|
Stealth Strategies for Building the Superstate
During World War II, a Soviet spy network in Nazi-occupied Europe kept Stalin supplied with first-rate intelligence on German military plans and political developments. It came to be known as the Red Orchestra (Rote Kapelle).
The network sent its information to its Moscow superiors via
secret radio transmitters that operated only for short bursts and moved
constantly to avoid detection by the Gestapo. Nazi intelligence referred to
the transmitters as "music boxes" and assigned the names of musical
instruments to the distinctive, but elusive, operators.
A few top agents were exposed in high-profile cases — Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Victor Perlo, the Rosenbergs — but, according to both Communist defectors and U.S. intelligence officials, dozens of Red cells involving hundreds of high-level Soviet agents were never exposed.*
* On February 14 and 15, 1957, former Soviet NKVD agent Alexander Orlov testified before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee ("Scope of Soviet Activity In The United States," Part 51). Orlov claimed knowledge of 38 espionage rings in the U.S., with only two exposed as a result of the revelations of Whittaker Chambers and Elizabeth Bentley. Decades later, in the 1990s, evidence was still seeping out to confirm those charges of penetration of the U.S., including some of our most sensitive institutions and high-level positions. The recently released "Venona intercepts" — decoded secret Soviet transmissions collected in the 1940s — verified that Harry Hopkins, top adviser to President Franklin Roosevelt, was a Soviet agent. Ditto for atomic bomb scientists Robert Oppenheimer and Theodore Hall. But the identities of many of the Venona agents are still unknown.
Many of these agents were not engaged
merely in the lower level aspects of espionage such as stealing state
secrets and reporting on military plans and weapons development. They were performing a more critical role for the Kremlin as "agents
of influence": misinforming and misdirecting America's leaders and actually
influencing and formulating U.S. policies concerning the most sensitive
areas of our national security.
The Communists have especially focused on Sun Tzu's lessons on strategic deception and the supreme importance of espionage and intelligence. They are completely familiar with what Sun Tzu described as the "five sorts of spies": Native spies; internal spies; double spies; doomed spies; and surviving spies.
The
Communists adapted and greatly expanded on the ancient sage's doctrines,
creating a global apparatus
with capabilities and long-term plans for world conquest that would have
astounded Sun Tzu.
In 1955, British intelligence expert and author E. H. Cookridge aptly described the global Soviet apparatus as "the net that covers the world," in his book by that title.
As he pointed out, the Communists had at that time established a worldwide militant organization of tens of millions of members, operating aggressively in virtually every country toward a centrally directed common objective — an accomplishment without parallel at any time in history. Besides controlling these millions of disciplined members, who could be ordered into coordinated global action on short notice, the Communist leaders had developed an intelligence apparatus of unparalleled, massive proportions.
Cookridge noted:
The number is at least ten times larger than that of agents used by all Western nations combined. But even this is only part of the Communist secret army.... A suggestion that there are 750,000 men and women in the world — semiprofessional agents, informants, fifth-columnists, fellow-travelers, and sympathizers — whom the Soviet secret service succeeded in ensnaring in some way into the spy net — is probably an underestimate.
It is a formidable army, combined with a quarter of a million of full-time agents and officials, and led by an elite of 10,000 to 12,000 trained master spies.8
Likewise, no other nation comes
close to matching the size of the internal secret police forces required by
the Communists to maintain their Total State. Through innumerable movies,
documentaries, novels, articles, and history books, Hitler's dreaded
A
major reason for this can be seen in the relative strength of the Nazi and
Soviet secret police organs at the time of the Hitler/Stalin Pact: In 1939,
Hitler's Gestapo employed a total of 7,500 people; Stalin's NKVD employed
366,000!
Reports by the Committee on Un-American Activities of the House of Representatives, such as "The Communist Infiltration of the Motion Picture Industry" (1947), "Communist Political Subversion" (1956), "Soviet Total War" (1956), and "Communist Target — Youth" (1960) provided explosive, detailed information about the Soviet attack on America. As did reports of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS), such as "The Institute of Pacific Relations" (1951), "Expose of Soviet Espionage" (1960), and "The Soviet Empire" (1965).
