Article 16717 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part V, Federal Gov't Mind-Control Programs Subvert U.S. Education
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1992 11:35:37 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Oct23.113537.15687@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: federal government mind-control programs subvert U.S. education
Lines: 132


        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:
These are very, very dangerous things you're talking about because
first, on several levels, what it does to the individual, what it
does to a data bank to have that about the individual, and how you
would use that to selectively eliminate or to incorporate people 
whom you want to support your position of power and dominance in a
"new world order" -- or how you could target those people for 
elimination, as far as power goes, or even physical detention.

Keep in mind that we went through McCarthyism where over a hundred
thousand Americans and their families were destroyed by this one
completely psychopathic, deranged, mentally warped, perverted
scum-bag.  And those are the good things I could say about Joseph
McCarthy.  That man was one of the most evil men who ever lived.
Yet, he had the FULL participation of many members [of Congress]
because he said that he was speaking for the consensus, and for
the "right" way of thinking. What about all the innocent people
who he hurt and who committed suicide?  And there are many instances
of that. When I look around at the people whose lives have been
affected by this so-called "consensus thinking", or where they've
had dossiers on people, and the moment they see that you don't
support their particular economic, religious, political or social
agenda, they're able to target you as (quote) "the enemies".

During Nixon's reign, they had the "enemies list". And also, it
was during his reign that executive order 1140 was implemented.
And there was another executive order later which allowed for
detention camps to be created. That executive order is STILL in
place. In fact, it was during the last administration, the Reagan
Administration, where there was a contingency plan, if there was
ever any major social upheaval, that some fifty-five thousand
Americans, on whom they had dossiers (not so dissimilar from what
you're discussing here), could be isolated. And, without trial,
without conviction, without being formally charged, with no
civil liberties and rights, without legal representation, 
these Americans could be indefinitely incarcerated in different
U.S. Government facilities. They even had these facilities ... and 
during a major undercover story that I was doing, I've actually
gone to some of these facilities to see if they actually existed.
Fifty-five thousand Americans! And that was just the first batch.

Now, could you imagine, with the data systems that we have, people
of all backgrounds, conservative and liberal -- if you didn't
answer those questions correctly, and if they had a dossier on you
which show that you legitimately hold certain views which they
feel could be a threat, then in all likelihood, your dossier is
going to make you one of those people who are not on the "RIGHT"
side of the issue. And, since you're not the one in power or
control, you're the target. And it's not as if there is no
precedent for this. There IS precedence for this, and there is
precedence in virtually every country of the world, where they
have harrassed or arrested or denigrated or used surreptitious and
illegal means to discredit, to destroy, to defame people whom they
felt threatened by. 

So, they have an opportunity to create a WHOLE generation of
thinking based upon a curriculum, and a model of education that
will eliminate people from any positions in the future .... people
who would never have a chance -- never -- of getting into a position
of being either a policy-maker or an opinion-leader.  Why? Because
they have been able to track these people. They're tracking their
parents. They're tracking their friends. They know where they live.
They know what they eat. They know which television shows they
watch. They know everything about them because, during this whole
teaching process, they've kept EXTENSIVE files on all of their
results.

So, anyone who IS an individualist, who chooses to respect the
autonomy of their own mind, who is capable of making assertive
decisions, who wants to be an active participant in anything that
is going to affect their lives ..... Think of all the women who
have decided to forego caesarian [operations], or who have
challenged the radical mastectomy [operation]. Those women, in
answering a questionnaire that they would be seeking a second
opinion, or that they would seek complementary therapy, etc., ....
those women would not be accepted into anything where you had to
have a woman who would simply accept what she was told to do.
So, those women who finally have begun to free themselves would be
excluded, and as a result, you would have two classes. You would
have the ruling majority by consensus and the excluded minority
that is left out of everything. And that is a very, very
frightening thought. And it's not as if it is theoretical. 

This, you're telling us, is being done NOW.  This is being taught
NOW.  This is illegal. The Federal Government has been caught doing
this illegal act NOW. We are not theorizing about the future.
And I'm concerned about this. Is that a fair or an unfair summary
of your statements, Bev?

BEVERLY ECKMAN:
I'm not sure that the Federal Government deliberately got itself
in this mess. Some people, some individuals did, but I think what
happened was that they didn't realize how much footsy they were
playing with the Carnegie Foundation, which is practically taken
over ..... Well, I'm not going to say "practically". It IS taken
over by behaviorists. When you look at the credentials of the
leadership ... and those are the people who are sitting on every
important task force, who are making virtually all of the decisions
about education. The problem is that they OWN most of the computer
banks.  They own the testing service.  They own that National
Assessment of Educational Progress.  They own the Scholastic
Aptitude Tests.  They own the National Teaching[ers?] Exam. You can
keep going on and on about all the tests that they own, as well as
many of the state assessments under separate contract, which is a
slight conflict of interest, by the way. They own a lot of the
computer systems.  They are in the position right now that if they
said: "We're going to take our computers and go home," the Federal
Government would be in deep trouble. I mean, they would panic
because they have traded so much money back and forth; given so
much money, not just to the Carnegie Foundation, but the Carnegie
Foundation has given money to the GOVERNMENT! Gobs and gobs of
grants for them to establish these computer systems and what-not.
And I think our Federal Government got in over their heads.
                       (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