Türk Siyaseti ve Türkiye Siyasi Tarihi - Video Projesi - Türk ve İslam Tarihi - Türk Dna'sı

Skulls and Bones Bildirisi No. 10

Birinci Dünya Savaşının galibi İngiltere'dir. İngiliz devletini yöneten unsur kraliyet hanedanlığıdır. Bilindiği gibi İngilizler, Almanlar, Hollandalılar ve Fransızlar gibi Cermen milletinin bir mensubudurlar.
Birinci Dünya Savaşından sonra Dünyayı yöneten unsurun Birinci Dünya Savaşının galibi ve baş aktörü olan ülkenin olduğunu anlamamız gerekir.
İşte bu İngiltere devleti, kendisinin bir uzantısı olan Amerikan devleti ve Almanya devletindeki bazı aile şirketlerini, şeytani tarikatları ve hükümet nezdindeki önemli kişileri kullanarak(ve ayrıca onları büyütüp, ünlü yapıp, sahneye çıkartıp ve sonrasındada besleyip), Devlet+Mafya-Tarikat-Gladyo sistemini İkinci Dünya Savaşı öncesinde ve sırasında kurmaya çalışmak istemiştir ve başarılı olmuştur.
Nasıl başarılı olmuştur ve bu Devlet+Mafya-Tarikat-Gladyo sisteminin içinde kimler var?
Devlet: İngiltere-Amerika.
Devleti Yöneten Hanedan(İngiliz/Cermen Milletine Hizmet Ediyor): Windsor(İngiliz Cermen Kökenli) ve Rothschild(Hazar Türk Kökenli) sülalelerinin karışımı
Mafya: Rockefeller-Rothschild-JP Morgan gibi sülale şirketleri
Tarikat: İlluminati, Mason, Bilderberg gibi şeytani tarikatlar
Gladyo: İngilizlerin kontrolünde olan Faşist İktidarlar: İngiliz Ajanı Kukla Hitler ve Kukla Nazi Devleti/Hükümeti, ve İngiliz Ajanı Kukla Stalin ve Lenin'in Sovyetler Birliği'nin Yıkımını Amaçlayan Yeni Sovyet Devleti/Hükümeti.
Bu konu hakkında ayrıntılı bilgileri bu forumdaki başlıklarda bulabilirsiniz.

Skulls and Bones Bildirisi No. 10

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 05 May 2011, 01:41

Memorandum Number Ten: Keeping The Lid On The Pot

The Order's control of history, through foundations and the American Historical Association, has been effective.

Not so much because of outright censorship, although that is an important element, but more because of the gullibility of the American "educated public:

From time to time their plans go awry. The bubbling pot of political manipulation - it's called conflict management on the inside - threatens to spill over into public view. It is extraordinary how newspaper editors, columnists, TV and radio commentators, and publishers either lack insight to see beyond the superficial or are scared witless to do so. Even worse, the educated public, the 30-40 million degree holders, lets these opinion molders get away with it.
Outright censorship has not been too effective. There has certainly been a campaign to suppress revisionist interpretations of history.

Witness Harry Elmer Barnes in The Struggle Against The Historical Blackout:

It may be said, with great restraint, that, never since the Dark and Middle Ages, have there been so many powerful forces organized and alerted against the assertion and acceptance of historical truth as are active today to prevent the facts about the responsibility for the second World War and its results from being made generally accessible to the American public. Even the great Rockefeller Foundation frankly admits (Annual Report, 1946, p. 188) the subsidizing of a corps of historians to anticipate and frustrate the development of any neo-Revisionism in our time. And the only difference between this Foundation and several others is that it has been more candid and forthright about its politics. This author's personal experience of attempted outright censorship was at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, when the Director attempted to suppress publication of my then forthcoming National Suicide: Military Aid To The Soviet Union. The facts weren't in question. Unfortunately, the book offended the Nixon-Kissinger program to aid the Soviets while they were aiding the North Vietnamese - so in effect, Americans were being killed by our own technology. In this case neither author nor publisher was in a mood to listen, and the Establishment put tail between legs and called it a day.

More effective than outright censorship is use of the left-right political spectrum to neutralize unwelcome facts and ideas or just condition citizens to think along certain lines.