The voluminous 1953 SISS report entitled "Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments" labeled the Communist operations in our government "a conspiracy" and concluded:
The massive scope and insidious nature of the Communist offensive was so far beyond what most Americans imagined that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover stated in 1956 that "the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."12
That handicap, however was largely the work of the CFR-dominated media, which made sure that the American public remained
largely unaware of the shocking information uncovered by the congressional
investigations. The same media subversives attacked the congressional
investigators and characterized proper concern over Communist and socialist
advances as "right-wing paranoia."
In 1960, the Kremlin hosted the Congress of 81 Communist Parties from around the world. Those parties boasted a collective strength of more than 40 million members. But their real strength then, as now, lay in their ability to get non-Communists to do their work for them. In the U.S., as elsewhere, the Communists created hundreds of front organizations and penetrated virtually all existing organizations and institutions, with the intent of gradually gaining significant influence, if not total control.
Labor unions were especially targeted because they offered:
Similarly, the Communists and their various Marxist-socialist brethren have,
during the past century particularly, targeted the colleges and universities
— with amazing success. They have gained such influence in academia that
from the 1960s onward they have been able to generate mass demonstrations of
students, and even violent riots, by exploiting emotional issues such as
war, nuclear weapons, the environment, homosexual rights, feminism, civil
rights, race, etc.
Mr. Clabough, a careful scholar of Communist literature and strategy, who has been attending and monitoring Communist meetings in the New York City area for years, says the Red network in this country is as strong as ever.
This was precisely the message of Soviet Premier Konstantin Chernenko, when, in his June 1983 address to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), he made this noteworthy remark:
As we will show in this and following chapters, despite the supposed "collapse" of Communism, that global orchestra has continued playing, with the same "skillful conducting" continuing from the background. There are still official Communist Parties operating in most countries and dozens more socialist parties run by "former" Communists.
Meanwhile, in the 1990s Russia and China reestablished friendly relations and began openly cooperating on many economic and military fronts.*
* Some of the most clear-sighted analysts of global affairs predicted this decades ago. Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn and John Birch Society founder Robert Welch were ridiculed by both liberals and conservatives for contending that the so-called "Sino-Soviet Split" was entirely a strategic deception from the start, aimed at playing the West for suckers. Their careful research, reasoned analysis, and alarming predictions have proven true. Golitsyn's books, New Lies for Old and The Perestroika Deception, are immensely important for an understanding of this deception. Robert Welch's printed expose of the phony Sino-Soviet split began in the August 1971 Bulletin of The John Birch Society and was developed in subsequent Bulletins.
For example, in the December 1971 Bulletin, he observed:
What many readers will find most extraordinary is that it is often difficult to discern whether it is the Communist leaders who are in charge of conducting this orchestra, or the CFR one-worlders, since they both are so frequently standing arm-in-arm at the same podium, moving their conductor's batons in perfect synchronization.
And always, the "harmony" they seek is
that which leads ineluctably to their mutual goal of world government.
Together they apply simultaneous
"pressure from above and below" in a strategy that is known in Communist
circles as "revolutionary parliamentarianism."
The one-world architects know that they must create the appearance of popular support for their global designs in order to pave the way for national governments to surrender political power to the UN. To accomplish this surrender, they have devised a giant pincer strategy in the form of a huge NGO network (pressure from below) on the one hand, and sympathetic political and corporate leaders (pressure from above) on the other.
The NGOs clamor for "world governance," and their orchestrated clamor
is portrayed as the collective voice of the peoples of the world expressing
a global consensus. The political and corporate leaders — according to plan
— then "respond" to the "will of civil society."
Meanwhile Kozak and his coconspirators provided coordinated "pressure from above" to get parliament to institute Communism piecemeal, by centralizing power and taking over more and more functions that had previously been left to local governments and the private sector. It is important to understand that this takeover was accomplished by a small minority. But this minority was highly organized and disciplined. And it was also highly skilled in the art of deception, in creating the false appearance of having overwhelming numbers on their side.
