-Caveat Lector-
http://www.morethanconquerors.simplenet.com/MCF/ckln-hm.htm
Dave Hartley
http://www.Asheville-Computer.com
http://www.ioa.com/~davehart
Article 16432 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups:
alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.
censorship,tk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.education
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part I, Federal Gov't Mind-Control Programs Subvert U.S. Education
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:25:42 GMT
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Followup-To: Follow-up To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: federal government mind-control programs subvert U.S. edcations
Lines: 134
I made the following transcript from a tape recording
of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
WBAI-FM (99.5)
505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
New York, NY 10018 (212) 279-0707
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
GARY NULL:
There's a lot in our educational system that we're not teaching
that should be a part of the curricula. I've invited someone who is
now on the line. My guest is Beverly Eckman. She's an author. She's
and educator. She is a person concerned in the areas of politics,
education and public affairs. She has served as the chief speech
writer for such figures as Richard Carlson, the Director of the
Voice of America, and Chief Justice Warren Burger, and for groups.
She has also written for various publications. Welcome to the
program, Bev. Let's go to some allegations. And I'd like you to
address them in detail, with documentation for each allegation.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Alright. The allegations on educating for the New World Order,
first and foremost, are that the Federal Government is developing
and establishing curriculum in violation of Federal law. The state
governments have the right to establish curriculum, but not the
Federal Government.
Secondly, that testing and curriculum are connected to each other,
and that both are coordinated and funded using Federal dollars
(and that is what took four years to uncover) in such a way that
the Federal Government would pick up on it.
Thirdly, that the U.S. Department of Education is in collusion with
the Carnegie organization -- primarily with the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching (There are others and they all
trade money back and forth. But mainly, it's the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching); and that they are also in
collusion with state education agencies, which they have revamped
and restructured, so that they could help turn around the educational
system in a completely different fashion, dedicating it to
totally different ends, which we can talk about in just a moment.
That brings me right into the fourth allegation: Privacy Act
violations are rampant, particularly with regard to the
computerization of testing and survey devices in conjunction with
the use of social security numbers and other identifiers which
permit data to be linked with the Federal and state computer systems.
And, of course, that does lead to this dossier-building capability
that we can also talk about in just a moment.
The fifth allegation is that state and Federal education agencies
are fraudulently passing off attitudinal, psychological and
behavioral surveys, studies, tests and curricula as academics and
substantive learning. In fact, Bob Gray of the Privacy Office up
there in Washington said that our best case probably was fraud.
He had the fraud hotline, as a matter of fact. And he said that it
was one of the best cases of fraud he'd ever heard.
The sixth allegation -- and this is from the professional literature
associated with the testing and survey devices that we found via
computer. Those learning programs -- when you get the administrative
literature and the interpretive literature -- state plainly what
the thrust of the materials are. But this information is kept from
parents and the casual investigator. In other words, when they
came out of the computer, if they were psychological therapy, it
said so. But nothing like that is stamped on the material once the
teacher has it in hand or when the parents get hold of it.
The seventh allegation is that in the process of refining these
attitudinal, psychological and behavioral strategies that are
being used in the classroom, the Government, through its
tax-supported labs and centers (which is where a lot of this stuff
comes out of) is supporting a policy of irresponsible scientific
experimentation. That is, the Government is subsidizing the
practice of medicine without a license, in effect. The experiments
are poorly controlled, the repercussions are not fully understood,
and the strategies themselves are often not fully accepted by
professionals in the field.
And finally, the last thing: the book alleges that a political
weapon is being created, wittingly or unwittingly, as the result
of computerization, which allows personal information to be linked
in such a way as to generate dossiers on individuals and families,
demographic, religious and ethnic groups.
The way I weave the story together is through a Pennsylvania woman
named Anita Hoag who basically uncovered it because of the complaint
that she lodged back in 1986. And what we found is that the state
bureaucracies, the state education agencies, the way they are
configured today, are serving as the fall-guys. They are really
taking the heat off the Federal Government by making it look like
these are decentralized policies -- that these are state initiatives,
when they're really not.
These initiatives, for instance, to do testings and to set goals
according to behavioral objectives .... these are Federal mandates,
and you have to go very far into it to find that and really hold
that over their heads. And then finally they wil admit, yes these
were Federal mandates. Yes, we had to do this.
GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's look at this in a larger context. What you seem to
be saying is that the Federal Government or certain agencies of
the Federal Government have taken it upon themselves to have a
special agenda in education; in effect, creating a curriculum that
would allow a whole group of people to be educated based upon what
they consider "right thinking", "right philosophy", "right attitudes."
