Well, any notion of that occurring through technological control is totally incorrect. In a Resource-based Economy the control of people through technology would not exist. Technology would be to monitor the Earth, not people.
Machine automation is already doing that sort of stuff. This is not some magical mystical notion.
Machines can easily keep an abundant supply of resources up for us.
I think you are also completely confused about what a resource based economy is. A resource based economy is feudalism and amounts to intergenerational slavery by those who believe that the mass of mankind has been born with saddles on their backs, with a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately.
Please git urself edumacated as to what resource management actually is:
George Hunt initially wanted to buy a ticket but this proved to be much too expensive ($650). At the conference he noticed it had very little to do with the conventional environment movement and was surprised to see people like Maurice Strong, Edmund de Rothschild (Pilgrims Society), David Rockefeller (Pilgrims Society), and James A. Baker (Pilgrims Society; Cap & Gown; trustee American Institute for Contemporary German Studies; Atlantic Council of the United States; National Security Planning Group; Bohemian Grove; CFR; Carlyle; advisor George W. Bush in his 2000 election). In his two videos, produced in 1989 and 1992, he plays audio recordings of several of the 1987 speakers, including Maurice Strong and Edmund de Rothschild (71). There's not really a reason to label these recordings a hoax (to use UFO community language) and subsequently denounce George Hunt as a fraud. In fact, Hunt could hardly have done a better job at presenting his evidence. However, some of the evidence this person has uncovered is so amazing, that most people will remain skeptical (like me), no matter how much evidence is presented. If what Hunt is claiming is true, then it confirms the overall picture that has been sketched in this article. First take a look at the following Fourth World Wilderness Conference (1987) statement from David Lang (spelling unknown; a Montreal banker, according to Hunt):
"I suggest therefore that this be sold not through a democratic process - that would take too long and devour far too much of the funds - to educate the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the earth. We have to take almost an elitist program, [so] that we can see beyond our swollen bellies, and look to the future in timeframes and in results which are not easily understood, or which can be, with intellectual honesty, be reduced down to some kind of simplistic definition."
It is impossible to claim knowledge of what a resource based economy is without understanding the leaked report from Iron Mountain: http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/iron_mountain.htm
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 IRON MOUNTAIN REPORT
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.
FUNCTION OF WAR / SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR
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, "...by 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.
Paragraph ten stresses the fact that even though some of the alternate enemies mentioned may seem unlikely, they are sure that one must be found. It must be of "...credible quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come without social disintegration. Plain English? There must be some type of "disaster" found that will unite the nations to come under one roof.
The "function of war" in this section is, in the author of this report's opinion, an insult to human intelligence. In the third paragraph, they discuss the fact that military service has a "patriotic" priority in society. This as an idea needs to be "maintained for its own sake". It can be used as a "...control device over the hostile, nihilistic, and potential unsettling elements of society in transition, (meaning, though they don't use the term, people) the draft can again be defended, and quite convincingly, as a 'military' necessity." They go on in the fourth paragraph that the "...armed forces in every civilization have provided....state-supported haven .....for the 'unemployable'..." They go on to comment that a replacement for this "function of war" must "involve a real risk of personal destruction..." If the substitute doesn't provide a believable life and death threat, it will not serve the "...socially organizing function of war." (paragraph 12)
In the "substitution for the function of war" there were two critical classifications. In order for there to be a stable society in a world of peace, the following tow criteria would be needed:
an effective substitute for military institutions that neutralize destabilizing social elements" (which means neutralize anti-social people) This would be essential for "social control", and
a credible motivational surrogate for war that can insure social cohesiveness", which would be the basic way to adapt human drives to what the society needs. (paragraph one)
One possible solution to control "potential enemies of society" (paragraph six) would be to reintroduce slavery. They asserted that the "traditional association of slavery" should not blind us to "..its adaptability to advanced forms of social organization..." They acknowledge that the "Western moral and economic values" do not line up with slavery. But it is possible to develop a "....sophisticated form of slavery..." that may "..be an absolute prerequisite for social control in a world of peace..." They maintain that the first "logical" step would be the "adoption of some form of 'universal' military service."
