"Battle of Ideas and Systems"
In 1956, at a reception for
diplomats Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, in one of his highly
charged, emotional tirades said, "We
Will Bury You!"
"We are Bolsheviks!" he declared pugnaciously. "We stick firmly
to the Lenin precept—don't be stubborn if you see you are wrong, but
don't give in if you are right." "When are you right?" interjected
First Deputy Premier Mikoyan—and the crowd laughed. Nikita plunged
on, turning to the Western diplomats. "About the capitalist states,
it doesn't depend on you whether or not we exist. If you don't like
us. don't accept our invitations, and don't invite us to come to see
you. Whether you like it or not. history is on our side. We will
April 17, 1894 -
September 11, 1971
His not so well known words - which our diplomats apparently missed
His voice was scornful as he added: "But we, Mister Capitalists,
we are beginning to understand your methods."
By this time, the diplomats—who, in turn, have come to understand
Mister Khrushchev's methods—had already left the room.
Skipping ahead in time, after
the political assassination of Vice President Spiro Agnew, President
Richard Nixon selected
Gerald R. Ford Jr. (alias Leslie Lynch King) as a replacement for
Agnew. Not long after that, the Watergate burglary and Deep Throat took Nixon out
and put Ford in the White House as the only un-elected President to hold
In August of 1975, Gerald R. Ford committed an act of the treason
against the people of the United States when he signed the Helsinki
Final Act. The
Helsinki Agreement was allegedly for cooperation for the
reunification of Germany. But the "tell" as to the real intent as
it pertains to the United States was that Canada was also a signatory
and in his speech at the signing, West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt
referred to the Canada and the U.S. in the collective:
The States of Europe and North America, recognizing their common
responsibility, have tried "to build bridges of co-operation between
the systems, spanning the gulfs that divide them".
Premier Brezhnev defined the intellectual context (emphasis added):
Premier Brezhnev said (excerpted): Before this exceptionally
authoritative audience we would like to stress most emphatically one
of the inherent features of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union:
the Leninist policy of peace and friendship among nations; its
humanism. The decisions of the 24th Congress of our Party are imbued
with the ideas of humanism, as is the Peace Programme, which called
in one of its items for the convocation of an all-European
conference... The understandings we have reached here on
many items expand the possibilities for peoples to increase their
influence upon what is called "grand policy at a high level".
At the same time they touch upon worldly problems. They will
contribute to improving the lives of people, providing them with
jobs and expanding opportunities for education. They are relevant to
health care... It has been a victory of reason.
State Department documents reveal that the
post war reorganization of the U.S. Government
was in large part to create a shadow government that would work covertly
to collectivize European nations into an association which came to be
known as the European Union. The U.S. signing of the Helsinki
Agreement was characterized as the U.S. playing the part of observer but
with the benefit of hindsight, clearly, they were agreeing to subvert U.S.,
Canadian and Mexican sovereignty as well by elimination of borders and
integration of governments to create a regional union - the North
(Note: there is a difference between cooperation and co-operation.
They used the term co-operation).
Co-Operation called for in the Helsinki Final Act:
Basket 1. Security
Basket 2. Co-operation in the fields of economics, of science and
technology, and environment
Basket 3. Security and Co-operation in the Mediterranean,
Co-Operation in Humanitarian and other Fields
The "Co-Operation" included exchanges of professionals and businesses
in all areas of endeavor listed in Helsinki Final Act. To
understand how our country has been infiltrated with marxist ideology,
all one needs to do is to study the Helsinki Agreement.
In 1974, Nelson
Rockefeller was sworn in as Vice President. The following are
significant excerpts from
Rockefeller's Senate biography (emphasis added):
In 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt
appointed the thirty-two-year-old Rockefeller to the new post of
coordinator of the Office of Inter-American Affairs. It was a shrewd
move on Roosevelt's part, designed to mute the Rockefeller family's
support of Wendell Willkie for president that year. Although his
brothers served in uniform, Nelson held civilian posts throughout World
War II, becoming assistant secretary of state for American republics
affairs in 1944. He played a key role in hemispheric policy at the
United Nations Conference held in San Francisco, developing consensus
for regional pacts (such as the Rio Pact and NATO) within the UN's
framework. Although President Roosevelt tried to lure Rockefeller
into the Democratic party, he remained loyal to his family's Republican
ties. When Roosevelt died, his successor showed less appreciation for
Rockefeller's talents. In August 1945 the failed haberdasher Harry
Truman fired the multimillionaire Rockefeller, in order to settle a
dispute within the State Department.
Rockefeller returned to government during
Dwight Eisenhower's administration, where he chaired a committee on
government organization, became under secretary of the new Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, served as special assistant to the
president for cold war strategy, and headed the secret "Forty
Committee," a group of high government officials who were charged with
overseeing the CIA's clandestine operations...
Gerald Ford told the nation that he wanted
his vice president to be "a full partner," especially in domestic
policy. "Nelson, I think, has a particular and maybe peculiar
capability of balancing the pros and cons in many social programs, and I
think he has a reputation and the leadership capability," Ford
explained. "I want him to be very active in the Domestic Council, even
to the extent of being chairman of the Domestic Council." But during
the months while Rockefeller's nomination stalled in Congress, Ford's
new White House staff established its control of the executive branch
and had no intention of sharing power with the vice president and his
staff. One Rockefeller aide lamented that the "first four month
shakedown was critical and he wasn't involved. That was when the
relationship evolved and we were on Capitol Hill fighting for
Rockefeller envisioned taking charge of
domestic policies the same way that Henry Kissinger ran foreign policy
in the Ford administration. Gerald Ford seemed to acquiesce, but
chief of staff Donald Rumsfeld objected to the vice president preempting
the president. When Rockefeller tried to implement Ford's promise
that domestic policymakers would report to the president via the vice
president, Rumsfeld intervened with various objections. Rockefeller
shifted gears and had one of his trusted assistants, James Cannon,
appointed chief of the Domestic Council. Rumsfeld responded by cutting
the Council's budget to the bone. Rockefeller then moved to develop his
own policies independent of the Domestic Council. Tapping the scientist
Edward Teller, who had worked for Rockefeller's Commission on Critical
Choices, he proposed a $100 billion Energy Independence Authority.
Although Ford endorsed the energy plan, the president's economic and
environmental advisers lined up solidly against it.
Commission on Critical Choices
The Commission on Critical Choices was
formed by Nelson Rockefeller in 1973. The organization of the
Commission was documented in a book titled, "Trilaterals
Over Washington" by Anthony Sutton and Patrick Wood. Except
from Book 2, Chapter 5:
THE COMMISSION ON CRITICAL
CHOICES FOR AMERICANS
In its own words,
“The Commission on Critical Choices for
Americans is a nationally representative, bipartisan group of 42
prominent Americans, brought together under the chairmanship of
Nelson A. Rockefeller. Their assignment: To identify the critical
choices which will confront America as it embarks on its third
century as a nation and to determine the realistic and desirable
objectives this nation can achieve by 1985 and the year 2000.
“Because of the complexity and interdependence of issues facing the
world today, the Commission organized its work into six study
panels, which emphasize the interrelationships of the critical
choices rather than studying each one separately.
“The six study panels are:
Panel I—Energy and Its Relationship
to Ecology: Economics and World Stability.
Panel II—Food, Health, World Population and Quality of Life.
Panel III—Raw Materials, Industrial Development, Capital
Formation, Employment and World Trade.
Panel IV—International Trade and Monetary Systems, Inflation and
the Relationships Among Differing Economics Systems.
Panel V—Change, National Security and Peace, and
Panel VI -Quality of Life of
Individuals and Communities in the U.S.A.”9
In brief, the Commission is a Rockefeller
study group funded by a Rockefeller organization:
“The Third Century Corporation, a New
York not for-profit organization, was created to finance the work of
the Commission. Since the start of its activities in the fall of
1973, the Corporation has received contributions and pledges from
individuals and from foundations well-known for their support of
public interest activities. “10
The membership of the Commission reflects
this Rockefeller influence:
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON
CRITICAL CHOICES FOR AMERICANS
Chairman -Nelson E. Rockefeller
Executive Director -Henry L. Diamond
• Gerald R. Ford
• Henry A. Kissinger
• George P. Shultz
• Mike Mansfield
• Hugh Scott
• Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr.
• John J. Rhodes
• Ivan Allen, Jr.
• Martin Anderson
• Robert O. Anderson
• William O. Baker
• Daniel J. Boorstin
• Norman E. Borlaug
• Ernest L. Boyer
• Guido Calabresi
• John S. Foster, Jr.
• Luther H. Foster
• Nancy Hanks Kissinger
• Belton Kleberg Johnson
• Clarence B. Jones
• Joseph Lane Kirkland
• John H. Knowles, M.D.
• David S. Landes
• Mary Wells Lawrence
• Sol M. Linowitz
• Ed ward J. Logue
• Clare Boothe Luce
• Paul W. McCracken
• Daniel Patrick Moynihan
• Bess Myerson
• William S. Paley
• Russell W. Peterson
• Wilson Riles
• Laurence S. Rockefeller
• William J. Ronan
• Oscar M. Ruebhausen
• Joseph C. Swidler
• Edward Teller
• Marina v.N. Whitman
• Carroll L. Wilson
• George D. Woods
Of the above members an unusual number
received personal gifts from Nelson Rockefeller and were consequently
under some obligation to the Rockefeller family. We know of the
Henry A. Kissinger. Received a
$50,000.00 gift in January 1969.
Nancy Hanks. Later married to Henry
Edwin J. Logue. In 1968 received a
gift of $31,389 followed by another $145,000 of which $45,000
William J. Ronan. Received a gift of
$75,000 in 1958 and $550,000 in 1974.
Henry L. Diamond. Executive Director
of the Commission, received a gift of $100,000 in December 1973.
significance of the Commission's Panels is that they roughly correspond
to the basket items for "co-operation" in the Helsinki Final Act.
It would seem that Rockefeller set
the terms for the Agreement since his Commission was established while
he was Governor of New York and was two years before the Act was signed
by Gerald Ford. That
thinking is supported by... Marble Cake?
Time Essay: THE MARBLE-CAKE GOVERNMENT Washington's New Partnership with
May 27, 1966
ago, Washington used to offer simple, straightforward directions to
any state or city that received federal aid. The directions went
something like this: "Take as directed. Do not shake. Do not stir.
Swallow hard." The states were not very fond of the directions, but
they wanted the funds that came with them—and they swallowed their
objections. Now something new and interesting is happening to the
often strained relations between the Federal Government and the
nation's states and cities. To a degree that few people could have
anticipated only a short time ago, Washington is actively seeking
the help, cooperation and counsel of the states, the cities and a
vast array of volunteer groups and private industries. It is forging
new partnerships that have wide-ranging implications.
goes by the name of creative
federalism, a term suggested by New York's Governor Nelson
Rockefeller in his 1962 Godkin Lectures at Harvard and picked up by
Lyndon Johnson in his "Great Society" speech at Ann Arbor, Mich., in
1964. Far from seeking a stronger role for the Federal Government—as
it sometimes has been thought to do—creative federalism not only
asks states and cities to do more on their own, but challenges the
concept that governmental power is a one-level reservoir from which
every cup drawn by Washington means a loss for someone else.
Instead, as Max Ways wrote in FORTUNE, "creative federalism starts
from the contrary belief that total power —private and public,
individual and organizational—is expanding very rapidly."
Fast forward to 1980, Ronald Reagan was elected as
President with George H. W. Bush as the Director of Vice
(President). Reagan had learned the art of
propaganda as a host for CBS's 'General Electric Theatre from Lemuel
Boulware. Boulware was the Deputy Director of the
labor-relations for War Production Board during World War II.
