False Prophets RATionalizing False Profits
Council on Foreign Relations Exercise in Operations Research
The groups to which one belongs create powerful barriers to manipulation and outside control. Resistance to propaganda arise from the existence of group norms in which attitudes are anchored. People reject or accept a persuasive message according to whether or not it will cause them to deviate from the norms of their family, work group, or faith. An effective psychological warfare technique for weakening your targets resistance to manipulation and outside control is attacking and destroying their faith.1
In TRAGEDY AND HOPE, Quigley writes about a British philosophical doctrine called "rationalization." It appeared at the end of the 19th Century, the same time the Rhodes-Milner secret society was formed. According to Quigley, rationalization, "was first used ... to solve problems of mass production, and led, step by step, to assembly-line techniques in which regulated quantities of materials (parts), power, labor, and supervision were delivered ... to produce a continuous outflow of some final product...Naturally, such a process serves to dehumanize the productive process and, since it also seeks to reduce every element in the process to a repetitive action, it leads eventually to an automation in which every supervision is electronic and mechanical." 2
Quigley explains, "From the basically engineering problem of production, rationalization gradually spread into the more dominant problem of business. From maximizing production, it shifted to maximizing profits. ...As in so many other innovations, the introduction of rationalization into war was begun by the British and then taken over on an enormous scale, by the Americans. Its origin is usually attributed to the efforts of Professor P. M.S. Blackett (Nobel Prize 1948) to apply radar to antiaircraft guns. From there Blackett took the technique into antisubmarine defense whence it spread, under the name 'Operational Research' into many aspects of the War effort..First news of the success of Operations Research in Britain was brought to the United States by President Conant in 1940 and formally introduced by Vannevar Bush, as chairman of the New Weapons Committee of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in 1942. By the end of the war, the technique had spread extensively through the American war effort, and with the arrival of peace, became an established civilian profession. The best known example of this is the RAND Corporation, a private research and development firm, under contract to the United States Air Force..."3
Quigley continues, "A great impetus has been given to rationalization of society in the postwar world by...new developments...The newest of these was probably game theory, worked out by a Hungarian refugee mathematician, John von Neumann, at the Institute for Advanced Study. This applied mathematical techniques to situations in which persons sought conflicting goals in a nexus of relationships governed by rules...The basic work in the new field was the book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern (Princeton 1944)...These, and related techniques, are now transforming methods of operation and behavior in all aspects of life and bringing on a large-scale rationalization of human life which is becoming one of the most significant characteristics of Western Civilization in the twentieth century."4 Among Von Neumann's colleagues were Einstein, Oppenheimer, and Council on Foreign Relations members George F. Keenan, and Abraham Pais. Pais became Einstein's biographer. The Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton was part of a power structure established between the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London and US Council on Foreign Relations that "would penetrate deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy..."5
Quigley tells us "the mobilization of rationalization under the Office of Scientific Research and Development and the National Defense Research Committee by those two Massachusetts Yankees, Bush and Conant, is one of the miracles of the war." Quigley's got it wrong, given the amount of American tax-payer dollars Bush and Conant were in control of ($460 million), the miracle would have been not mobilizing "rationalization." In the 1940's $460 million dollars could get a lot of scientists mobilized to "rationalizing" the suffering death and destruction of countless millions of human beings -- especially if the scientists were the ones paid to research, produce, and study the war machines,and not the ones paid to use the wars machines.
Conspicuously absent from Quigley's study of "rationalization" is the role of Psychological Warfare in Operations Research. Between 1951-58 the Johns Hopkins University Operations Research Office, Baltimore Maryland, compiled a selection of psychological warfare case studies. Morris Janowitz, a prominent Army Psychological Warfare Division staff member suggested the project. The casebook would be used to train individuals assigned to the field of international communications and psychological warfare. Dr. Janowitz worked at the Institute fur Sozialforschug and the University of Michigan.6
William E. Daugherty lead the effort. During World War II Daugherty worked in US Marine Intelligence. Daugherty was responsible for ad hoc improvisations in psychological warfare within the division's zone of action on Okinawa. In 1951 the Director of the Johns Hopkins University Operations Research Office assigned Daugherty to assist the Eighth US Army in implementing a revitalized and expanded psychological warfare program in Korea.7
The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland published "A Psychological Warfare Casebook" in 1958. In the preface Daugherty writes, "The Preparation of this casebook was undertaken by the Operations Research Office as the third in a series of three manuals (other two: ORO-T-324, "The Nature of Psychological Warfare," and ORO-T-222, "Target Analysis and Media in propaganda to Audiences Abroad") designed to serve as training guides and reference sources for personnel assigned to or interested in psychological warfare planning and operations. Although this casebook was prepared primarily to meet the particular needs of Army personnel, it early became evident that it would be impracticable to dissociate the foreign propaganda activities of psychological warfare personnel in the Army from those in the Navy and Air Force and from such civilian agencies as the World War II Office of War Information (OWI) or the present-day US Information Agency (USIA). Thus "psychological warfare" as defined and used in this study, is an all-inclusive term. As used in this casebook the term encompasses both peacetime and wartime activities and is designed to support both military and political operations..."8
In the Acknowledgements Daugherty writes,"Throughout the many months it has taken to collect, organize, and tailor the accounts appearing in this casebook the Office of Chief of Special Warfare (previously the Office of the Chief of Psychological Warfare), US Army, has frequently and continuously expressed an interest in the early completion of the work. The initial planning for this casebook was undertaken during the period that the late Maj Gen Robert A. McClure served as Chief of Psychological Warfare (1951-1953). This work was brought to a conclusion during the tour of duty of Brig Gen William C. Bullock as Chief of Psychological Warfare (1953-1956)..."9
The Johns Hopkins University Operations Research Office "Psychological Warfare Casebook" was reviewed by the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air force, the Department of State, the US Information Agency, the Human Resource Office - George Washington University, and RAND Corporations Social Science Division. Among the reviewers was Dr. Paul M. A. Linebarger, Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University. Daugherty writes, "Although the term "psychological warfare" gained wide acceptance in military circles in World War II its usage in postwar literature came into being slowly...the first American author to use the term formally as the title of a book was Professor Paul M. A. Linebarger..."10 The Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies was established by Council on Foreign Relations founding father Christian Herter and CFR member Paul Nitze.