In paragraph seven, they comment that the "'alternate enemy' must imply a more immediate, tangible, and indirectly felt threat of destruction." This enemy must justify taking and paying a "blood price" in the wide area of human concern. They go on into paragraph eight to say, "...inconsiderable actual sacrifice of life; the construction of an up-to-date mythological or religious structure for this purpose would present difficulties in our era,...certainly be considered." They go on to discuss the development of "blood games" (paragraph nine) to effectively control individual aggressive impulses. To be realistic, a ritual of this type might be "socialized" like the Spanish Inquisition and the "witch trials of other periods". The purposes would be for "social purification", and "State security". Though this type of thing is doubtful, it is "...considerable less fanciful than the wishful notion of many peace planners that a lasting condition of peace can be brought about without the most painstaking examination of every possible surrogate for the essential functions of war." They considered this, "in a sense" the quest for "William Jame's 'moral equivalent of war'."
This "function of war" is put in a way very degrading to man. It starts out in paragraph one with, "Man, like all other animals". Man is brought down to the level of beasts. They go on to comment that, "To forestall the inevitable historical cycles of inadequate food supply, post- Neolithic man destroys surplus members of his own species by organized warfare." It gets better in paragraph two, where man is compared "in a limited degree" with rats. This is because they kill their own kind.
One of the "functions of war" they state, has "...served to help assure the (survival) of the human species." (paragraph three) They go on to say that in nature, it is survival of the fittest; the "inferior" disappear. With war, this function is reversed, because those who fight and die during wars, are "in general its (its meaning man) biologically stronger members." In paragraph six, they state: "Conventional methods of warfare would almost surely prove inadequate, in this event, to reduce the consuming population to a level consistent with survival of the species." Species, of course meaning man. So conventional warfare may not be able to kill enough people. They go on to say (paragraph seven) that, "The second relevant factor is the efficiency of modern methods of mass destruction. Even if their use is not required to meet a world population crisis, they offer, perhaps paradoxically, the first opportunity in the history of man to halt the regressive genetic effects of natural selection by war."
They have some interesting ideas for "substitutes for the functions of war". Since war has shortcomings as a way for "selective population control", they believe that coming up with substitutes for this function " should be comparatively simple". (paragraph one) They believe that even though war has not "been genetically progressive", it cannot be fairly faulted as a "system of gross population control to preserve the species".
They believe to have a "universal requirement" for procreation be limited to "artificial insemination "would be fully adequate substitute control for population levels". Conception and embryonic growth would take place under laboratory conditions. This type of "reproductive system" would have the advantage of "being susceptible of direct eugenic management". (Sounds like a "Brave New World" to me.) When this report was written, steps to have "total control of conception with a variant of the ubiquitous 'pill', via water supplies or certain essential foodstuffs, off set by a controlled 'antidote'" was already being developed: by teams of experimental biologists in Massachusetts, Michigan, and California, Mexico and the U.S.S.R. (paragraph four)
This solution, they realize, cannot come about a substitute for war while there is still war. The reason? "...excess population is war material." (paragraph five) As long as there is even "a remote possibility of war" societies "must maintain a supportable population" even if it effects the economy.
CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC
The "function of war" wouldn't make too much difference in the area of art. They do believe that it has a role "..as the fundamental determinant of culture values." (paragraph two) Right now art shows "...The exaltation of bravery, the willingness to kill and risk death in tribal warfare".
The "function of war" concerning science is a different story. What motivates the development of science on all levels.
A "substitution for the function of war" for art would simply be for art to change. It could be used as previously "in a few primitive peace-oriented system". (paragraph three) Art would be "reassigned" to "...decoration, entertainment, or ply...". it would be "entirely free of the burden of expressing the socio-moral values and conflicts of a war-oriented society..."
In science a "substitution for the function of war" could be to go into a "giant space research program" (paragraph four) They have found, if all war threats were to end tomorrow, the quest for scientific knowledge could go forward, without slowing down for "perhaps two decades". (paragraph five) There are many "unresolved" social issues that can be researched and dealt with.
We have combined section's five and six to show you that what the "experts" said the "functions of war" are in our society along with some of their "substitutions for the functions of war". Section five ended with some extra comments that we will summarize here.
They consider war a "general social release" (paragraph two) It provides "the release and redistribution of undifferentiated tensions". In other words, a type of therapy. It is a "generational stabilizer" (paragraph three) that enables the "deteriorating older generation" to "maintain control of the younger, destroying it if necessary". It clears ideology. It is a basis for international understanding.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Since war is not a "political issue" but used as a means of control, if an "era of peace" were to come, there would have to be drastic changes. Section Seven gives the "bottom line".
War has provided a dependable system to maintain economies. Any substitute would have to be able to take the place of what war does to maintain economies. There would have to be a way to take care of the "waste" war does that will permit it to be independent of the normal supply and demand economy. It must be subject to "arbitrary political control". (paragraph three-Substitutes for Functions of War: Criteria)
In the political aspect, war has been the foundation for a stable government. Political authority is accepted. War has made it able "to maintain necessary class distinctions". It also ensures the "subordination of the citizen to the state" though the concept of nationhood. (paragraph three, functions of war) The substitute for war must make it so an external menace would require people to accept the political authority.