Now, of course, those are going to be "right" based upon the
people who created them.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Exactly.
GARY NULL:
And they are not taking into consideration individual, cultural and
religious differences. They are simply saying: "We all should
think the same way to serve a particular political agenda."
In effect, we are creating a nation (in a lesser form) of a
"Manchurian Candidate" attitude.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Yes, that's correct. That's a good way of putting it.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
continuation)
GARY NULL:
In other words, we want everyone to be in line so that whoever may
be in control economically and politically ..... whatever they
would suggest, whatever policies, programs, platforms or laws they
would pass -- there would be no opposition to it because the
educational system would have KEPT people on "THE RIGHT" side of
the issue, which is THEIR side.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
That's correct. And another thing that they want to do is to choose
the "RIGHT PEOPLE" to be in positions of authority. You don't want
these kids coming out of school and having the "WRONG" attitudes,
but then, to make matters worse, to go into the "WRONG" fields
where they have a lot of influence.
It's sort of like how we choose our potential Olympic champions.
We look for them among the young. And this is, more or less, what
these people are doing too. They're scouting, in many ways,
through these tests. And those are the ones who are going to get
into the best colleges and universities.
They DO track this information on up to your college years and
beyond. Now they can do it even beyond. They haven't, so far, but
they can, as of the past couple of years.
GARY NULL:
Alright. Let's look at some specifics. We can accept, then, that
there is a hidden agenda at the national level where they're
controlling curriculum, which, by law, they're not allowed to
control.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
That's correct.
GARY NULL:
We also know that there are a lot of political implications for
these dossiers that they're keeping on children and their families,
so they can hand-pick the ones who are of the "RIGHT" belief and
exclude those who are of the "WRONG" belief.
So, theoretically, if you were a Jewish Orthodox person, immediately
you're going to be of the "WRONG" belief.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
That's right. In fact, they want to wipe out religion, it seems,
as much as possible. They don't care what religion it is. All
religion is fair game because that, apparently, does not go along
with their agenda at all. But when you say "a political agenda",
we're really saying that a political weapon is being created.
No one knows who is going to be sitting at the helm of world
affairs in another twenty years. We can't look into the crystal
ball and predict that with real accuracy. And these people want to
BE sitting at the head of world affairs in the next twenty years.
This is what they have in mind. They want to be controlling world
affairs, even if they are not physically sitting in that seat.
They want to be able to control that seat.
So this is one thing that I've found that political liberals and
political conservatives, and various religious groups, and what-not
can all agree on. They all hate the idea of this dossier-building.
While some people may think: "Well gee, if a kid's attitude is bad,
change it." This sounds reasonable. And the political liberals,
for example, can go along with this. Even some religious groups
can go along with that part of it. But when you start getting into
the dossier-building capability, then all of a sudden the eyebrows
start going up.
GARY NULL:
But let's back-track for a moment, Bev. Let's say that you are a
conservative or you are liberal, and let's say for our argument's
sake ..... because about seventy-five percent of this audience is
either Catholic or Jewish, and we have a high Orthodox listenership
to this particular show. And this is the most listened-to [radio]
show in America right now. So it's a good sampling [of people] for
what we're going to deal with right now. THESE people -- let's say
these people in this audience; these two particular religious groups
and both conservatives and liberals ..... Now I'm sure that most
people would agree that if someone has an attitude that is
dysfunctional to their values and beliefs which is anti-human --
meaning it denies the quality and virtue of life or spirit or body
-- that they want to take some remedial action. That's why they
listen to this show. If someone is destroying their body with sugar
or with smoking or with alcohol or with over-eating, they want to
correct it. But that's a big difference from someone who is told:
We have an agenda that will take a "WRONG" belief system and
correct it.
Now suddenly, you're getting into the area of: What are you going
to correct about our beliefs?
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Well you're also getting into one other thing too. And that is
"informed consent." The person who wants to change the bad habit
-- the smoking or whatever it happens to be -- he/she is doing
this with full knowledge and understanding. I mean, if he wants to
do this by hypnosis, that's his business. If she knows what she is
going into ..... or in the case of a parent doing it for the child,
parents typically have control over their children. Some parents
do what is wrong. That's true. But we cannot punish all parents
for what a few might do. And so you get into this "informed
consent problem," as well.
GARY NULL:
Alright. Well let's go specifically to this one question:
How are attitudes corrected? In other words, how do they change
the so-called "WRONG" belief, and what do they change it into?
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Well, the way in which it is done is by what is called "strands".
And those are .... I guess the best way to put it is mini-courses,
mini-classes which are inter-disciplinary in nature. They are
spread out through the subject areas; all subject areas: English,
history, whatever. And they're brought in at opportune moments.
They consist of films sometimes. Sometimes it's just a social type
of exercise, like a lifeboat exercise which I'm sure a lot of you
have heard about. Various things like that. And they're brought in
through what is called the "intermediate unit". At least that's
what it's called in Pennsylvania. Some places call it the
"educational special unit" or something like that. Other states
call it by different names, but it all amounts to the same thing.
The "intermediate unit" is a van, and it carries these materials
from one school district to another, and even to private schools
that accept federal funds.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
(continuation)
BEVERYLY ECKMAN:
And those materials do not go through the typical process of
adoption, like text book adoption. They do not have to be passed
by any watch-dog organization, local or otherwise. You can just
take them on through. Now these strands are behavioral in nature.
They are psychological in nature. And it is a way to undercut, in
many cases, the value system.
For example ... I'm going to get real specific here.
Take the value of individualism. Now that is really not a value,
in itself. It is an attitude. The values that UNDERLIE
individualism are what they're going to target. They're not going
to come in taking individualism off the top, so to speak, or
attacking individualism, off the top. What they'll do instead is
to go after self-sufficiency, independence and ambition. Those are
the values or the beliefs -- the sub-structure that supports the
ethic of individualism.
If you have mini-courses scattered throughout all the other
subjects -- hard-hitting, feeling types of exercises and films
that unfailingly portray self-sufficiency, independence and
ambition in an unfavorable light, eventually, you're going to
weaken the sub-structure. And individualism will be history.
What we don't realize today is that the field of psychology HAS
come far enough to be able to do that. Yes, in many cases,
psychology is a quack science, or it's not a true science. BUT,
the behaviorists DO know how to brain-wash selectively. And they
ARE doing it.
If you don't believe it, look at the statistics on youth gangs.
What is a gang? It's a group. And one of the goals that they say
in their interpretive literature is the point of their testing and
their curriculum is "WILLINGNESS TO CONFORM TO GROUP GOALS."
GARY NULL:
That's a DANGEROUS concept!
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Yeah.
GARY NULL:
My God, that means a rule by consensus. Think of all the things
that an uneducated, non-individualistically-thinking society would
agree to. That allows naziism -- that allows fascism to exist.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
You've got it.
GARY NULL:
And look at Germany. Certainly there was no society in the last
hundred years that was more regimented in its need to believe
absolutely in a single principle, and NOT to challenge it. That
was the German educational system. And that was created by a man
named Spora in 1929 and carried forward right through the entire
Third Reich, where you did not have an opportunity in curriculum
to challenge the beliefs. You did not have individualism. You had
complete authoritarianism.
And look at the Japanese. As a culture today, it is extremely
rigidified, racist in the extreme. As a SOCIETY, it's racist.
There are INDIVIDUALS who are not. But anyone who challlenges the
notion should go live there, and you'll see, very blatantly, this
..... it's frequently understated; politically, it certainly is,
for its own survival. But it has an extremely tenacious anger
toward other cultures in its own elitism and its idea of being best.
Women are kept in their place. They are not given equality; not
respected for being multi-dimensional human beings.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
This is true. Of course, it's always under the cover of respecting
diversity and all that kind of stuff. But when you really get into
it, they want the homogenized man [person]. And it's very
interesting now, with the demise of the former Soviet Union, that
they're sticking to this in such a rigid way (I'm talking about
the behaviorists, that is) -- the homogenized man [person].
You know, after all the things that Stalin tried to do, and that
Hitler tried to do in order to get RID of differences and diversity,
and what-not. And it didn't really work because nationalism reared
its ugly head worse than ever.
But still, they're sticking to this idea. And it's very interesting.
GARY NULL:
Well do you see how much there is of that mindset again today in
Germany?
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Yes. It didn't die out. Did it?
GARY NULL:
No. And the consensus vote recently on the skinheads brutalizing,
hurting and killing these poor and homeless immigrants was that
they SUPPORTED this nationalistic fervor. It shows you how
regressive people can be.
And also, think of it this way. Going back to this 60 MINUTES show
last night on the environment. Being in the environmental movement
for twenty-nine years; being with the original Citizens for Clean
Air and all the work and the really tough go we had back then,
just trying to make people aware that they have some responsibility
to their environment, and being looked upon as if you were a nut.
Now it's gotten to the point where collectively, EN MASSE,
anything that is not of the "RIGHT" thinking, meaning that if you
are going to change the environment, you're going to cause job-loss.
That's their knee-jerk reaction. Nothing else. If there is
anything that is not of the "RIGHT" thinking, destroy that which
challenges it. And so, they're willing to burn the homes of their
own friends, their own neighbors. There's a danger that can be
created from a mass socio-pathic .....
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
... a mass mindset. Yes. I think this is the worst part of this.
And, of course, these behaviorists ... they KNOW what they're doing.
They know EXACTLY what they're doing. That's their business.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
And it is to create a mindset that is a mob -- mob temper tantrums,
so to speak, mob rule. Now they call it something else. They call it
"the delphi" technique, or they call it "consensus", but it comes
down to the same thing.
GARY NULL:
Give us an example of how these educators or the behavioral
scientists are doing this.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Okay. Do you mean in curriculum or in testing?
GARY NULL:
In both.
BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Okay. Well let's look at our testing first because I think this
will give us a kind of a hint of what's going on. You know, these
tests are kept very, very secret. A parent can't get hold of them.
A TEACHER can't see them. A United States senator can't even see
them. This is what really tipped us off, in the first place, that
something very peculiar was going on. So let's talk about some of
these tough questions: the ones that they're exempting from
freedom of information and hiding from parents so that the kids,
supposedly, won't know the answers, and so that the validity of
their precious tests won't be compromised.
Well, here's a real toughy:
"Morton has been playing hard all afternoon with his friends.
He comes home a few minutes before supper. If I were Morton,
I would take a shower or a bath before supper when I knew:
A) I had already taken a shower that morning.
B) I didn't smell too bad.
(Notice the grammar on that one.)
C) I would miss my favorite TV show."
Or how about this one:
"Norma is home alone. She gets a headache. She goes to the
medicine cabinet and finds her mother's headache pills. If I
were Norma, I would take one of my mother's pills when
I thought:
A) it was the same kind of headache my mother gets.
B) the pill might stop my headache quickly.
C) my parents might not like me to take it."
You have to think about that one, but you don't have to think
about it too hard if you understand what they're looking for in
all this. And what they're looking for is .... There are six things:
1) Locus of Control: In other words, who controls you? Is it
your parents, yourself or your peers? Basically, these are the
three choices.
2) Willingness to Receive Stimuli: Do you take it all in or
do you shut some of it out?
3) Amenability to Change: Are you flexible, in other words.
Will you change easily or are you going to be a hard-liner?
4) Level of Group Conformity: The way they put it is,
"willingness to conform to group goals and willingness to obey
authority," which sounds good (the "obey authority" part) until
you realize that the authority they're talking about is not
necessarily an authority figure who is recognized, such as
parents or the police or something of that nature. They're
talking about any figure that passes itself off as an
authority figure.
So these are the things they're looking for. And if you look at
these questions IN THAT LIGHT, then you see something totally
different in them.
Here is another one:
"I was elected class president. I came home to tell my parents
the good news. They told me that my dad had taken a job out of
the state and we were going to move in two weeks. So I had to
withdraw from school and move. If this happened to you, how
much time would you spend on each thing below?
1. being upset
2. trying to find someone to stay with, so you could remain
in school
3. planning a going-away party
4. fighting with your parents
5. reading about the place you were going to move to"
"When I make a plan to do something, something usually goes wrong.
Check one: very true of me, mostly true of me, mostly untrue
of me, very untrue of me."
I mean, we're laughing, but it really isn't funny. And there is
page-after-page of this stuff. Some of it is simply questions like:
"How many, or what kinds of books and magazines are in your house?"
and they give you choices.
"How many times a week do you eat breakfast?"
"Do your parents or guardians enjoy hearing about school?"
"Do they think the school is doing a good job?"
"A person is of a different religion than his or her church.
In this situation I would feel either: very comfortable,
comfortable, slightly uncomfortable or very uncomfortable."
It just goes on and on. In Texas, we got one that says:
"How many Christians are on your street?"
"What is your least favorite country?"
And that is a multiple-choice question, by the way. And this one
you will really like -- especially your audience, I think.
There is a list of nineteen nationalities here:
Irish-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Italian-Americans (so on and
so forth), Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Eastern European-Americans,
Japanese-Americans, (and so on).
Then the questions follow. And here are some of the questions:
"Which of the above do you think is responsible for the decline
of the U.S. economy?"
"Which of the above do you think is more likely to raise a large
family; that is, eight or more children?"
"Which of the above do you think is most subject to criminal activity?"
"Which of the above do you think would be most likely to
eliminate an entire race?"
How about THAT one?
"Who most influences the way you feel about other races?"
"If you could eliminate an entire race, would you?"
"If `yes', which one?"
"Have you, or would you ever physically assault someone because
of their sexual preference?"
..... and so on and so on.
(to be continued)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
please assist in its dissemination by posting it to other
bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
both on and off campus.
John DiNardo
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