The
opposition was psychologically outmaneuvered and made to believe that
"resistance is futile." They surrendered without firing a shot. The
Communists won that war because they were the only side fighting; their
opponents didn't even realize they were under attack!
At the UN's World Civil Society Conference in Montreal in 1999, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan explained to the professional NGO activists their new "partnership" with the UN.
Annan explained that the NGOs must serve as,
Kofi Annan is not the mastermind of this UN pincer strategy, of course; he
is merely a factotum carrying out the program for the Insiders who have
posted him as their front man. The magnitude of this global pincer strategy
and the incredibly deceptive processes employed in the pursuit of their
monstrous goals is mind-boggling. To paraphrase (and modify) Sun Tzu, when
all of these elements are at work and their operations and/or connections
are clandestine, it is justly called the "diabolic manipulation of threads."
This diabolic manipulation and conspiracy are very apparent when one looks beneath the surface of the global "peace" and "disarmament'' campaigns during the last half of the 20th century. These campaigns support a primary objective of the UN's founders — providing the UN with a monopoly of force.
Recall that the primary impetus, ostensibly, for creating the UN was to "put an end to war" through an organization which would provide "collective security."
As we have already seen, it was the CFR one-world brain trust, together with the Communists, that designed, organized, and launched the UN. And it was the same cabal that authored the State Department policy documents, Freedom From War and A World Effectively Controlled By the United Nations.19
The global "disarmament" campaign — which is, in truth, a program to transfer arms from private individuals and individual nation-states to the UN — continues unabated. In fact, it is accelerating.
In May 2000, thousands of activists from across the planet gathered at the United Nations in New York for the "Millennium Forum." Disarmament was very much on the agenda. The Forum was the formal rent-a-mob warm-up to prepare the NGO militants for coordinated action at the Millennium Summit of world leaders, which would follow in September.
Addressing the NGO activists, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan
welcomed them as "the new superpower," leaders of the new international
"civil society," and "implementing partners" in the work of the UN.20 But
contrary to the manufactured image, these NGOs certainly do not represent
civil society, and most are not independent.
The person in charge of presenting the Hague Agenda document at the Forum was Cora Weiss, president of the private Hague Appeal for Peace and Justice, Inc.
Weiss told the Forum attendees.
My colleague and fellow senior editor at The New American, William Norman Grigg, who attended that UN session, noted:
Cora Weiss is both a member of the CFR and a veteran, hardcore Leninist. She is the daughter of Samuel Rubin, a longtime member of the Communist Party, U.S.A., and heads a tax-exempt foundation that bears her father's name. The Samuel Rubin Foundation is the chief financial angel behind the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), a very influential Washington, D.C. "think-tank" which has long served as a major front for Soviet KGB activities.
The chairman of IPS is Cora Weiss' husband, Peter Weiss, a radical attorney who is a member of the Communist-front National Lawyers Guild. Like Tom Hayden, Jane Fonda, and other pro-Communist traitors, Cora Weiss made the pilgrimage to Hanoi during the Vietnam War and organized pro-Vietcong demonstrations.
In 1969, she returned from North Vietnam two days before Christmas and held
a major press conference where she reported that American POWs were treated
well and housed in "immaculate" facilities. Weeks later, at a press
conference she held in the Cannon House Office Building in Washington, D.C,
Weiss scoffed at the claims of two former POWs — Lieutenant Robert Frishman
and Seaman Douglas Hegdahl. Frishman and Hegdahl had testified before
Congress concerning the inhumane treatment they had experienced at the hands
of the Reds. Weiss made light of their injuries, and referred to our POWs as
"war criminals." 24
The activation of Chapter VII would require a standing UN military with the power to "take such action by air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security."26
In keeping with the schemes of the global strategists, both at Pratt House and in the Kremlin, the Hague Agenda proclaims that "it is time to redefine security in terms of human and ecological needs instead of national sovereignty and national borders." 27 Which, naturally, will require the "creation of standing UN peace forces for use in humanitarian interventions" and the implementation of "demobilization programs" around the world to "reclaim and destroy weaponry" not under UN control.28
This refers not only
to nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction, but also to "light
weapons, small arms and guns"29 — meaning those held by private citizens, as
well as those under control of national military forces. (More on the UN
drive for personal disarmament in Chapter 9).