And Reagan was the best. When he spoke, he hit every nerve in the
conservative political body without giving a hint to the populace that
he really was a communist. And it's only in hindsight - by looking
at what he did rather than what he said, that he is revealed.
Reagan gave a speech to the British Parliament that is stunning.
He described the problems with the Soviet Union and their system; he
then proposed that the United States establish the same system of
propaganda with think tanks and Foundations to provide the ideological
Excerpts from Reagan's speech:
As for the Soviet view, Chairman Brezhnev repeatedly has stressed
that the competition of ideas and systems must continue and that
this is entirely consistent with relaxation of tensions and peace.
We ask only that these systems begin by living up to their own
constitutions, abiding by their own laws, and complying with the
international obligations they have undertaken. We ask only for a
process, a direction, a basic code of decency -- not for an instant
This November in Washington there will take place an
international meeting on free elections and next spring there will
be a conference of world authorities on constitutionalism and self
government hosted by the Chief Justice of the United States.
Authorities from a number of developing and developed countries --
judges, philosophers, and politicians with practical experience --
have agreed to explore how to turn principle into practice and
further the rule of law.
At the same time, we invite the Soviet Union to consider with us how
the competition of ideas and values -- which it is committed to
support -- can be conducted on a peaceful and reciprocal basis. For
example, I am prepared to offer President Brezhnev an opportunity to
speak to the American people on our television, if he will allow me
the same opportunity with the Soviet people. We also suggest that
panels of our newsmen periodically appear on each other's television
to discuss major events.
June 11, 1982, Reagan traveled to Berlin to give a speech in which
he said the following:
"We in the West have made our choice.
America and our allies welcome peaceful competition in ideas, in
economics, and in all facets of human activity. We seek no
advantage. We covet no territory. And we wish to force no ideology
or way of life on others."
But communism - collectivism is not a political philosophy. It
is an institutionalized criminal enterprise. They centralize
control for asset stripping from the population leaving people destitute
with no resources available to produce and with a gun to their heads if
they complain. And that is exactly what is happening in this
country now. Right straight down the line - every negative thing
that Reagan said about the Soviet system is what is happening to our
country now. And why is that? It is because Reagan invited the
Soviets into this country for a "Battle of Ideas and Systems" just as
Chairman Brezhnev suggested and what was agreed to in the Helsinki Final
In 1983 and 1986, Reagan signed agreements with Mexico and Canada
respectively that were the first steps towards unification our countries
to create the North American Union. These were the first steps
towards breaking our nation by creating international zones for the
communists to work through and use under the cover of the United Nations
Wikipedia, 1986 was also the year that Mikhail Gorbachev introduced
his alleged reforms.
Mikhail Gorbachev was the Party's first leader to have been born
Revolution. As de facto ruler of the USSR, he tried to reform
the stagnating Party and the state economy by introducing
demokratizatsiya ("democratization"), and
uskoreniye ("acceleration" of economic development), which
were launched at the 27th Congress of the CPSU in February 1986.
Brezhnev's "Battle of
Ideas and Systems" combined with Gorbachev's
initiatives of glasnost, perestroika, democratization certainly sound as
if they had studied the writings of Antonio Gramsci as well as "our
methods" - just as Khrushchev said.
In 1984, Reagan announced his Strategic Defense Initiative dubbed
'Star Wars'. Despite the Futurists vision of a space shield, this
initiative was no doubt about the development of satellite
communications, conversion to digital switching systems for
telecommunications and GPS systems. But the definition of
Strategic Defense seems to encompass everything except bullets.
"A Strategic defence is a type of military
planning doctrine and a set of combat activities
used for the purpose of deterring, resisting and
repelling a strategic offensive, conducted as either
a territorial or airspace invasion, or a naval
offensive to interrupt shipping lane traffic as a
form of economic warfare. Strategic defensive need
not be passive in nature, and often involves
military deception, propaganda and psychological
warfare, as well as pre-emptive strategies. All
forms of military force are included in the
planning, and often civil defence organisations are
In terms of military theory, strategic defensive
thinking seeks to understand and appreciate the
theoretical and historical background to any given
war and conflict scenario facing the decision-makers
at the national level. The requirement of the
decision makers for the strategic defence analysts
is usually for providing a detailed understanding of
strategic and defence issues of relevance to the
national and regional relations and intentions."