The sociological function has been able to control dangerous social dissidence and destructive tendencies. It has been able to motivate human behavior with social allegiance. To replace this, a credible omnipresent and understood fear of personal destruction must be generated. This fear must be big enough to transcend the value of an individual human to the greater good of the whole.
The ecological function has been used to maintain a balance between gross human population and the supplies available for its survival. The substitute must insure the survival of the species. (man)
SUBSTITUTES FOR THE FUNCTIONS OF WAR: MODELS
Here are a few examples these "experts" came up with in order to replace some of the functions of war. The economic function can be replaced with an in depth social-welfare program. This program can be directed towards the improvement of the conditions of human live. An unreachable space research program is another option. Disarmament inspection system with variants of such a system.
The political function can be a omnipresent (virtually omnipotent) international police force. There should be an established and recognized extraterrestrial menace. They recommend massive global and environmental pollution. They even suggest fictitious alternate enemies.
The sociological function (they call the Control function) can be programs derived from using the Peace Corps as a model. Slavery in a modern, sophisticated form is another option. A motivational function to get control can be intensified environmental pollution. Also, making new religious or other mythologies. Socially oriented blood games is another option.
Since war isn't choosey on who dies, the ecological function can be a comprehensive program of applied eugenics. (Plain English: breeding superior races)
I am going to end the summary of this report here. Yes, there is much more in the report, but I believe you get the jest of it. I am going on to bring this report into what is happening today.
ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS BEING FOLLOWED?
This report was concluded in 1966. President Kennedy was shot before he could explain what he was talking about at Columbia University. Johnson ordered this Report to be sealed. The "experts" recommended that no one, except those who needed to know, be exposed to the contents of this report. One man, to whom the American people owe a debt of gratitude, thought we had a right to know. Let's take a look at what has been going on in America in the past 30 years. Are we being manipulated and conditioned to accept a New World Order from an outline of 15 experts? (Because of lack of space, I will be summarizing. I encourage people to further investigate any examples given to verify).
I found it very interesting that these "experts" took all moral issues out of their evaluations. Man was brought down to the level of animals, like a herd of cattle that needed to have decided what was best for the greater good of the herd. Who would have to be slaughtered and who could be used to increase the herd? What could be done to get rid of the excess members of the herd? What about the potentially "criminal" cattle who would not go with what the owners decided would be best?
This Report made us to be pawns that have been used to benefit the elite. Great study and care was taken as what to do to re-condition these pawns to a whole different type of thinking. These pawns who have been conditioned so long to think one way. Though the types of things I will be discussing are happening all over the world, I will be mainly talking about America. There couldn't be a New World Order if America didn't fall first.
Since the legalizing of abortion, over twenty years ago, there have been over 36 million Americans murdered before they could be born. That is more Americans than have died in all the conflicts America has been involved with all put together. American's have been conditioned to believe that this is not "murder" but is "choice".
For Desert Storm, our soldiers had to have shots to "protect them against chemical warfare". These shots were the germs of botchulism and amthrax. Since then over 7000 of our best service men have died. see: The Resnick Interview with Peter Kawaja
Euthanasia and the "right to die with dignity" are being pushed so the "quality of life" can be improved.
Extermination camps are being built to do away with "undesirables".
Aids is a government made disease that the spread of it is encouraged by our government.
GLOBAL PEACE KEEPERS
The United Nations (UN) has a military that goes around the world as "peace keepers". The members of the UN forces come from all countries. These "peace keepers" are also stationed in the United States in the closed bases throughout the country. They are also in some of the bases that are opened. Foreign tanks and vehicles are coming to America and secretly being painted white (UN color) in various military installations around the country.
The US is disarming their military and closing down military bases all over the country. Our president can sign an executive order that will put the military under the command of the UN. US soldiers are already having to put aside their oath and take the oath of the UN forces.
Racism is being pushed over the media and though the government. Should riots develop, as in other countries, we will need a "peace keeping" force in the US. They are ready.
NEW RELIGIONS? BLOOD SACRIFICES?
The New Age will be the only acceptable religion of the NWO. It is everything against Christianity and has infiltrated every area of our lives.
Satanism and other Occult religions are already having ritual human sacrifices.
When this was written, over 30 years ago they acknowledged that this would be hard to convince the people of. Even with the UFO sightings that had already been put out. What has happened in the past 30 years?