In 1936 Hadley Cantril and DeWitt Poole founded a publication called Public Opinion Quarterly. Harwood Childs was editor, Cantril was associate editor. Poole was a State Department expert in anti-communist propaganda. Poole became chief of the Foreign Nationalities Branch of the Office of Strategic Services. Poole directed OSS efforts to recruit agents from immigrant communities. The agents analyzed foreign language publications and spied on their neighbors.11
The Public Opinion Quarterly board of editors included veteran psychological warfare experts Harold Lasswell, Paul Lazarsfeld and Frank Stanton. DeWitt Poole, would become president of the National Committee for a Free Europe, one of the CIA's largest single propaganda efforts. CFR member Stanton directed the Free Europe Fund, a CIA proprietary corporation, that laundered the money for Poole's National Committee psycho-political operations.12
The CIA Office of General Counsel is a specialized CIA support unit. The General Counsel is the legal adviser to the CIA. The General Counsel establishes proprietary corporations for the CIA. In intelligence jargon a proprietary company is a corporation ( aka a "devised facility") set up for a clandestine operation. Legal relationships, handled by the General Counsel included contracts, leases, or other obligations. The CIA Office of General Counsel is made up of Council on Foreign Relations "Wall Street and Washington Bankers and Lawyers." These bankers and corporation lawyers make wonderful second-story men.
CIA proprietary corporations have evolved into "legitimate" businesses controlled by the CIA. They sell stock, have stockholders, produce a product, make a profit, have loses; however, they hire both civilian workers and CIA operatives and analysts. The CIA insiders are a small minority -- only about 100-200 CIA operatives are needed to control a 10,000 person organization. Very few of the 10,000 employees are aware of the 100-200 CIA operatives in their midst. CIA and Justice department lawyers handle the proprietary corporations legal affairs. CIA and Justice Department accountants keep the proprietary corporations books. Many of these accountants work for the big accounting houses. The proprietary corporation has largely replaced the Foundation as a source of income for covert operations -- carried out abroad and on American citizens at home.
The CIA operatives and analysts lead double lives. They double as operatives and analysts as needed. Otherwise they perform their civilian activities. Many of the covert operations carried out by the operatives that work in these corporations are covert operations against American citizens. Some of the CIA operatives have no idea what is really going on. They are kept from seeing the big "picture." The need for the secrecy is "national security."
Harold Lasswell carried out the first detailed descriptive studies of major propaganda campaigns, focusing on the communications issued by national elites during World War I and by totalitarian movements that tried to influence the masses during the great depression. Lasswell formulated a set of theoretical categories for analyzing the effects of persuasive communications and initiated development of systematic techniques of content analysis. Paul Lazarsfeld worked out new methods for investigating the impact of mass media on voting behavior and beliefs, judgments, and values of the mass audience. Using poll data from US election campaigns and surveys of public reactions to radio programs Lazarsfeld and his colleagues described the complex communication networks and cross pressures in modern society. Their studies (Lazarsfeld et. al. 1944; Katz & Lazarsfeld 1955) highlight the influential role of local opinion leaders, who function as "gatekeepers" by promoting or rejecting evaluative judgments transmitted in the mass media by political parties, business organizations, public welfare authorities, and intellectuals.13
Council on Foreign Relations member Walt Whitman Rostow studied at Yale, became a Rhodes scholar, studied at Ballliol College at Oxford (1936-1938). In 1940 Rostow returned to Yale and received a PHD. Rostow joined the Office of Strategic Services after Pearl Harbor. He worked for the OSS research and analysis branch on studies of the Soviet Economy. After the war Rostow returned to England and taught American History at Oxford. In the 50's Rostow returned to the US to teach at MIT. Was Rostow doubling as an intelligence operative and analyst as needed?14
After World War II, the Ford Foundation became a major player in funding covert foreign policy operations. The institute most involved in classified research was RAND Corporation, set up by the Air Force in 1948. The interlocks between the trustees at RAND, and the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations were so numerous that the Reece Committee listed them in its report (two each for Carnegie and Rockefeller, and three for Ford). Ford gave one million dollars to RAND in 1952 alone, at a time when the chairman of RAND was simultaneously the president of Ford Foundation. Conspicuously absent from the Reece committee report were the interlocks between the Council on Foreign Relations and trustees at RAND, and the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations.15
In the 50's the CIA established the Center for International Studies (CENIS) at MIT. Assistant CIA Director Max Millikan directed CENIS. CFR member Rostow joined CENIS and became a paid National Security Council consultant for CFR member Eisenhower.16 In the mid-50's the Ford Foundation gave CENIS $850,000 for communications research. A planning committee chaired by Hans Speier directed the research. Speier was the RAND Corporation's director of social science and research.17
John's Hopkins University Operations Research Office Psychological Warfare Casebook reviewers included Council on Foreign Relations members, Drs. W. Phillips Davison and Alexander George of RAND Corporations Social Science Division. Davison had been chief of the Special Defense Unit Propaganda Analysis, German Subsection during WWII. Davison was on staff to the US Department of Justice, and the Psychological Warfare Division of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Forces of the Office of Strategic Services. From 1948-1950 CFR member Davison edited PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY.18