Funding for the Hague Appeal is provided by the usual CFR-dominated sources:
The Hague Appeal is an international coalition of 180 organizations, most of which have been involved in the radical "peace and disarmament" movement for decades.*
* These include Amnesty International, the American Friends Service Committee, Friends of the Earth, Pax Christi, the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, Parliamentarians for Global Action, UNICEF, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, the World Order Models Project, and the WorldWatch Institute.
The Hague Appeal received favorable support from the CFR media
cartel during the Forum, which was bracketed for months before and after
with a coordinated release of disarmament appeals in all the usual CFR
transmission belts: the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Christian Science
Monitor, etc.
Why do the CFR elites go through such elaborate charades, creating these multitudes of radical front groups (or co-opting existing ones) and funding them with piles of money? And why all of the orchestrated media support?
The CFR elites know, of course, that they wouldn't get very far if they were honest and straightforward about their intent:
Wouldn't work, obviously.
What if they fund a gaggle of radical groups, with various elements calling for the transfer of power in one area or another to international authorities? What if they also fund another gaggle of even more radical groups to make the first gaggle appear "moderate" and "reasonable"?
And suppose they saturate the print and
broadcast media with the antics and propaganda of these groups for a
sufficient length of time. And suppose that this propaganda clamors for
government to address outrageous problems while ignoring any possible danger
to freedom in the new "arrangements." Then the pressure from below will
reach the point that the Insiders above can have their political agents in
Congress and the White House respond to the "will of the people" with
"compromise" legislation. These "compromise" solutions always move the whole
political arena further leftward, toward ever bigger, more oppressive
government.
Concerning the campus riots then rocking the nation, he wrote:
Another similar revelation was provided by Jerry Kirk, who, as a student, was active in the SDS, the DuBois Club, the Black Panthers, and the Communist Party.
In a 1970 interview, Kirk said:
Understanding the objectives, it was not surprising that the Hague Agenda and the UN Millennium events were accompanied by a deluge of disarmament propaganda — courtesy of the Pratt House mediacracy. Simon and Schuster, one of America's largest book publishers, brought out William Shawcross' new paean to the UN, Deliver Us from Evil: Peacekeepers, Warlords, and a World of Endless Conflict.33
Written largely from the perspective of Kofi Annan,
whom the left-wing Shawcross obviously
adores (and with whom he traveled the world), the book repeatedly indicts
the U.S. for its miserly refusals to surrender more of our sovereignty,
money, and military to the noble UN. Glowing reviews followed in the CFR
media choir.
And he reminded "the great and good" that the U.S. is obligated under Article VT of the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to,
The same issue of Foreign Affairs featured an article by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov warning that any U.S. move toward deploying a missile defense system would jeopardize NPT, ABM, CTBT — the whole edifice of arms control treaties.36
Also in the same issue, General Andrew J. Goodpaster (CFR)
offered boilerplate Pratt House "Advice for the Next President," echoing the
Schell and Ivanov appeals for disarmament, and urging the use of NGOs to
"mobilize understanding."37
Millennium Summit Pressure As the UN Millennium Summit got underway, the pressure from above and below increased. Following the pattern from past Summits, it was a well-honed, multi-level, multi-pronged, multidimensional attack aimed at multiple targets.
Prime targets, of course, were the heads
of state in attendance; if they could be induced to sign the disarmament
treaties, declarations, and resolutions, it would add to the international
momentum and legitimacy of the UN disarmament agenda. Other intended
targets, however, were the U.S. public and the U.S. Congress, as well as the
U.S. governmental, academic, and intellectual cadres who follow, influence,
and make foreign policy — and then help sell it to the public.
Joining them in this orgy of praise for the UN were such one-world luminaries as:
Among the profusion of programs circulating at the Summit, the Middle Powers Initiative (MPI) is particularly noteworthy.