It's not known
if the duality of the Star Wars label was intentional or coincidental
(doubtful), but when Reagan opened up the United States for the Soviet
propaganda machine, he ushered in the era of the mass brainwashing,
delusions, illusions and 'cult of personality' strategies. In
fact, Reagan himself has what could be described as a cult following.
With Reagan, the political arena became theatre and the line between
reality and fantasy was erased.
The Helsinki Final Act combined
with Gorbachev's reforms have allowed communists to infiltrate every
level of our society to the point now, that the United States is falling
to communism, quisling politicians pretend not to notice, and the mass
media provides nothing but propaganda and cultural Marxism.
America is dying and dirt is thrown in our faces on a daily basis as
they bury us.
Communist Outlets for the Distribution of Soviet Propaganda in the
United (Part 1)
Committee on Un-American
House 87th Congress
Synopsis - Pages 1587-88
Union and its international network of Communist and Workers Parties
utilize numerous weapons in their unrelenting revolutionary struggle to
attain world conquest. One of the principal weapons in their arsenal is
the ingenious application, on a tremendous scale, of a variety of
Stressing the formidable dangers of propaganda as utilized by the world
Communist movement, Evron M. Kirkpatrick states in his book, Target: The
World, that "only in the hands of the Nazi and Communist leaders has
propaganda attained first-rate importance as a weapon for achieving
national and international political goals."
Dr. Kirkpatrick, executive director of the American Political Science
Association, author of books on American government, and former
Government official and chairman of the Social Science Division of the
University of Minnesota, also wrote in the above-named study:
Modern totalitarianism, of which Communism is the pre-eminent example,
has harnessed technology and psychology to persuade, convince, confuse,
demoralize, and control. Inside Communist countries propaganda is used
to control the ideological environment of the people, to secure
obedience, consent, and conformity. Internationally, Communist leaders
utilize propaganda to recruit followers, secure sympathy, and to divide
and demoralize opposition. Universally, Communists use propaganda in the
effort to suggest and insinuate the view of the world most favorable to
their temporary plans and policies and to their long-range goals. Aware
that loyalty and action alike grow not so much from what happens as from
what men think happens, the Communists have developed a huge,
diversified propaganda operation at work night and day * * *.
No one can read the history of the Communist movement, or for that
matter the history of the world in this century, without being impressed
with how crucial the use of the modern means of mass communications, of
propaganda, is to Communist tactics. And yet, in spite of the obvious
importance of propaganda and propaganda activities to the Communists, in
spite of the role these activities have played in the cold war of recent
years, there has been very little Systematic attention devoted to this
on Un-American Activities believes that propaganda directed from Soviet
sources constitutes one of the greatest single threats to the security
of the United States and the free world. Through this weapon, Khrushchev
and other Soviet and national Communist leaders have succeeded in
swaying many millions of non-Communists throughout the world, winning
their support for Soviet policies and turning them against the programs
and policies of the free world.
OUTLETS FOR DISTRIBUTION OF SOVIET PROPAGANDA
The worldwide Communist propaganda offensive is largely an insidious
slander campaign against the United States. The Soviet propaganda
machine consistently characterizes this country as "imperialistic," a
"warmonger," and a participant in war crimes. The Communist propaganda
effort within this country, implemented primarily through the
dissemination of thousands of publications, is designed — by playing on
the hopes and fears of the American people — to subvert the United
States by undermining its foreign policy and Military Establishment.
[Click the above link for the entire text
of part 1 - or
HERE for the large pdf scanned images of the hearing record]
1] Time Magazine, November 26,
1956, Foreign News "We Will Bury You".
Bush, Gorbachev, Shultz and Soviet Education
March 30, 2010