In the spring of 1956 and the fall of 1958 PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY published two special editions devoted to articles on psychological warfare studies. Ithiel de Sola Pool and Frank Bonilla edited the 1956 edition; Daniel Lerner the 1958 edition. Pool, Bonilla, and Lerner worked for CENIS. The 1956 edition was titled "Studies in Political Communications." The 1958 edition was titled "Attitude Research in Modernizing Areas." Desegregation of schools in Little Rock, Arkansas, was a CENIS "Attitude Research" study.19
During WWII James P. Warburg was Deputy Director of the Overseas Branch of the Office of War Information. Warburg was also Special Assistant to the Director of the Coordinator of Information. Warburg was a banker and author. Warburg contributed to the Johns Hopkins University Office of Operations Research Psychological Warfare Casebook. In UNWRITTEN TREATY (1946), Warburg writes,
"It cannot be stated with sufficient emphasis that information is one thing - propaganda quite another.
The purpose of spreading information is to promote the functioning of man's reason.
The purpose of propaganda is to mobilize certain of man's emotions in such a way that they will dominate his reason...20
In 1959, Public Opinion Quarterly published an article by CFR member W. Phillips Davison titled "On the effects of Communication." Davison's article reduces the purpose of communication to a collection of sleight of mind techniques for manipulating an audience to mobilize man's emotions so as to dominate his reason. Davison writes,
"The communicator's audience is not a passive recipient - it cannot be regarded as a lump of clay to be molded by the master propagandist ...[The audience] must get something from the manipulator if he is to get something from them. A bargain is involved. Sometimes, it is true, the manipulator is able to lead his audience into a bad bargain...But audiences, too, can drive a hard bargain..."
Understatement is a sleight of mind technique used by a master propagandist. Davison understates the master propagandist's effectiveness. The master propagandist is expert at leading his audience into a bad bargain. The master propagandist is expert at creating a reality world in which his audience will be manipulated not to act in their own best interest but in the best interest of the propagandist. Included in Davison's examples of how "communications can lead to adjustive behavior." are the overseas studies of Hadley Cantril and Lloyd Free.21
Hadley Cantril and Lloyd Free were Princeton University Social Psychologists, researchers, and members of the intelligence community. CFR member Nelson Rockefeller funded them to develop psycho-political policy strategies and techniques. Free was one of the first "country team" Public Affairs Officers. In 1947 Free was Special assistant to the Director of the State Department's Office of International Information.22
In "How Nations See Each Other." (1953) Cantril writes about a tool to investigate people's perception of their nationality and other nationalities. The tool became known as the Buchanan-Cantril "Adjective Check List." It contained twelve adjectives: Hard-working; Intelligent; Practical; Generous; Brave; Progressive; Self-Controlled; Peace-Loving; Conceited; Cruel; Domineering; Backward. It was based on the observation people tend to ascribe to their group a set of characteristics different from those ascribed to other groups. The resulting self-image is predominantly flattering, while their picture of "others" is strongly influenced by how much they perceive those others to be like themselves. The relative "similarity" or dissimilarity" between group stereotypes is a useful indicator of the degree of like or dislike between groups or nations.23
The Council on Foreign Relations War and Peace Studies Peace and Aims Group used the Buchannan-Cantril "Adjective Check-List" to "investigate the claims of different European nations, the relationship between the individual national claims, and their bearing both on current foreign policy of the United States and on the eventual postwar settlement.." Members of the Peace and Aims team would question "competent political and economic representatives of a particular nation or group of nations [who] presented their aims and aspirations." The Adjective "Check-List" was used to learn about a nations self-image, and its perception of other nations; their friends and foes and America's friends and foes. This information was supplied to the Council on Foreign Relations run State Department. They used it to script carefully planned psycho-political operations focused at target nations manipulating their actions and adjusting their behavior to obtain Council on Foreign Relations goals. The United States of America was among nations targeted.24
Walter Lippmann was a member of the first US Intelligence Organization the INQUIRY, attended the Paris Peace Conference, and was a founding father of the Council on Foreign Relations, the American branch of the Institutes of International Affairs. Lippmann advocated a society in which a small group of elites would rule by controlling public opinion. Chapter I, of Lippmann's book, PUBLIC OPINION is titled "The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads." Lippmann, writes,
"This then, will be the clue to our inquiry. We shall assume that what each man does is based not on direct and certain knowledge, but on pictures made by himself or given to him. If his atlas tells him that the world is flat he will not sail near what he believes to be the edge of our planet for fear of falling off. If his maps include a fountain of eternal youth, a Ponce de Leon will go in quest of it. If someone digs up yellow dirt that looks like gold, he will for a time act exactly as if he had found gold. The way in which the world is imagined determines at any particular moment what men will do. It does not determine what they will achieve. It determines their effort, their feelings, their hopes, not their accomplishments and results. The very men who most loudly proclaim their "materialism" and their contempt for "ideologues," the Marxian communists, place their entire hope on what? On the formulation by propaganda of a class-conscious group. But what is propaganda, if not the effort to alter the picture to which men respond, to substitute one social pattern for another? What is class consciousness but a way of realizing the world? National consciousness but another way? And Professor Giddings' consciousness of kind [ i.e. stereotypes ], but a process of believing that we recognize among the multitude certain ones marked as our kind?"25
