The genesis of UN Agenda 21 can be traced back to 1963. The Iron Mountain Report recommends that the governments should create a fake environmental disaster. The UN took the ball and invented Global Warming that became Climate Change.
Report from Iron
Mountain is a book published in 1967 (during
the Johnson
Administration) by Dial Press which puts itself
forth as the report of a government panel. The book includes the claim it was
authored by a Special Study Group of fifteen men whose identities were to
remain secret and that it was not intended to be made public. It details the analyses
of a government panel which concludes that war, or a credible substitute for
war, is necessary if governments are to maintain power. The book was a New York Times bestseller and
has been translated into fifteen languages. Controversy still swirls over
whether the book was a satiric hoax about think-tank logic and writing
style or the product of a secret government panel. The document is a favorite
among conspiracy theorists, who reject the statement made in 1972 by
satirist Leonard Lewin that the book was
a spoof and that he was its author.[1]
Publishing history
The book was first
published in 1967 by Dial Press, and went out of print
in 1980. E. L. Doctorow, then an editor at
Dial, and Dial president Richard Baron agreed with Lewin and Victor Navasky to
list the book as nonfiction and to turn aside questions about its authenticity
by citing the footnotes.[2]
Liberty Lobby put out an edition
c. 1990, claiming that it was a U.S. government document, and therefore
inherently in the public domain; Lewin sued them
for copyright infringement,
which resulted in a settlement. According to The New York Times,
"Neither side would reveal the full terms of the settlement, but Lewin
received more than a thousand copies of the bootlegged version."[2]
A new paperback edition
was published in 2008.[3] Likewise, an edition
was brought out in 1993 by Buccaneer Books, a small publisher reprinting out of
print political classics. It is unclear whether this was authorized by the
author.
In response to the bootleg editions, Simon & Schuster brought out a new hardcover edition in 1996 under their Free Press imprint, authorized by Lewin, with a new introduction by Navasky and afterword by Lewin both insisting the book was fictional and satire, and discussing the original controversy over the book and the more recent interest in it by conspiracy theorists.
Contents
According to the report,
a 15-member panel, called the Special Study Group, was set up in 1963 to
examine what problems would occur if the United States entered a state of lasting peace. They
met at an underground nuclear bunker called Iron Mountain (as well as other,
worldwide locations) and worked over the next two years. A member of the panel,
one "John Doe", a professor at a
college in the Midwest, decided to release the report to the public.
The heavily footnoted
report concluded that peace was not in the interest of a stable society, that
even if lasting peace "could be achieved, it would almost certainly not be
in the best interests of society to achieve it." War was a part of the
economy. Therefore, it was necessary to conceive a state of war for a stable
economy. The government, the group theorized, would not exist without war,
and nation states existed in order
to wage war. War served the vital function of diverting collective aggression.
They recommended "credible substitutes" and paying a "blood
price" to emulate the economic functions of war. Prospective
government-devised alternatives to war included reports of alien life-forms, the
reintroduction of a "euphemized form" of slavery "consistent
with modern technology and political processes", and - one deemed
particularly promising in gaining the attention of the malleable masses - the
threat of "gross pollution of the environment".
Reaction by Lyndon Johnson
U.S.
News & World Report claimed in its
November 20, 1967, issue to have confirmation of the reality of the report from
an unnamed government official, who added that when President Johnson read
the report, he 'hit the roof' and ordered it to be suppressed for all time.
Additionally, sources were said to have revealed that orders were sent to U.S.
embassies, instructing them to emphasize that the book had no relation to U.S.
Government policy.[4]
Authenticity
When it was first
published, controversy surrounded the book over the question whether it was a
hoax or real. In an article in the March 19, 1972 edition of The
New York Times Book Review, Lewin said that he had
written the book.[5]
The book was listed in
the Guinness
Book of World Records as the "Most
Successful Literary Hoax." Some people claim that the book is genuine and
has only been called a hoax as a means of damage control. Trans-Action devoted
an issue to the debate over the book. Esquire magazine
published a 28,000-word excerpt.[2]
In a remembrance of E.
L. Doctorow published in 2015 in The Nation, Victor Navasky
asserted his involvement in creating Report from Iron Mountain,
naming Leonard Lewin as the main writer with "input" from
economist John Kenneth Galbraith, two
editors of the satirical magazine Monocle (Marvin Kitman and
Richard Lingeman) and himself. [6]
Purported
statements made by John Kenneth Galbraith in support of authenticity
On November 26, 1967,
the report was reviewed in the book section of The Washington Post by Herschel McLandress,
supposedly the pen name for Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith.
McLandress wrote that he knew firsthand of the report's authenticity because he
had been invited to participate in its creation; that although he was unable to
be part of the official group, he was consulted from time to time and had been
asked to keep the project secret; and that while he doubted the wisdom of
letting the public know about the report, he agreed totally with its
conclusions.
He wrote: "As I
would put my personal repute behind the authenticity of this document, so would
I testify to the validity of its conclusions. My reservation relates only to
the wisdom of releasing it to an obviously unconditioned public."[7]
Six weeks later, in
an Associated
Press dispatch from London, Galbraith went even further and
jokingly admitted that he was a member of the conspiracy.[8] The following day,
Galbraith backed off. When asked about his 'conspiracy' statement, he replied:
"For the first time since Charles II The Times has been guilty of
a misquotation... Nothing shakes my conviction that it was written by
either Dean Rusk or Mrs. Clare Boothe Luce".[9]
The original reporter
reported the following six days later: "Misquoting seems to be a hazard to
which Professor Galbraith is prone. The latest edition of the Cambridge newspaper Varsity
quotes the following (tape recorded) interchange: Interviewer: 'Are you aware
of the identity of the author of Report from Iron Mountain?' Galbraith: 'I was
in general a member of the conspiracy, but I was not the author. I have always
assumed that it was the man who wrote the foreword – Mr. Lewin'."[10]
In an article published
in New York in
2013, Victor Navasky asserted that
Galbraith was indeed McLandress, and that he was "in on the hoax from the
beginning."[11]
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment