C-Day Minus 10
 

    

The first day of the new Millennium, January 1, 2000 was the date the United States came under 'new management'.  It was the date of the silent coup d'etat on America.  January 1st was judgment day for the Y2k computer system time bomb.  The date passed without any of the major disasters that had been predicted as possibilities but that didn't mean that nothing happened.  The silent coup d'etat happened.

 

Y2k Date Glitch

The Y2k date glitch had to be fixed - there were no options.  This was the opportunity for the government information technology contractors to 'capture and control' the government's critical computer systems all at once without anybody suspecting anything until the time was ripe to use the power afforded them by the control of the systems.   It was - as Art Cebrowski called it - net-centric warfare.

 

Large Scale Computer Systems

People seem not to understand the significance of large scale (i.e. thousands, 10's of thousands, 100's of thousands, millions of people, processes, locations, functions) computer systems to manage large scale operations - such as our government.  They look at the PC on their desk and they think "what's the big deal?".  The big deal is that a PC is to a large scale computer system as an ant is to an elephant.  Without the large scale computer systems producing accurate information for large scale operations, the large scale operations halt... and as the lack of information persists, things deteriorate into chaos as people try to 'cover'.

The keeper of the information systems controls the operation.   For example, consider the possibility that the reports showing the financial condition of the country given to Congress are fraudulent.  Their 'view of the world' is shaped by those reports.  If the reports are wrong - intentionally or not, it means that Congress will make wrong decisions on legislation.  It is in this way that the keepers of the information can control the operation. They can run it to ground if that is their plan.  The ways that the keepers of the information can wreak havoc in an organization are limited only by their imaginations. 

 

 

The Set-Up

In the decade prior to the millennium rollover, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton set the stage for the coup.  Bush dismantled SAC and stood up STRATCOM.  STRATCOM is the military unit that was responsible for integrating the command structure of the Services - creating the 'Joint Command'.  This consolidation of leadership in the Services was the means by which the U.S. nuclear assets were put under the command of one man - one general and the old-line military leaders were shunted aside. 

Bill Clinton dismantled our government and privatized a significant portion of it under the guise of 'reinventing government'.  "Doing more with less" meant getting rid of public employees and replacing them with contracts with private corporations further expanding the concept of 'public-private partnerships' which began under Bush with his 1000 Points of Light network. 

Under the 'public-private' model, government becomes a facade with the power of government transferred to the corporate side of the equation.  This is the means by which communist social change agents are being injected into our communities to 'transform' the American way of life to the communist model - including elimination of private property rights, herding people into 'human settlements', implementing communist control of the labor market, indoctrinating children into the communist 'soviet' system of government.  They are implementing the communist UN System. 

I suspect that the way the scam worked was that Clinton contracted out management of government functions to private corporations.  The deals were no doubt loss leaders so that huge savings could be realized to justify the contracts.  The savings were used to produce the glowing reports of budget surpluses as far as the eye could see.  Obviously however, once the computer systems and functions are firmly in the hands of contractors and the government no longer has expertise to manage the functions, it's just a matter of time before the blackmail begins and the price skyrockets.  Plus... there is always plausible deniability for anything that goes wrong because most people don't understand computer systems management - and the consulting firms have trained corporate management to think that a warm body is just as good as a superstar. 

And.... not surprisingly (I was a contractor in the IT business), I suspected right.  He who controls the computer systems.... controls the enterprise.   12/27/2005

From Donald Rumsfeld's congressional testimony on July 16th 2001

We have a crisis in the workforce in the Pentagon. There are almost three times as many civilian employees as military employees. Over the next three to five years, it's estimated that at least half of those civilian employees are going to be eligible for retirement. Those who are left have inadequate preparation for the kind of technological demands that the Department of Defense needs from them. And it's not just people in the field, it's people at headquarters. The Pentagon is one of the -- perhaps the largest, most outmoded and even anachronistic organization maybe in the world. And we need to figure out how the people that we need can be brought into the Pentagon to do the jobs that are necessary for the 21st century.

Over the last seven years there has been a Reinventing Government initiative, where several hundred thousand federal civilian employees were dismissed. They retired, whatever, downsized. Almost all of that was in the Department of Defense. Many of those positions have not been replaced, an we don't have the people coming in that have the skills that are necessary, particularly in terms of technology.

And:

As you know, the Department of Defense really is not in charge of its civilian workforce, in a certain sense. It's the OPM, or Office of Personnel management, I guess. There are all kinds of long- standing rules and regulations about what you can do and what you can't do. I know Dr. Zakheim's been trying to hire CPAs because the financial systems of the department are so snarled up that we can't account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that's believable. And yet we're told that we can't hire CPAs to help untangle it in many respects.