Lippmann's conclusion is,
"I argue that representative government, either in what is ordinarily called politics, or in industry, cannot be worked successfully, no matter what the basis of election, unless there is an independent, expert organization for making the unseen facts intelligible to those who have to make the decisions...My conclusion is that public opinions must be organized for the press if they are to be sound, not by the press as is the case today. This organization I conceive to be in the first instance the task of a political science that has won its proper place as formulator, in advance of real decision, instead of apologist, critic, or reporter after the decision has been made..."26
Harold Lasswell was an intelligence agent, political scientist, and professor at Yale Law School. Lippmann's arguments appealed to Lasswell. Shortly before World War II the Rockefeller Foundation funded the Research Project On Wartime Communication. The Library of Congress coordinated the project. Among the researchers was Harold Lasswell. Regarding the project Lasswell writes, "The Library project had several responsibilities; to perfect tools of research on mass communication; to recruit and train personnel for service agencies in propaganda, information, and intelligence; to advise on matters of strategy, tactics, and organization; to describe and analyze certain phases of the history of the war crisis."27
A byproduct of the Research Project on Wartime Communication was a book by Lasswell and Abraham Kaplan. Kaplan was a UCLA philosophy professor. The book was titled POWER AND SOCIETY A FRAMEWORK FOR POLITICAL INQUIRY. Among the books reviewers were Nathan Leites, and Joseph M. Goldsen research director at the Library of Congress. Leites and Goldsen worked for RAND corporation.
Lasswell's definition of power is, "Power is participation in the making of decisions: G has power over H with respect to values K if G participates in the making of decisions affecting the K-policies of H." His definition of policy is, "The social process is the totality of value processes for all values important in the society... Policy is a projected program of goal values and practices; the policy process in the formulation, promulgation, and application of identifications, demands, and expectations concerning future interpersonal relations of the self...the exercise of influence (influence process) consists in affecting policies of others than the self. To have influence is to occupy a high position (and potential) with respect to all the values important in the society. Influence is exercised when its possession affects the interpersonal relations of those (other than self) active in the shaping and enjoyment of the values..."28
Lasswell defines rationalization as, "The pragmatization of practices is the maximizing of their economy with respect to all the values of the actors. Rationalization of practices is their technicalization and pragmatization. We speak of practices and institutions as pragmatized in the degree that means and ends are reciprocally determined so as to maximize the total values in the situation. Rationalization (Zweckrationalizierung) involves not only a maximal realization of values, but also that the adaptation of means and ends to one another be achieved through expediencies. For example, if religious doctrines impose sanctions for the utilization of certain materials, practices in accord with those doctrines are not rationalized, though they may be pragmatized in relation to the religious values. Rationalization, in short, requires that the only restrictions imposed on practice be those set by non cultural conditions (biological and environmental) for the attainment of goals."29 In short "rationalization" is a philosophy for maximizing profits based upon the doctrine that the ends justify the means, no matter what the cost to others.
Lippmann presents a graphic view of what a society controlled by an "independent, expert organization" would become. It is presented as a preface to his book PUBLIC OPINION, contained in a quote from the Republic of Plato, Book Seven,
"Behold! human beings living in a sort of underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all across the den; they have been here from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them; for the chains are arranged in such a manner as to prevent them from turning round their heads. At a distance above and behind them the light of a fire is blazing, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have before them, over which they show the puppets.
I see, he said.
And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying vessels, which appear over the wall; also figures of men and animals, made of wood and stone and various materials; and some of the prisoners, as you would expect, are talking, and some of them are silent.
This is a strange image, he said, and they are strange prisoners.
Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?
True, he said: how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?
And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would see only the shadows?
Yes, he said.
And if they were able to talk with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before therm?"30
A society controlled by an "independent, expert organization," arranging chains of bondage from childhood by corrupting the societies knowledge base, and deciding what shadows to project on the wall, would be a society of prisoners that couldn't use their heads to act in their own best interest. They would become a society of slaves living in a realm of fear.
Before World War II Richard H. S. Crossman was an Oxford professor. During the war Crossman was Deputy Director of Britain's Psychological Warfare Branch, Armed Forces Headquarters, North Africa. After the war Crossman became a Labor Party member of the British House of Commons. Crossman was a John's Hopkins University Operations Research Office Psychological Warfare Casebook contributor. Daugherty writes,"Britishers as well as Americans viewed Crossman as one of the outstanding if not the leading propagandist of World War II...In February 1952 Crossman addressed the British Royal United Service Institution on the topic of Psychological Warfare...in Crossman's own words'...the object of psychological warfare is to do certain things to the enemy: first to demoralize him; secondly...to undermine his beliefs; and thirdly to begin the process of indoctrination."31
People's actions are strongly influenced by their knowledge base. People act on their beliefs. You can manipulate a person's actions by corrupting their knowledge base; by warping historical truth; or ignoring it completely. Knowledge can make for independence if it helps people meet their world more confidently and realistically. Those who have wanted others to remain dependent have always recognized this fact and have opposed the spread of knowledge. They include those who felt the Bible must not be read by the people; those who made laws against teaching slaves to read and write; and those who kept the plans of a monster like Hitler a secret for more than 14 years.
In his second letter Peter warns, "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not." [II Peter 2:1-3]
Religious values are about acting rationally, acting intelligently, not rationalizing profits made at the expense of another. Intelligence is analyzing a problem to determine what has to be done, designing different solutions to solve the problem and evaluating the solutions to chose the best one. All religions have rules and guidelines of acting intelligently. Acting intelligently is acting in ones own best interest and at the same time acting in the best interest of all. The Laws of God provide rules and guidelines for acting intelligently. The Laws of God include The Ten Commandments, The Teachings of Buddha, and the Laws of Mohammed.
The Golden Rule is the simplest and most elegant rule for acting intelligently. The Golden Rule was discovered by at least three human beings. Confucius and Mohammed taught, don't do to others that which you wouldn't have others do to you. Christ taught do unto others that which you would have others do unto you. Using the Golden Rule to help drive your decisions helps you follow all the rules and guidelines handed down by God. No creature anywhere can simplify the Golden Rule, making human beings amongst the most intelligent creatures in the universe. Applying the Laws of God reward our actions with a better future. Our tomorrows will be less full of problems and guilt created by making poor choices in the past. Our neighbors tomorrows will be less full of problems we created for them. Living by the Laws of God rewards us with a more fulfilling and joyous life here on earth and an eternal life after death.
Lasswell and Lippmann are among the false prophets Peter warns against. Lasswell's advice is a rationalization to abandon the rules and guidelines handed down by God to maximize profits. Lasswell's advice is to live by a philosophy in which the ends justify the means no matter what the cost to others. Lasswell's advice is irrational and immoral. Lasswell's suggestion that the "only restrictions imposed on practice be those set by non cultural conditions (biological and environmental) for the attainment of goals." is heresy.
Ironically Lasswell cites John Dewey's work, Human Nature and Conduct, as Lasswell's reason for choosing the term pragmatism and using it in his definition of rationalization. It was Dewey's belief that culture ( shared habits, or "custom") not only enables us to act in the environment but defines the environment in which we act. Divorcing aspects of human culture, such as religious beliefs, from actions for the attainment of a goal, such as maximizing profit, would make us inhuman.
Nothing so aroused Dewey's scorn as psychological dogma that humans are naturally passive and must be compelled to act. In Human Nature and Conduct, Dewey provides a graphic description of the men of the elite who Lasswell and Lippmann, suggest should be allowed to manipulate and control the lives of others. Dewey writes, "Meantime there are certain "practical" men who combine thought and habit and who are effectual. Their thought is about their own advantage; and their habits correspond. They dominate the actual situation. They encourage routine in others, and they also subsidize such thought and learning as are kept remote from affairs. This they call this sustaining the standard of the ideal. Subjection they praise as team-spirit, loyalty, devotion, obedience, industry, law-and-order. But they temper respect for law - by which they mean the order of the existing status - on the part of others with most skillful and thoughtful manipulation of it in behalf of their own ends. While they denounce as subversive anarchy signs of independent thought, of thinking for themselves, on the part of others lest such thought disturb the conditions by which they profit, they think quite literally for themselves, that is, of themselves. this is the eternal game of the practical men. Hence it is only by accident that the separate and endowed "thought" of professional thinkers leaks out into action and affects custom."32
In POWER AND SOCIETY Lasswell references the works of a number of American and British scholars. Among the British scholars is George E. G. Catlin, who wrote, "Politics, as a theoretical study, is concerned with the relations of men, in association and competition, submission and control, in so far as they seek, not the production and consumption of some article, but to have their way with their fellows...What men seek in their political negotiations is power."33
Catlin is wrong, what human beings seek in their political negotiations is freedom. Thomas Jefferson made the "Golden Rule" the foundation of American Democracy by changing John Locke's Natural rights law from Life, Liberty, and Property to the inalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. The change insures that decisions are driven by civic virtue instead of selfishness. The change probably resulted from Jefferson's understanding of the "Golden Rule" and a struggle Jefferson had with slavery. The original draft of the Declaration of Independence contained a scathing denunciation of slavery.34 Jefferson's change declares it immoral and illegal to consider one person the property of another. If you would be unhappy being someone else's property it follows it is wrong to consider another person your property. If the original draft of the Declaration of Independence had been approved there would have been no slavery after the revolution of 1776. The original draft was not approved, slavery was not abolished, and a civil war was fought leaving a legacy of bitterness in America still felt today.
