In 1997, Michael Douglas starred in a movie titled The Game. The brief description of the movie on IMDB goes like this:
After a wealthy banker is given an opportunity to participate in a mysterious game, his life is turned upside down when he becomes unable to distinguish between the game and reality.
I remembered that movie as I was trying to think of how to explain The Helsinki Game: Battle of Ideas and Systems in such a way that people would understand that it’s real and it’s what is breaking apart our country.
The game began in 1975 when Gerald Ford signed the Helsinki Final Act and in 1982, when Ronald Reagan accepted the challenge of the Soviets to a Battle of Ideas and Systems, the playing field was defined: security, economic and human dimension. The purpose of the game was: Whose ideology and systems of governing would prevail – The communist ideology and systems of the East or the capitalist ideology and systems of the west.
Normalcy bias will prevent most people from accepting the fact that we were set up by the leaders of our own respective countries for a psychotic, real time game for global totalitarian control. Why would they do it this way rather than fighting it out man-to-man? Because the fear they used to create the east-west divide was nuclear annihilation for both sides. That interrupts commerce. Besides, combat is a man’s game. Women can’t play effectively. In an all out war of ideas and systems, women can play equally as well as men. It should be noted that while I use the language of games, it is not a game. It is a deadly serious contest for global control and the future of humanity.
From 1982 through 1989, George P. Shultz was the Secretary of State. Obviously, in an international contest of this magnitude, the Secretary of State is like the Supreme Allied Commander of Diplomacy. A paper found on the Rand Corporation website titled: The Case of the Soviet Union: The Dictator’s Dilemma quotes George Shultz:
Totalitarian societies face a dilemma: either they try to stifle these [information and communication] technologies and thereby fall further behind in the new industrial revolution, or else they permit these technologies and see their totalitarian control inevitably eroded. In fact, they do not have a choice, because they will never be able entirely to block the tide of technological advance. George Shultz, 1985
A little farther down in the paper, the author sums up the dilemma more succinctly:
The dictator may be stuck with a stark choice between securing the rewards of either the invisible hand or the iron fist, market success or social control.
The obvious solution to the Dictator’s Dilemma is: The Invisible Fist.
Ubiquitous computing combined with the partnership between government and corporations has resulted in a technocratic tyranny that is in fact, an Invisible Fist.
The following are a few excerpts at the beginning of the paper, Dictator’s Dilemma (with emphasis added):
The Role of Information
Proselytizing his Foreign Affairs thesis, the U.S. Secretary of State held a continuing “‘information age’ classroom in the Kremlin” in preparation for presidential summits. Shultz claimed in his memoirs that these tutoring sessions had a “profound impact” on Gorbachev. Recalling meetings in Moscow before the 1985 Geneva summit, Shultz wrote:
I then talked about the information age. . . . “Society is beginning to reorganize itself in profound ways. Closed and compartmented societies cannot take advantage of the information age. People must be free to express themselves, move around, emigrate and travel if they want to, challenge accepted ways without fear. Otherwise they can’t take advantage of the opportunities available. The Soviet economy will have to be radically changed to adapt to the new era.” Far from being offended, Gorbachev lighted up, “You should take over the planning office here in Moscow, become the new head of Gosplan [the Soviet ministry charged with economic planning], because you have more ideas than they have.” (591)
Gorbachev did seem to have learned the lessons well. Three years later, speaking before the General Assembly of the United Nations, he announced,
The newest techniques of communications, mass information and transport have made the world more visible and more tangible to everyone. International communication is easier now than ever before. Nowadays, it is virtually impossible for any society to be “closed.” (1988)
George Shultz, our Supreme Allied Commander of Diplomacy set the stage for information and communications technology to be the weapons in The Helsinki: Battle of Ideas and Systems and Gorbachev’s reference to transport is an indicator that systems for transportation were the initial focal point.
On the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) website, there is a brochure documenting the history of how Sam Nunn came to write the legislation for the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction legislation. The following is an excerpt:
In August of 1991, as General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev was on a working vacation in the Crimea, hard-line Soviet leaders penetrated his security, cut his communications, detained him in his compound and launched a coup.