The "left" leaning segment of the press can always be relied upon to automatically assault ideas and information from the "right" and vice versa. In fact, media outlets have been artificially set up just for this purpose: both Nation and New Republic on the "left" were financed by Willard Straight, using Payne Whitney (The Order) funds. On the "right" National Review published by William Buckley (The Order) runs a perpetual deficit. presumably made up by Buckley.

Neither the independent right nor the independent left sees the trap. They are so busy firing at each other they've mostly forgotten to look behind the scenes. And The Order smugly claims control of the "moderate" center. A neat game, and it's worked like a charm. But the establishment has a problem . . .

In Fact, It Has Several Problems

They are on the inside looking out. We are on the outside looking in. They may call us "peasants" but we have the advantage of knowing about the real world and its infinite diversity. Their global objectives are dreams based on skewed information. Dangerous dreams, but still dreams.

(1) The Order Lives In A Cultural Straightjacket

All the power in the world is useless without accurate information. If you meet these people as this author has more or less casually over 30 years, one impression comes to the forefront - they are charming but with a limited perception of the world. They may have global ambitions, they may act politically like miniature power houses, but their knowledge of the world comes from an in-group and those who play along with the in-group. And the in-group lacks morality and diversity. It's a kind of jet Set Politburo. Charming, power-hungry and myopic simultaneously.
All it can offer to the outsider is an invitation, almost an ultimatum, "You are part of the establishment." Which has as much interest for many as a Frederick Bundy fish fillet. Perhaps one of the exceptions is house conservative William Buckley, Jr. - at least his cynicism is marked by witty incisiveness. The rest are a pretty sad bunch.

(2) An Easy Prey For the Ambitious

Limited perception makes members of The Order a target and an easy prey for the ambitious outsider . . . who needs only the ability to say the right things at the right time to the right people, coupled with a sense of unscrupulousness. Henry Kissinger is a prime example - an outsider who wants desperately to stay on the inside. More devious than clever, but expert at using deviousness for his own ends.
Conservative readers may not agree, but Secretary of State Dean Acheson, who defended a guilty Alger Hiss to the bitter end, was probably more stupid than culpable.

Which leads us to,

(3) Genetic Problems

Extensive intermarriage among the families raises a serious question of genetic malfunctions. Membership lists are heavily laced with Dodge, Whitney, Phelps, Perkins, Norton, Putnam used as middle (maternal) names. Cultural inhibitions are obvious, the intellectual limitations from genetic factors are more difficult to analyze and describe.

(4) Shallow Power Base

It may be as Rosenbaum comments, that The Order is "incredibly powerful". On the other hand, it is also incredibly weak - there is no philosophic or cultural depth to The Order. Diversity is strength and The Order lacks diversity.

The vast bulk of the American people, that giant melting pot of Anglo, Germanic, Slavic, Hispanic, black, yellow, and who knows what else has been suckered. Many of them know it. Some are now going to know by whom.

When they've overcome the disbelief, the shock and perhaps some fear, they are surely going to say "What do we do?."
The great strength of individualism, an atomistic social order where the individual holds ultimate sovereignty, is that any counter revolution to an imposed social order where the State is boss, can take a million roads and a million forms.

No one is going to create an anti-The Order movement. That would be foolish and unnecessary. It could be infiltrated, bought off, or diverted all too easily. Much too easily. Why play by the rules set by the enemy?

The movement that will topple The Order will be extremely simple and most effective. It will be ten thousand or a million Americans who come to the conclusion that they don't want the State to be boss, that they prefer to live under the protection of the Constitution. They will make their own independent decision to thwart The Order, and it will take ten thousand or a million forms.

The only weakness is communication. The Order has so wrecked education that reading comprehension is difficult for many - that's part of the brainwashing program. But there are more than enough readers. Most people prefer to talk, anyway.

The program of The Order might work in Russia, which has a history of obedience to the State; it's barely working in Poland, while in England "The Group" survives because enough of class structure and attitude remain. It can never work in the United States.


In the first introductory volume we have laid out the preliminary groundwork and suggested some hypotheses we need to examine. An understanding of The Order, the havoc it has wreaked on American society, its plans for future havoc - perpetual war for perpetual peace - is a logical step by step process.
The next step is to look at education. Our present educational chaos can be traced to three members of The Order: Daniel Coit Gilman (First President of University of California and First President of Johns Hopkins University), Timothy Dwight (twelfth President of Yale University) and Andrew Dickson White (First President of Cornell University).

