From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part I, Federal Gov't Mind-Control Programs Subvert U.S. Education
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:25:42 GMT
Followup-To: Follow-up To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: federal government mind-control programs subvert U.S. edcations


        I made the following transcript from a tape recording 
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       (212) 279-0707

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                        (continuation)
GARY NULL:
There's a lot in our educational system that we're not teaching
that should be a part of the curricula. I've invited someone who is
now on the line. My guest is Beverly Eckman. She's an author. She's
and educator. She is a person concerned in the areas of politics,
education and public affairs. She has served as the chief speech
writer for such figures as Richard Carlson, the Director of the
Voice of America, and Chief Justice Warren Burger, and for groups.

She has also written for various publications. Welcome to the
program, Bev. Let's go to some allegations. And I'd like you to
address them in detail, with documentation for each allegation.

BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Alright.  The allegations on educating for the New World Order,
first and foremost, are that the Federal Government is developing
and establishing curriculum in violation of Federal law. The state
governments have the right to establish curriculum, but not the
Federal Government.

Secondly, that testing and curriculum are connected to each other, 
and that both are coordinated and funded using Federal dollars
(and that is what took four years to uncover) in such a way that
the Federal Government would pick up on it.

Thirdly, that the U.S. Department of Education is in collusion with
the Carnegie organization -- primarily with the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching (There are others and they all
trade money back and forth. But mainly, it's the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching); and that they are also in
collusion with state education agencies, which they have revamped
and restructured, so that they could help turn around the educational 
system in a completely different fashion, dedicating it to
totally different ends, which we can talk about in just a moment.

That brings me right into the fourth allegation: Privacy Act
violations are rampant, particularly with regard to the
computerization of testing and survey devices in conjunction with
the use of social security numbers and other identifiers which
permit data to be linked with the Federal and state computer systems.
And, of course, that does lead to this dossier-building capability
that we can also talk about in just a moment.

The fifth allegation is that state and Federal education agencies
are fraudulently passing off attitudinal, psychological and
behavioral surveys, studies, tests and curricula as academics and
substantive learning. In fact, Bob Gray of the Privacy Office up
there in Washington said that our best case probably was fraud.
He had the fraud hotline, as a matter of fact. And he said that it
was one of the best cases of fraud he'd ever heard.

The sixth allegation -- and this is from the professional literature
associated with the testing and survey devices that we found via
computer. Those learning programs -- when you get the administrative
literature and the interpretive literature -- state plainly what
the thrust of the materials are. But this information is kept from
parents and the casual investigator. In other words, when they
came out of the computer, if they were psychological therapy, it
said so. But nothing like that is stamped on the material once the
teacher has it in hand or when the parents get hold of it.

The seventh allegation is that in the process of refining these
attitudinal, psychological and behavioral strategies that are
being used in the classroom, the Government, through its     
tax-supported labs and centers (which is where a lot of this stuff
comes out of) is supporting a policy of irresponsible scientific
experimentation. That is, the Government is subsidizing the
practice of medicine without a license, in effect. The experiments
are poorly controlled, the repercussions are not fully understood,
and the strategies themselves are often not fully accepted by
professionals in the field.

And finally, the last thing: the book alleges that a political
weapon is being created, wittingly or unwittingly, as the result
of computerization, which allows personal information to be linked
in such a way as to generate dossiers on individuals and families,
demographic, religious and ethnic groups.

The way I weave the story together is through a Pennsylvania woman
named Anita Hoag who basically uncovered it because of the complaint
that she lodged back in 1986. And what we found is that the state
bureaucracies, the state education agencies, the way they are
configured today, are serving as the fall-guys. They are really
taking the heat off the Federal Government by making it look like
these are decentralized policies -- that these are state initiatives,
when they're really not.

These initiatives, for instance, to do testings and to set goals
according to behavioral objectives .... these are Federal mandates,
and  you have to go very far into it to find that and really hold
that over their heads. And then finally they wil admit, yes these
were Federal mandates. Yes, we had to do this.

GARY NULL:
Alright.  Let's look at this in a larger context. What you seem to
be saying is that the Federal Government or certain agencies of
the Federal Government have taken it upon themselves to have a
special agenda in education; in effect, creating a curriculum that
would allow a whole group of people to be educated based upon what
they consider "right thinking", "right philosophy", "right attitudes."
Now, of course, those are going to be "right" based upon the
people who created them.

BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Exactly.

GARY NULL:
And they are not taking into consideration individual, cultural and
religious differences. They are simply saying: "We all should 
think the same way to serve a particular political agenda."     
In effect, we are creating a nation (in a lesser form) of a
"Manchurian Candidate" attitude. 

BEVERLY ECKMAN:
Yes, that's correct.  That's a good way of putting it.
                       (to be continued)
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

      If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
      please assist in its dissemination by posting it to other
      bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
      both on and off campus.

      John DiNardo