Three days later, after the coup failed and Secretary Gorbachev returned to Moscow, Senator Sam Nunn, then at a conference in Budapest, received an urgent phone call from a long-time Russian friend, pressing him to come to Moscow immediately. Nunn arrived the next day, heard raucous debates in Parliament, saw angry demonstrations on the street and with the sense that a new country was being born, visited Mikhail Gorbachev in the Kremlin.
The Soviet leader tried to assure the Senator that things were under control, but as Nunn left the meeting, he asked: “Did you retain command and control of nuclear weapons during the coup?”
Gorbachev did not answer. In Nunn’s mind, that was answer enough.
Gorbachev’s speech to the United Nations in 1988 when he mentioned communications, mass information and transport couldn’t possibly be a coincidence with what followed the August Coup. The timeline for the transportation technology projects in Europe and Germany in particular coincide with the beginning of the transportation technology project in the U.S. All events line up as if strategically planned using a Gantt Chart with the August Coup serving as the milestone event for the next phase. Significant support for that idea is the fact that nobody was executed for the failed attempted coup on the Soviet government. That was a first in Russian history. Also, the NTI brochure doesn’t say this, but Sam Nunn was at an Aspen Institute conference in Budapest when the alleged attempted coup occurred. This put Sam Nunn in position to be able to fly to Moscow without public scrutiny.
The theatre of an attempted – but failed coup served as a dialectic to justify building a global logistics system with point-to-point tracking including chain of custody to prevent loose nukes of a collapsed Soviet Union from falling into the hands of terrorists.
In 1993, Ron Dellums was Chairman of the Armed Services Committee. H.R. 2401, The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, included
Title XII — Cooperative Threat Reduction with States of Former Soviet Union.
Sec. 1202 The Congress finds that it is in the national security interest of the United States for the United States to do the following:
(1) Facilitate, on a priority basis, the transportation, storage, safeguarding, and elimination of nuclear and other weapons of the independent states of the Former Soviet Union…
(2) Facilitate, on a priority basis, the prevention of proliferation of weapons (and components of weapons) of mass destruction and destabilizing conventional weapons of the independent states of the former Soviet Union and the establishment of verifiable safeguards against the proliferation of such weapons and components.
(3) Facilitate, on a priority basis, the prevention of diversion of weapons-related scientific expertise of the independent states of the former Soviet Union to terrorist groups or third world countries.
(A) the demilitarization of the defense-related industry and equipment of the independent states of the former Soviet Union, and
(B) the conversion of such industry and equipment to civilian purposes and uses.
(5) Expand military-to-military and defense contacts between the United States and the independent states of the former Soviet Union.
Title XIII — Defense Conversion, Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance
The operative word in Title XII is Cooperative. The so-called Peace Dividend of the 1990’s was money taken from the military for the purpose of integration of the military into the domestic economy as they were doing the same thing to the Soviet military — hence Defense Conversion.
The plan to embed the military into the domestic economy included reorganization of the Defense Department and roles of the Armed Forces. A commission was established for that purpose:
Title IX –Department of Defense Organization and Management, Subtitle E–Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces:
SEC. 951. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The current allocation of roles and missions among the Armed Forces evolved from the practice during World War II to meet the Cold War threat and may no longer be appropriate for the post-Cold War era.
(2) Many analysts believe that a realignment of those roles and mission is essential for the efficiency and effectiveness of the Armed Forces, particularly in light of lower budgetary resources that will be available to the Department of Defense in the future.
(3) The existing process of a triennial review of roles and missions by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff pursuant to provisions of law enacted by the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 has not produced the comprehensive review envisioned by Congress.
(4) It is difficult for any organization, and may be particularly difficult for the Department of Defense, to reform itself without the benefit and authority provided by external perspectives and analysis.
SEC. 952. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is hereby established a commission to be known as the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces (hereinafter in this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘Commission’’).
(b) COMPOSITION AND QUALIFICATIONS.—(1) The Commission shall be composed of seven members. Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense.
(2) The Commission shall be appointed from among private United States citizens with appropriate and diverse military, organizational, and management experiences and historical perspectives.
To integrate the military into civil society required that military requirements for capability and readiness be synchronized with domestic programs and civilian jobs. Towards that end:
Partnership Between the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense
“In 1994 the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) entered into a cooperative agreement to develop technologies of value to both. This agreement, codified in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and signed by the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, formalized and focused a longstanding ad hoc relationship. To manage this technology development program and to direct its day-to-day activities, the MOU established a Joint Program Steering Group (JPSG) that would represent both departments and be staffed with members from several agencies.”
[MOU source: “The Development of ‘Non-Lethal’ Weapons During the 1990’s, footnote 26. Researcher Amanda Teegarden, OK-SAFE].
Several other reports were found to support the allegation that the military has been embedded in civilian society while maintaining their military mission.
Assessing the Potential for Civil-Military Integration: Technologies, Processes, and Practices
September 1994, OTA-ISS-611
Excerpt p. 14-15: (emphasis added)
Definitions are essential–not only for the term “civil-military integration,” but also for the various related activities, such as “commercial goods” and “commercial services.” Policy formulation for CMI has been handicapped by the lack of a standard definition of CMI. OTA developed a working definition of CMI (see chapter 3), and definitions of commercial goods and services (see chapter 4).
In this study, Civil-Military Integration (CMI) is defined as the process of uniting the Defense Technology and Industrial Base (DTIB) and the larger Commercial Technology and Industrial Base (CTIB) into a unified National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB). Under CMI, common technologies, processes, labor, equipment, material, and/or facilities would be used to meet both defense and commercial needs.
On the Defense Technical Information Center website, there is a report titled Combatant Logistics Command and Control for the Joint Forces Commander. This report contains a history of the military’s logistics systems status over time and plans for increased capabilities. The following is the abstract of the report:
Joint doctrine says that commanders must also exercise control over logistics. Control requires information. Logistics is not included in the warfighter’s command and control system, but needs to be. Logistics in the Gulf War is examined to identify the kinds of information, and planning and analysis capabilities needed. In the Gulf War, General Schwartzkopf sought to assure that his forces had adequate sustainability by exercising control over logistics and requiring that 60 days of supply of all commodities (fuel, water, ordnance, other) be in-theater. These stockpiles took a long time to accumulate, created a huge footprint, represented potential vulnerabilities, and much of the material had to be back hauled when the war ended. This brute force approach was necessitated by the absence of sustainment planning and prediction tools. The creation of such tools and their inclusion in a combatant logistics command and control system is necessary for what the JCS is calling Focused Logistics. This report is an analysis of the requirement for and some of the characteristics of such a system.
Logistics for a Combatant Commander in charge of the security of a region involves control of transportation hubs within his region. It is in the transportation hubs, logistics and supply chains where the synchronicity between the military and the civilian management is revealed and the military coup d’etat on civilian government is accomplished.
John P. White was the Chairman of the Commission on Roles and Commissions for military transformation as called for in the NDAA of 1994. Following the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City in April of 1995, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13010 establishing the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure. A Steering Committee was established reporting to the Commission. John P. White was appointed to the Steering Committee. (Source: President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure – Overview Briefing Page 4.
Fusion Centers defined for civilian purpose are also military fusion centers for military purpose and fusion centers include transportation hubs. Notice DOD is shown on this diagram of fusion centers.
They are bankrupting the civilian side of the economy building their military transportation hubs and fusion centers while integrating military requirements into the domestic economy behind the domestic curtain of economic development. As if that weren’t enough, the fusion centers are the hubs of the police state.
On September 11, 2001, we entered the realm of the virtual reality of information operations with video of an airplane flying into a building at a transportation hub. What’s real and what isn’t? What’s military and what is civilian? Most importantly, is it an American business or is it the operation of a foreign military behind a domestic business cover.