" and "bad". They admit that it wasn't easy, but as far as they could tell, it had never been done before. The previous studies for peace had taken certain things into consideration:"...the importance of human life, the superiority of democratic institutions, the greatest 'good' for the greatest number, the 'dignity' of the individual, the desirability of maximum healthier and longevity,...." These experts did not. Instead they attempted to "....apply the standards of physical science...." and go on to quote Whitehead who said, "...ignores all judgments of value; for instance, all esthetics and moral judgments."
In other words, people the idea of human rights, and the value of human life are not at all taken into consideration in the putting together of the Report. They took their assignment, and decided how they could take care of all the problems without considering the people involved. In this report, as you will see, human beings are being brought down to the level of herds of animals.
Section four is interesting. (War and Peace as Social Systems). They point out that wars are not "caused" because of international conflicts of interest. (paragraph seven). They further comment that "...war-making, active or contemplated, is a matter of life and death on the greatest scale subject to social control..." In paragraph six of this same section, they comment that the "threats" against the "national interest" are created or accelerated to "meet the changing needs of the war system". This will be in more detail in the next section, where they discuss the "Functions of War". (Section five) for each section, along with their "Substitutes for the Functions of War (Section six). We will include booth the "functions" and the "substitutes" under each heading.
They go into great detail on the "Functions of War" (Section five) and the "Substitutes for the Functions of War" (Section six). The areas covered are: economic, political, sociological, ecological, cultural and scientific. These areas are all affected by the "functions of war" so they will have to find "substitutes for the functions of war" in order to have peace. see: Silent Weapons For a Quiet War
One "function of war" is that it uses organized violence to defend or advance "national interest". They believe it is necessary for a military establishment to "create a need for it's unique powers" (Section five, paragraph two)
Another major "function of war" is that it produces waste. This waste is a means to control surpluses. It also produces jobs and industrial advancement. War, basically, stimulates the economy. Paragraph eight states, "It is, and has been the essential economic stabilizer of modern societies."
In section six, they come up with options that can replace war. They have two criteria: they must be wasteful, and must operate outside the normal supply and demand system. They make a list of social welfare programs, such as heath and housing. But they comment that there is a weakness in changing the money form the military spending to social-welfare. Unless it was run like the military , "subject to arbitrary control". (paragraph 12) This control would com in the form of building (public housing--medical centers) that can be accelerated or stopped, depending on what it would take to create a stable economy. Another option would be a series of "giant space research programs". (paragraph 13)
One "function of war" in the political sense, is that war is "virtually synonymous with nationhood" (paragraph two) War has been essential for nations to exist independently. So, with "peace", nations lose their national sovereignty.
So a "substitute for the function of war" politically would have to come up with something that would be compatible with no national sovereignty. Nations can still exist in the "administrative sense" (paragraph two). But there would have to be institutions, such as a "World Court or a United Nations" that had the real authority.
One of the things considered was generating a type of space enemy. They acknowledge that, "...most ambitious and unrealistic space project cannot of itself generate a believable eternal menace...."(paragraph seven) Even the "flying saucer instances" were not encouraging enough to be used to unite "....mankind against the danger of destruction by 'creatures' from other planets...."
An effective substitute for war, would require "alternate enemies". (paragraph seven) They go on to say that a "gross pollution of the environment" could eventually replace the mass destruction by nuclear weapons, as a "threat to the survival of the species", (meaning humans). In paragraph eight, they go on to say that "...Poisoning of the air, and the principles sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced,". This, at first glance, would seem to be promising. But they go on to say, " present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale....." In other words, pollution can offer a solution to get rid of the population that nuclear war does; and it's already being done, but it would take a generation to a generation and a half to accomplish the desired goal. They go on to explain that the rate of population could be "increased selectively". (paragraph nine) If there was a "modifying of existing programs" that deter the pollution, it could speed up the process to make this solution credible sooner.
Darkbird18 first heard about the “Iron Mountain Report” back in 1997 and had a hard time finding it online and also there where some real “Bad” people online back then that didn’t want anyone to read this information,why? But here it is for all to read and study, the powers that be knew about this study and cover it up with lies and illumination  to make us think it was just some wild Idea that JFK had to spend money but the truth is JFK my have been assassinated   because of this report! What is here on this blog is just the first part of the report, click on the link below to read the hold report and you can download the PDF from here
Iron Mountain Report PDF
Iron Mountain Report: A Hoax or Betrayal?

Technorati Tags: ,,

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...