Treasury are now working to finalize that part of the plan. It is yet one more doomsday mechanism that, once it gains sufficient momentum, will pass the critical point of no return.
The Korean War was the first time American soldiers fought under UN authority. That trend has accelerated and already includes military actions in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Somalia, and Haiti. By the time this book gets to print, there undoubtedly will be more. While the American military is being absorbed into the UN, steps are also underway to hand over American atomic weapons.
When that happens, the doomsday mechanism will become activated. It will be too late to escape.
Likewise, the IMF/World Bank is already functioning—in
conjunction with the Federal Reserve System—as a world central bank. The American economy is being deliberately exhausted through foreign giveaways and domestic boondoggles. The object is, not to help those in need or to preserve the environment, but to
THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN
The substance of these stratagems can be traced to a think-tank study released in 1966 called the
Although the origin of the report is highly debated, the document itself hints that it was commissioned by the Department of Defense under Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara and was produced by the Hudson Institute located at the base of Iron Mountain in Croton-on-Hudson, New York. The Hudson Institute was founded and directed by Herman Kahn, formerly of the Rand Corporation.
Both McNamara and Kahn were members of the CFR.
The self-proclaimed purpose of the study was to explore
various ways to "stabilize society." Praiseworthy as that may sound, a reading of the
DOOMSDAY MECHANISMS
517
It was stated at the beginning of the report that morality was not an issue. The study did not address questions of right or wrong; nor did it deal with such concepts as freedom or human rights.
Ideology was not an issue, nor patriotism, nor religious precepts.
Its sole concern was how to perpetuate the existing government.
The report said:
Previous studies have taken the desirability of peace, theimportance of human life, the superiority of democratic institutions,the greatest "good" for the greatest number, the "dignity" of the'
individual, the desirability of maximum health and longevity, andother such wishful premises as axiomatic values necessary for thejustification of a study of peace issues. We have not found them so. Wehave attempted to apply the standards of physical science to ourthinking, the principal characteristic of which is not quantification, asis popularly believed, but that, in Whitehead's words,"... it ignores alljudgments of value; for instance, all esthetic and moral judgments."1