And:

SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, it is a -- it clearly is disturbing that the department is without the financial management systems so that you can track dollars in a way that you can feel confident, when you answer someone's question as to what happened to various transactions. Every report I have seen indicates that it will take years and years and years to do the job.

And who do they have to rely on to help them to straighten out the mess?   The very same contractors who screwed them - and us.  The multinationals corporations - the IT consulting firms, the accounting firms that helped with the Enron corporate fraud, and the defense technology corporations .  They are draining our economy - exporting the best of our technology and knowledge jobs to India and China. 

Click Here to see a GAO report of the government contractors who aren't even American corporations anymore.  

REP. FRELINGHUYSEN: Part of the business world invests its time in what's called the Business Executives for National Security, BENS group. I know that we've briefly touched on BRAC, and that's a hot point, it's controversial. But that group has come up with a lot of, I think, some great suggestions, including improving process for contracting services, revising the A-76 process in terms of out- sourcing competitions successfully, making the private sector the preferred provider of military family housing, making the private sector the preferred provider of long-haul defense communications, et cetera, et cetera.  [Note: this is why the DOD was selling off military housing on Long Island while our soldiers were in Iraq - leaving their families in trouble for housing.]

More from Rumsfeld - earlier in the testimony:

I mean, in other words, I think you've tried to do your best to go down to the White House and ask for the money that's necessary to get this job done, but you've been turned down. And they have said they will not give you the money.

As we're told, you asked for like $38 billion, and they give -- and OMB said you'll only get 15 (billion), and you wound up with 18 (billion). And we appreciate the fact that you got the 18 (billion).

But what I worry about is, if you, as secretary of Defense, and General Shelton know that the country is underfunding the defense budget, then why can't we convince the president and OMB, which seems to be running this government, that we've got to have a significant increase, or we're going to let America's military capability deteriorate? That is unacceptable.

[As an aside... who are the people behind the computerized, paperless voting systems?

Defense Contractors - of course]

 

Interestingly, it was the congressional hearings on the torture at Abu Ghraib that informed me of the extent to which there had been a merger between the military and the defense contractors - which includes the computer technology firms.  The revealing information that came out of the hearings was that private contractors were the interrogators who instigated the torture of the Iraqi prisoners.  That led me to the military website to search - for information on 'transformation'.  I found a speech by Admiral E. P. Giambastiani that confirmed my suspicions.  The following was found under the heading 'Transformation'.  The transcript of the speech and the diagrams stated that 'transformation' was the corporatization of the military: 

Excerpt of speech by Admiral E. P. Giambastiani 

http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2004/sp031704.htm

"So how can we better integrate industry and JFCOM? How can you parallel our process and participate with us on these initiatives? Brigadier General Jim Warner will brief our plan tomorrow afternoon. And as a reward for sticking around, we can all go golfing afterwards!" "Joint transformation" is something that is still not well understood within the military-both in the United States and in NATO.

To help tell the story on what we mean by "joint transformation," I've brought just three slides. I should make clear that when I use the term "joint operations," I mean the BIG "J" in joint-which refers to a seamless integration of joint forces, interagency and multinational and coalition partners. "

This is just one example of the "process" end of transformation. On the "product" side, you can see that we have focused our efforts on moving the force to a joint operational training environment-and from a force based on attrition warfare to one that is designed and trained to conduct effect-based operations.  [9-11 was an effect-based operation].

You can see the "way ahead" must be aimed at developing and delivering new 4th Block capabilities. We're very pleased that you are here-and your continued participation and robust exchange of information is something that we will need to successfully move our collective organizations to the right.

 

The 'partnership' of the information technology corporations, the defense technology corporations and the 'joint military command'  put the power of government in their hands - not in the hands of congress and not in the hands of government as we knew it.

[Note: In 2003, Louis V. Gerstner, Chairman of IBM became the Chairman of the Carlyle Group; the former Chairman of the Carlyle Group - Frank Carlucci became the Chairman of the Rand Corporation.  The 'talking points' and strategies are communicated from these organizations to corporate leaders via 'associations'. 

 

Corporate Restructuring of America's Defense

So What's Wrong With This?   What's wrong with it - is that the CEO's of America's largest corporations are American in name only.  They are traitors to America.  They are exporting their corporations to foreign countries - leaving only the corporate shell here because the profits are greater to produce in a foreign countries and then to import into the U.S. 

