GOVERNMENT IS A CON GAME INVENTED BY THE ROTHSCHILDS AND AIMED AT MORONS_HERE ARE SOME PROOFS OF THEIR INTENT IN THIS VIDEO--AND PROOF OF HOW THEY HAVE CONNED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR DECADES: I became aware of Dr. Sutton’s research while attending Seton Hall University in South Orange, New Jersey in 1972, when I became intrigued with ‘revolution and technology transfers,’ especially since this spelt ‘conspiracy’ with a capital C. Dr. Sutton’s research crystallized this fact, when I recognized the anomaly. Dr. Sutton explains: The way the U.S. perceived the Soviet Union during the Cold War has become known as the perceptions problem. The CIA and the State Department were emphatic; the Soviet Union was a real super power with its own self-developed technology and a threat to the Western world. This of course suited the corporate ambitions of the military industrial complex. This was the prevailing viewpoint reflected in all economic development textbooks, in the media, in military planning and the export control laws. It was the prevailing mythology. This mythology generated giant contracts and stupendous profits. Yet it was truly a mythology. We entered UCLA Graduate School in 1958 after a multi-country, multi-industry experience with industrial technology in Europe, Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Not once in ten years had we encountered any Soviet design technology and we knew that the Soviets were massive importers of the most advanced technology from the West. In our experience the accepted paradigm was absurd....the Soviet Union was actually built by the West and was dependent upon the West for technology. This reality of dependency was concealed by a clever propaganda image that became the dominant reality for the West. At UCLA this view was dominant, i.e., everyone knew that the Soviets were far ahead of the U.S. in technology. No discussion was allowed, as this was verifiable truth, according to UCLA pundits. It was impossible to submit the contrary reality as a doctoral thesis though massive evidence existed and even in the UCLA Main Library! After three years at UCLA, we were ejected from the doctoral program. A sympathetic member of the Department, Dr. Dudley Pegrum, found a position for this [Antony C. Sutton] author at California State University, Los Angeles, as assistant professor of economics. At Cal State we encountered the same hostility and viewpoint: Soviets have their own self-developed technology, every knows that…. But we survived five years before denial of tenure. However, quietly, we began in 1965 a massive self-financed study, a technical analysis of Soviet Industry. For five years we said little and completed the first volume of the three-volume study. The data were not difficult to obtain….the Soviets had convinced THEMSELVES they had a self-generated indigenous technology and the Glavlit censors allowed export of numerous training and equipment manuals and handbooks under the mistaken impression they were needed to maintain Soviet exports of this equipment. These manuals were undeniable evidence of dependence when compared to Western models and designs. Then came one of those fortuitous events that cannot be explained, but broke the barrier of orthodoxy. We sent the manuscript unsolicited to Henry Regnery Company in Chicago. Two weeks later we had a return letter from Henry Regnery himself to the effect that the work was very important but not commercial. Regnery advised we send the manuscript to Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Again by accident, the manuscript arrived on the desk of Alan Belmont, Assistant Director for Administration at Hoover Institution, and the one man in the entire United States best able to judge its accuracy. Belmont had just retired to Hoover from FBI where he was Assistant Director for Domestic Intelligence….and knew firsthand the efforts by the Soviets to acquire U.S. technology through espionage. Belmont sent the manuscript to émigré Russian engineers, those who had worked in the plants using the technology we describe. This route was probably the only way the manuscript could break through the paradigm barrier. This was the breakthrough that Bruce De Palma never found. Pons and Fleischmann had to go to France with Japanese financing to work on their ‘novelty of fact,’ as [Thomas S.] Kuhn describes the barrier phenomenon. Yull Brown [Brown’s Gas] discussed below, found acceptance and award in Australia but rejection in the United States. By 1968 we were at Hoover Institution working on the remaining two volumes. All three were published between 1968-1974 but not without major struggles within Hoover Institution, notably with hostility from former CIA personnel. By the end of 1974 we had three volumes in print. But the fourth volume (on military aspects) led to expulsion from Hoover Institution in a battle led by CIA personnel trying to cover the tracks of inadequate analysis in official Washington. The fourth volume surfaced the military assistance provided by the technical transfers and which were not suspected at all in Washington. We did not know at the time that these volumes had also surfaced the so-called perceptions problem that U.S. intelligence had been suckered by Soviet propaganda. The CIA wanted the military implications concealed to protect their image. This author [Antony C. Sutton] was the unfortunate messenger. The Soviet Union collapsed within 20 years and the world now knows that the system was a technological hoax and an economic disaster. In 1982, CIA Director William Casey admitted that their estimate of dependence was wrong but obliquely suggested that CIA itself had discovered the dependence! In fact, it was our self-financed work going back to the 1950s that surfaced the dependence while CIA reaction to the work was to eliminate the messenger. We have no doubt that history will surface other similar, and maybe some worse, examples of the rigid structure of orthodoxy and its extraordinary cost.
Posted on: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:20:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015