The Laws of God are much more powerful than the laws of man. The laws of man coerce compliance through fear of punishment. The laws of God encourage application through the promise of reward. The laws of man can be unfair and unfairly applied. A guilty person may escape punishment and an innocent person may be punished. The laws of man can profit one group at the expense of another. Unjust laws may encourage criminal behavior. Unjust laws may make an innocent person a criminal. Unjust laws may legislate breaking the Laws of God. The laws of man are costly to legislate and costly to apply. The laws of man attempt to remove criminals from society. Large groups of human beings must waste their lives in a bureaucratic, tension filled environment attempting to administer, apply, and carry out the punishment associated with a particular crime. Larger groups of human beings must provide the money for this costly bureaucratic framework. The laws of man are a poor substitute for the laws of God. When in doubt between the laws of God and the laws of man the wisest choice is to faith it.
Peter warned of false prophets that would through covetousness and deceit make slaves of us. John Dewey warned against evil men whose thought is about their own advantage;and whose habits correspond. What Peter and John Dewey failed to warn about was a secret society of evil men operating covertly undermining their neighbors religious beliefs to demoralize, indoctrinate, and enslave them. Perverting the values of society by mobilizing their neighbors emotions, dominating their reason, and encouraging them to disobey the Laws of God. Evil men of high position misusing their influence to rationalize, legalize, and encourage, through word and deed, adultery, promiscuity, gender confusion, and even the murder of ones own child as a victimless act and a constitutional right to privacy.
False prophets expert at leading their audience into a bad bargain. Reducing the purpose of communication to a collection of sleight of mind techniques for manipulating their neighbor. Creating tension, hatred, and fear by bearing false witness to their neighbors about their neighbors maintaining a state of eternal war -- a state of controlled insanity. Dehumanizing their neighbors and turning them into chattel to be used in the continuous outflow of products of war. Maximizing false profits from an economy of death and destruction. False profits justified by a dogma called "rationalization" or "operations research" based upon the notion that the ends justify the means no matter what the cost to others.
The men of Lippmann's and Lasswell's elite include the men of the Council on Foreign Relations and trustees at RAND, and the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations. Men that financed and researched "Rationalization" and performed Operations Research studies including planning and participating in psycho-political operations designed to maintain a worldwide state of perpetual conflict and war to maximize Council on Foreign Relations profits from munitions, medicine, food, energy, and media industries. Profits maximized by enslaving and dehumanizing the American worker.
The Reece Committee Foundation investigation, Church Committee's investigation of US intelligence abuses, the Rockefeller Committee investigation of CIA abuses(1975), and the Iran-Contra Affair Investigation (1985) provide proof that overlooking interlocks between the Council on Foreign Relations and the groups under investigation has become investigative committee standard operating procedure. Interlocks include Council on Foreign Relationship members assigned to each investigative committee. Isn't that conflict of interest? Isn't that illegal? Shouldn't the investigations be reopened?35
Janet Reno refuses to assign an independent prosecutor to investigate her boss, Council on Foreign Relations member Bill Clinton. Reno is a close friend of Clinton's director of Health, Education and Welfare CFR member Donna Shalala.
Title-50 War and National Defense § 783 states -
"It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to combine, conspire, or agree with any other person to perform any act which would substantially contribute to the establishment within the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship, the direction and control of which is to be vested in, or exercised by or under the domination of control of, any foreign government."
If a group is organized on a dictatorial basis; with so close an identity between the group and its policies and the governmental polices of the country in which it exists; that the group and the government constitute an indistinguishable unit; and that group suppresses all opposition to such a group; then a totalitarian dictatorship exists. If the people can not use the Executive, Judicial or Congressional Branches of its government to carry out their wishes and enforce their laws then they have lost control of their government.
The Council on Foreign Relations are in violation of Title-50 War and National Defense subsection 783. The Council on Foreign Relations has unlawfully and knowingly combined, conspired, and agreed to substantially contribute to the establishment of one world order under the totalitarian dictatorship, the direction and the control of members of Council on Foreign Relations, Institute of International Affairs, and Institutes of Pacific Relations, and Institutes of International Relations whose members are from various nations throughout the world.
If you visit Dumbarton Oaks you will see a Latin parable at the head of the dedicatory inscription and carved elsewhere in the gardens. The parable is -- "Quod Severis Metes" -- "As ye sow, so shall ye reap." It would be wise for Council on Foreign Relations members and members of Congress to heed that parable. In 1776 Jefferson told Americans what to do when their inalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness are jeopardized, "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.."
It is time for Congress to impeach Clinton and all Council on Foreign Relations members in government. Congress must formally accuse the Council on Foreign Relations members of their wrong doing and bring them before the proper tribunal. If Congress is unwilling to act it is time for the American people to follow Jefferson's advice.