The corporate takeover of our military is giving over our defense to the enemy - the multinational corporations who are loyal only to the bottom line.

http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2418/040927techchina/pfindex.html

John Chambers, the chief executive office (CEO) and president of Cisco Systems, Inc. doesn't care when economists think China is going to become the world's largest economy.  He's just thinking about what needs to be done for Cisco to tape into that market...

"What we're trying to do is outline an entire strategy of becoming a Chinese company," Chambers said.

 

BENS - Recommends Supply Chain Management for Military Procurement (that's why our guys had light weight humvees that lacked armor.  With Supply Chain Management, you don't purchase inventory and store it... you order it when you need it.  Problem is that you can't be ready to defend your country using supply chain management because you don't need anything until you have a war... maybe that's why the perpetual war in Iraq...to make the supply chain management system a workable concept?)

 http://www.bens.org/tail_brief2.html

"Transforming its ponderous and antiquated logistics infrastructure is the most difficult challenge remaining for the US Defense Department as it seeks to adjust to a much smaller post-Cold War force.  However, with challenge comes the opportunity to bring private sector best practices into the solution.  Procedures and techniques, pioneered by the private sector, have direct application to the Department of Defense. Supply Chain Management, Enterprise Resource Planning, and e-business are more than buzzwords in the commercial world.  Companies like FedEx, Cisco Systems, Dell, and Catepillar have revolutionalized their integrated production, transportation, and customer support operations--mostly through stunning advances in information technology.  DoD can tap this talen and technology by partnering to accomplish its own logistics transformation."

Commission on Defense - Supply Chain Management

http://www.bens.org/tail_dscm.html

Panel Pushes Pentagon Privatization (gee... no self-interest there right?)

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0201/022301t1.htm

 

Commentary by Me... following Abu Ghraib revelations

 

http://www.publicintegrity.org/pns/ 

Wolfowitz Speech

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/r20010503-depsecdef.html

"In fact our management initiatives that we're developing in the Rumsfeld Defense Department are so close to the findings of the BENS tail-to-tooth study that we've made that study a major subject of our preparation sessions for our future Service Secretaries."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1351802.stm

President George W Bush has spelt out a hi-tech vision for the US military, with a greater reliance on stealth and precision weapons to deal with new threats.

In a speech to graduates at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, Mr Bush said the US would have to redefine war on its own terms.

Mr. Bush is awaiting a final report from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who is conducting a major defense review

The US joint chiefs of staff are reported to be unhappy with both the way Mr. Rumsfeld has conducted his review - they have been left largely on the sidelines - and with some of its results.

Fundamental defence reform is going to mean the Bush administration taking on some very strong vested interests our correspondent says.

 

 

Corporate Restructuring of America's Defense

http://www.bens.org/pubs_prospectus.html

http://www.dod.gov/advisories/1997/p10151997_p240-97.html

Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen will make remarks at the kickoff meeting of the Business Executives for National Security (BENS) Tail To Tooth Commission at the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 106, 1st and Constitution, Washington, D.C. 9 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, Oct. 16, 1997

The BENS Tail to Tooth Commission will conduct a two-year study aimed at recommending workable business solutions to save the DoD up to $20 billion through outsourcing, BRAC, Acquisition Reform, Joint Requirements, DoD budget planning and headquarters reduction initiatives.

 

http://www.dod.gov/advisories/1997/p10151997_p240-97.html

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/VA-Pilot/issues/1997/vp970216/02140036.htm

 

NAFTA, MFN for China and the WTO

During George H.W. Bush's administration, he 'transformed' economic policy to foreign policy.  NAFTA was negotiated during Bush's administration.  It was signed during Clinton's administration.  Clinton carried on with the policy by giving MFN to China and getting us into the World Trade Organization (WTO).  Since I have information on this in another place in this website, I won't go too much into it here except for the following:

"It is also in the interests of a tyrant to keep his people poor, so that they may not be able to afford the cost of protecting themselves by arms and be so occupied with their daily tasks that they have no time for rebellion." - Aristotle in Politics (J. Sinclair translation, pg. 226, 1962)

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.  The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequence of the lie.  It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its power to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State"  -  Joseph Goebbels (unknown primary source document)

"What good fortune for those in power that the people do not think."
--Adolf Hitler

There was and is no bigger lie than 'Free Trade is Good'.  The spin meisters and gosling reporters have made 'Free Trade' which is actually 'managed trade' seem to be a good thing while 'protectionism' is made to be a bad thing even as the News reports business after business closing down, filing bankruptcy, and moving offshore.  Industry after industry has fallen to foreign competitors, millions of jobs have been exported leaving American citizens unemployed and impoverished, the wealthy keep getting wealthier and the members of Congress have lifetime jobs servicing their corporate masters.