Claiming to represent the non-nuclear "middle-power" countries of the world, it describes itself as "a carefully focused campaign established by a network of international citizens organizations to encourage ... leaders of the nuclear weapons states to break free from their Cold War mindset" and embrace disarmament — as defined by the MPI and the UN.40
But, as we shall see, MPI's
"independence" is all illusion; while posing as a "citizens network," MPI
is, in reality, nothing less than a front group for the one-world
internationalists.
MPI's primary spokesperson is New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, whose Labour Party is affiliated with the Socialist International. The eloquent Mrs. Clark championed the MPI disarmament campaign both at the UN Summit and at the Gorbachev Foundation-sponsored "State of the World Forum," which ran concomitantly with the UN affair, a few blocks away at the Hilton Towers.
Many UN leaders and heads of state
jockeyed back and forth between the UN and the Gorbachev confab, where they shmoozed and "brainstormed" with corporate titans, academics, NGO
rabble-rousers, and New Age gurus. As it turns out, Gorbachev's State of the
World Forum is also one of the original eight co-sponsors of the MPI, as
well as a funder of the group.
The "anti-Establishment" activists at MPI include a host of revolutionary radicals. Among the MPI co-sponsors are the Parliamentarians for Global Action, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, and the International Peace Bureau.41
All of these groups have been long connected to the KGB-created-and-controlled World Peace Council (WPC), which, since its founding in 1949 by Communist mass-murderer Joseph Stalin, has served the dual purpose of leading the drive for U.S. disarmament and providing support for terrorist groups and regimes worldwide.*
* One of the most informative studies on the WPC, The War Called Peace: The Soviet Peace Offensive, was published in 1982 by the Western Goals Foundation. The study accurately notes: "Since 1950, when it launched the Stockholm Peace Appeal, the World Peace Council (WPC) has been the Soviet Union's single most important international front organization." During the 1960s and '70s, the WPC played a crucial role in organizing the anti-Vietnam War protests throughout the U.S. and stirring up anti-American demonstrations throughout the world. It has led, albeit often from the background, most of the "popular" disarmament campaigns, such as those supporting the ABM, SALT, INF, and CWC treaties, and the crusades against building a U.S. missile defense system. . The WPC has supported, with financial aid and propaganda, terrorist organizations such as the PLO, ANC, UDT, and SWAPO. In fact, the WPC has included leaders of terrorist groups among its top officers. Which is hardly surprising considering that the WPC's longtime president, Romesh Chandra, was a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India. The Soviet "control agent" over Chandra for many years was KGB officer Aleksandr Berkov, who was later replaced by fellow KGB officer Igor Belyayev. Although Chandra was the WPC's front man, Berkov and Belyayev actually called the shots — as directed by Moscow. .
WPC national affiliates, such as the U.S. Peace Council (USPC), were
and are controlled by national Communist parties. The WPC and USPC closely
coordinate their activities with other KGB-connected groups, such as the
Institute for Policy Studies, Women's International League for Peace and
Freedom, the Women's Strike for Peace, the Center for International Policy,
the Center for Defense Information, Citizens Committee for a Sane World, and
others.
They prattled that the nuclear weapon states are "flouting the World Court" and the rule of law by not disarming. They cited "eminent" scholars who argued that the U.S. and the other nuclear states risk running afoul of "the Nuremberg Principles" and "international humanitarian law."43
They posed as the moral voice of the majority of the
world's non-nuclear powers while rebuking the major powers for endangering
the planet because of chauvinistic adherence to narrow national and
ideological interests.
And when their congressional offices are besieged with an
orchestrated campaign of telephone calls, e-mails, faxes, and letters; while
CNN, C-Span, and the other networks are all spewing forth the same story —
even the stalwart begin to crumble before such an onslaught. That is what
has been happening, and what we can expect to see a great deal more of, as
the advocates of "global democracy" continue to press their fraudulent and
totalitarian agenda.
However, the existence of strong organizational leadership opens up real opportunities. For more on the antidote, the reader may wish to jump to Chapter 14. However, there is still much more to the story.
The following chapters will examine some of the other prominent strategies of this cabal.
|