 Pollock, Daniel C Project Director & Editors De Mclaurin,Ronald, Rosenthal, Carl F., Skillings, Sarah A., The Art and Science of Psychological Operations: Case Studies of Military Application Volume One, Pamphlet No. 725-7-2, DA Pam 525-7-2, Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 1 April 1976 Vol 2 pg 609-10 "Social Science Research, And PSYOP, Introduction Persuasion, by Irving L. Janis - based on work of Kurt Lewin - "social anchorage"
Quigley, Carroll, The World Since 1939: A History, Collier Books, New York, Collier Macmillan Ltd., London, Originally published as Part II TRAGEDY AND HOPE, pg 176-177
Quigley, Carroll, The World Since 1939: A History, Collier Books, New York, Collier Macmillan Ltd., London, Originally published as Part II Tragedy and Hope, pg 178
Quigley, Carroll, The World Since 1939: A History, Collier Books, New York, Collier Macmillan Ltd., London, Originally published as Part II Tragedy and Hope, pg 182-3
Quigley, Carroll, Tragedy and Hope, Macmillan, New York 1966, p. 953
Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg xi, xii
Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg xi
Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg. v
Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg. vii; Daugherty Acknowledges: "Department of the Army: Col P.J. Black and Drs. Paul Blackstock, C.D. Leatherman, and W.J. Morgan, Office of the Chief of Psychological Warfare; Col. Edson D. Raff, Psychological Warfare School, Fort Bragg, NC.; and Lt Col Wallace L. Clement, Operations Research Division, Office of the Chief of Research and Development. Department of the Navy: Cmdr Saverio Fillippone, Support Operations Branch, Fleet Operational Readiness Division, Office of the Chief of Navel Operations; Department of the Air Force: Lt Col James E. Monroe, USAF, and Arthur Way. Department of State: Orville Anderson, Martin Herz, and Dr. S. Shepard Jones. US Information Agency: Henry Casler, Michael Guiffrida, Robert Allen Haden, Joseph C. Kolarek, Charles K. Moffley, Louis Olom, Dr. Howard Penniman, Ralph G. Price, Argus J. Tressider, David Warner, and Theodore Wertime. Human Resources Research Office, George Washington University: Drs. Carleton J Schofield and Julius Segal. RAND Corporation: Drs. Phillips Davison and Alexander George, Social Science Division. Operations Research Office, Johns Hopkins University: David Ambrose, Marshall Andrews, David Carpenter, Charles P. Chadsey, Murray Dyer, Alfred H. Husrath Jr., Merton Henry, Dr. Gerard Hinrichs, James E. King Jr., RAdm Marioun Little, USN (ret), Dr. Philip Lowry, Dr. Maurice J. Mountain, John Ponturo, Dr. Richard U. Sherman Jr., O.W. Torreson, and William R. Young. Others: Dr. Thomas Andrews, University of Maryland; Dr. Alfred di Grazia, Stanford University; Dr. Paul M. A. Linebarger, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University; Dr. Louis Nemzer, Ohio State University; Dr. Lucien Pye, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Dr. William Schramm, Stanford University; and Dr. Douglas Waples, University of Chicago.
 Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg. viii,12
Hadley Cantril, The Human Dimension: Experiences in Policy Research, Rutgers The State University, 1967 pg pg 24; Childs, Harwood, "The First Editor Looks Back," Public Opinion Quarterly, 21, no. 1 (Spring 1957) pgs 7-13; Brown, Anthony Cave ed., Secret War Report of the OSS, Berkeley, NY, 1976, Chapt. 2
 Childs, Harwood, "The First Editor Looks Back," Public Opinion Quarterly, 21, no. 1 (Spring 1957) pgs 7; US General Accounting Office, US Government Monies Provided to Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty report no. 173239, May 25, 1972, p. 79
 Pollock, Daniel C Project Director & Editors De Mclaurin,Ronald, Rosenthal, Carl F., Skillings, Sarah A., The Art and Science of Psychological Operations: Case Studies of Military Application Volume One, Pamphlet No. 725-7-2, DA Pam 525-7-2, Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 1 April 1976 Vol 2 pg 609 "Social Science Research, And PSYOP, Introduction Persuasion, by Irving L. Janis
 Prodos, John, Keepers of the Keys A History of the National Security Council from Truman to Bush, William Morrow and Company, NY, 1991, pgs 163-64
 Rene Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence (Sevierville TN: Covenant House Books, 1993), 412 pages. First published in 1958 by Devin-Adair in New York, and reprinted in 1977 by Angriff Press., pp. 65-66.
 Prodos, John, Keepers of the Keys A History of the National Security Council from Truman to Bush, William Morrow and Company, NY, 1991, pgs 163-64
 Berger, Charles and Steven Chaffee, editors, Handbook of Communication Science, Newbury Park, CA, 1987 pg. 282 [ article by McLeod, Jack and Jay Blumer, The Macrosocial Level of Communication Science ]
 Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pgs. viii, xii
 Simpson, Christopher, Science of Coercion Communication Research and Psychological Warfare, 1945-1960,Oxford University Press, 1994 pg. 83
 Warburg, Paul, Harcourt, Brace and Co., NY 1946 pg 15-16
 Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 3 (Fall) 1959, pgs 342-60.