Well, there have been "alien abductions", and many more UFO sightings. To top it off, there are UFO clubs where people who have "seen aliens" or "been abducted" can get together for conventions.
To top that off, we have had over 25 years of Star Trek, which has enforced a one world government. Throughout both series and the movies they have the "New Age" philosophy. (New Age will be the only philosophy accepted by the NWO) These folks have all kinds of experience with various races on other planets. see: Dirty Watchtower Secrets. // Like Father Like Son: George W. Bush and the Fake Alien Invasion
Star Wars has also conditioned people to believe in a "galaxy far far away". These reinforce extra terrestrial life on other planets. The two movies, "V" and "V the Final Battle" and then the series shows and invasion from another planet. The movie "Alien" shows this also. The world would have to unite, should the "movies and television programs" come to life with a "real" enemy. see: "War of the Worlds" Mind Control Experiment - New World Order Test Run
There is not scientific evidence available to prove all the environmental problems our government it trying to push on us. There is no such problem as "global warming" for example. But, people such as Vice President Gore and "NWO Lieutenant" Rockefeller are coming out with books that if we don't unite as a world, to work on the environmental problems, we will not survive. (Fictitious Enemy?) see: Global Warming's Dirty New Secret // Global Warming Claims Based on False Data
MORE FICTITIOUS ENEMIES
It is interesting that the media, with the help of the government, is coming up with all these "potentially dangerous" groups of people? These extremist groups, such as Christians, Militia members, talk show hosts, right wing radicals, conservatives etc., are being mentioned regularly as "potential terrorists". Between this and the racism the government is pushing, it will make it easy for them to call a police state, and round up all the people who disagree with them. Those considered to be "enemies of the state". see: "Project Megiddo"
Anyone on welfare is already a slave to the government. They are working on legislation where these people will have to work for their benefits. After 1996, (around May) these benefits will not come in the form of cash or food stamps. There will be a debit card. This will stop "welfare fraud" and give the government more control over it's welfare slaves.
There are also several labor camps built, ready to activated. These labor camps will be for strong prisoners who are considered "dissidents".
These experiments are already done on aborted babies. Thanks to a bill signed into law by Pres. Clinton to support fetal experiments.
What many folks don't know about are the bio-spheres being built in the mountains. (The two I know about are, in Washington state and North Carolina.) No one can have access to these places now as they are surrounded by guards. Bio-sphere is the UN term for Colony. It is rumored that these "colonies" are being used for breeding of the "superior race".
There are also concentration camps built that have "storage facilities" for human organs. These camps will be used for genetic experiments.
I would like to comment that in all the reports this author has done, and all the information I have read, Iron Mountain has had the biggest impact on me. The fact that a few men can come up with a plan to bring a "once free nation" into fascism upsets me. The fact that many of their suggestions are being followed makes me angry. The fact the majority of the American people don't know, and don't want to know is very unbelievable to me.
Read the report yourself: www.projectcamelot.org/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.pdf
Entire report in html... http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/report_fromi_iron_mountain/report_from_iron_mountain_1.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Roger Rusk, brother of globalist Dean Rusk, wrote The Other End of the World. On page 206 Roger Rusk writes...
[Full text of the book: http://reactor-core.org/other-end.html ]
"A few years ago Mr. Robert McNamara retired as head of the World Bank. At a dinner in his honor in Washington, Mr. David Rockefeller made the following revealing statement:
The world that we have worked to construct is threatened. The gravity of this moment, when Mr. McNamara and others are about to leave their posts while a new administration re-examines American foreign aid policy, is great. If we are going to save the international institutions we have put in place, the moment is now or never, for the struggle between the old guard and the new is going far beyond the struggle for capital appropriations. It is going to endanger the new world order which we have based on the alliance between Wall Street and Washington.
While we men of firms and banks organize international channels of economy and raw materials, the government is now building its own diplomatic and economic bridges between Washington and foreign governments. By our methods, our governments contribute to the stability and economic growth of the world, our multinationals benefit, and when it is necessary, they contribute their political support. Now radical conservatives are attempting to destroy all that in seeking first and foremost to serve the national interests of the United States'.
Notice such phrases as "international institutions we have put in place," new world order which we have based on the the alliance between Wall Street and Washington," and the last sentence which castigates those who seek to serve the national interests of the United States. In the face of a statement like this, can there be any lingering doubts that there exists a financial superstructure over the governments of the world which is international, multinational and supranational in scope?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Iron Mountain: Blueprint For Tyranny (2hrs 21mins)