 Quigley, Carroll, TRAGEDY AND HOPE, Macmillan, New York 1966, p. 953
 Pollock, Daniel C Project Director & Editors De Mclaurin,Ronald, Rosenthal, Carl F., Skillings, Sarah A., The Art and Science of Psychological Operations: Case Studies of Military Application Volume One, Pamphlet No. 725-7-2, DA Pam 525-7-2, Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 1 April 1976 Vol 2 pg 806 - The Hungarian Self-Image And The Hungarian Image of Americans and Russians by Radio Free Europe, Audience and Public Opinion Research Department, February 1970 Excerpts from "The Hungarian Self-Image and the Hungarian Image of Americans, Russian, Germans, Rumanians, and Chinese"; Buchanan, W. Cantril, H. "How Nations See Each Other," University of Illinois Press, Urbana 1953; Cantril H. and Strunk M.: "Public Opinion 1935-1946" Princeton University Press
 The War and Peace Studies of The Council On Foreign Relations 1939-1945, The Harold Pratt House 58th E. 68th Street, NY, 1946, pg. 24
 Lippmann, Walter PUBLIC OPINION, Harcourt, Brace and Co., NY, 1922 pgs 25-26
 Lippmann, Walter PUBLIC OPINION, Harcourt, Brace and Co., NY, 1922 pg 31-32
 Lasswell, Harold D. and Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society, A Framework for Political Inquiry, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1950 pg v Preface
 Lasswell, Harold D. and Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society, A Framework for Political Inquiry, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1950 pg 71,75
 Lasswell, Harold D. and Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society, A Framework for Political Inquiry, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1950 pg 70
 Lippmann, Walter PUBLIC OPINION, Harcourt, Brace and Co., NY, 1922, unnumbered page following dedication to Faye Lippmann and proceeding Table of Contents pg ix, translation credited to Jowett
 Daugherty, William E., Operations Research Office, in collaboration with Morris Janowitz, University of Michigan, Published for Operations Research Office, The Johns Hopkins University by The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore 18, MD., 1958, Distributed in Great Britain by Oxford University Press, London pg 35
 Dewey, John, Human Nature and Conduct, Southern Illinois University Press, 1988 pgs. 49-50
 Lasswell, Harold D. and Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society, A Framework for Political Inquiry, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1950 pg 75
 Jefferson's original draft states, "he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another." From: Thomas Jefferson, the "original Rough draught," Declaration of Independence, June-12-27 1776, manuscript collections of the Library of Congress, 101 Independence Ave. SE Washington, D.C. 20540 & on-line exhibit http://lcweb.loc.gov/exhibits/declara/declara1.html.
 CFR membership or involvement on the committees: Rockefeller Committee
( CFR Nelson Rockefeller (Chairman); Church Committee ( CFR members David
Aaron (to aide to CFR member Walter Mondale and Mondale's personal designee
to the committee; Lynn Etheridge Davis presently CFR member Clinton's International
Security Advisor, authored the initial Draft of of the Church Committee's
report dealing with the NSC) [ Source Keepers of the Keys, John Prados,
pg 386]; In 1986 two secret U.S. Government operations were publicly exposed
implicating Reagan Administration officials in illegal activities. These
operations became known as the Iran-Contra Affair. A seven year investigation
costing millions of dollars ensued. Only one person spent time in prison
- he was found guilty of not paying his income taxes. The Office of Independent
Counsel's report states "it is important to emphasize that both the
Iran and contra operations, separately, violated the United States policy
and law." Lawrence E. Walsh was Independent Counsel. In 1969 Walsh
worked with CFR member Kissinger at the meetings on Vietnam in Paris. In
1981 Walsh worked for Crowe and Dunlevy a law firm representing Oil Companies,
Air Lines, and Insurance Companies run by CFR members. Was the Walsh investigation
designed to give the appearance that justice was served while in effect
being a clever way of obstructing justice? Was the Walsh investigation part
of a sophisticated "limited hangout"? Did CFR media members, lawyers,
and judges, all profit monetarily from the publicity generated under the
pretense of doing something important, while justice went unserved and the
guilty went free? CFR members George Bush, Elliot Abrams, Casper Weinberger,
Robert M. Gates, William J. Casey, and Robert C. McFarlane advised Reagan
to go ahead with Iran-Contra. On December 24, 1992, Bush pardoned fellow
CFR members Weinberger, McFarlane, Abrams, and three CIA chiefs named Fiers,
George, and Clarridge. Isn't there a conflict of interest apparent in this
pardon? Isn't advising the President to break the law Treason? Why weren't
the people involved charged with Treason? Have members of the intelligence
community that belong to the CFR gained control of the US government? CFR
members William S. Cohen (R-ME) and George J. Mitchell (D-ME), served on
a non-partisan Joint House and Senate Select Committee that investigated
Iran-Contra. They co-authored a book about Iran-Contra. Book reviewer R.
F. Drinan ( America Mr 4 '89) writes, "The impact of this book is blunted
by Cohen and Mitchell's extensive efforts to avoid making tough judgments
of witnesses who were obviously lying or evading committee member's questions..."
Stephen Engelberg NY Times Book Rev (pg 36 S 25 '88) writes, "This
book includes some well-etched portraits of the players in the Iran-contra
affair." Conspicuously missing from these well-etched portraits is
how the players, including the committee members Cohen and Mitchell, are
connected through the CFR. Cohen and Mitchell titled their book Men of Zeal.
A more accurate title would be Greedy Heels Who Lie, Cheat, and Steal.