Gilman imported the experimental psychology of Hegelian physiologist Wilhelm Wundt from Germany. This psychology was grafted onto the American education system through the educational laboratories at Columbia and Chicago University. And they moved a familiar name, John Dewey, a pure Hegelian in philosophy, along the fast track in his career. This has been aptly termed "The Leipzig Connection" by Lance J. Klass and Paolo Lionni.

Then we shall look at the Foundations, how these were captured by The Order and their gigantic funds used to finance a Hegelian educational system designed to condition future society. It is doubtful if John D. Rockefeller or Mrs. Russell Sage, and certainly the Ford family, ever quite understood how their philanthropies were used for a long-term conditioning plan.

It is also doubtful if The Order forecast the public backlash of the 1970s and 1980s - not all children have succumbed to the social conditioning brainwashing, parents have more than once risen in part revolt, private schools have sprouted like spring flowers in the desert and perhaps enough academics have slipped through a net designed to contain and neutralize independent research and thinking.

After we have looked at education and foundations we still have to work our way through the system of "perpetual war for perpetual peace." How The Order has financed revolution and profited from war. The objective? To keep the conflict boiling because conflict for Hegel is essential for change and the forward motion of society. Then we have to look at the financial system and the Federal Reserve. The Order was there right from the start.

In conclusion we must emphasize one point. An understanding of The Order and its modus operandi is impossible unless the reader holds in mind the Hegelian roots of the game plan. Hegelianism is alien to grass roots America. The national character is straightforward and to the point, not devious and tortuous. The grass roots are still closer to the American Revolution, the Jeffersonian Democrats, the classical liberal school of Cobden and Bright in England, and the Austrian School of Economics where Ludwig von Mises is the undisputed leader.

These schools of thought have been submerged in the public eye by pirate-like onslaught of The Order and its many minions, but they still very much represent the daily operation of American society. From billionaire Bunker Hunt in Dallas, Texas to the seventeen year old black trying to "survive" in the Los Angeles ghetto, individual initiative is still more than obvious in American society.

A Statist system is the objective of The Order. But in spite of constant prattling about "change" by zombie supporters - such a system is foreign to deeply held beliefs in this country.

Above all the reader must - at least temporarily while reading this work - put to one side the descriptive cliches of left and right, liberal and conservative, communist and fascist, even republican and democrat These terms may be important for self recognition, they do provide a certain reassurance, but they are confusing in our context unless seen as essential elements in a game plan. You will never understand The Order if you try to label it right or left.
A Robert Taft and a William Buckley on the right are just as important -- the forward motion of society, the fundamental change desired by The Order, as a William Sloan Coffin and a Harry Payne Whitney (who financed the left). Their conflict is essential for change.


This hypothesis, of course, reflects the gulf between The Order and American society. The gulf stems from the differing views of the relationship between the State and the individual.

Which is superior? Our whole way of life is based on the assumption -at the individual is superior to the State. That the individual is the ---mate holder of sovereignty. That the State is the servant of the people. It's deeply engrained within us.
The Order holds the opposite - that the State is superior, that the common man (the peasant) can find freedom only by obedience to the State.
Now, of course, the State is a fiction. So who or what controls the State? Obviously, The Order.

Memorandum Number One: It All Began At Yale

The first volume of this series introduced The Order, presented three preliminary hypotheses with examples of the evidence to come.
We also asserted that any group that wanted to control the future of American society had first to control education, i.e., the population of the future. This volume will outline the way in which education has been controlled by The Order.
It all began at Yale. Even the official Yale history is aware of Yale's power and success: "The power of the place remain(s) unmistakable. Yale was organized. Yale inspired a loyalty in its sons that was conspicuous and impressive. Yale men in after life made such records that the suspicion was that even there they were working for each other. In short, Yale was exasperatingly and mysteriously successful. To rival institutions and to academic reformers there was something irritating and disquieting about old Yale College."1
"Yale was exasperatingly and mysteriously successful," says the official history.
And this success was more than obvious to Yale's chief competitor, Harvard University. So obvious, in fact, that in 1892 a young Harvard instructor, George Santanyana, went to Yale to investigate this "disturbing legend" of Yale power. Santanyana quoted a Harvard alumnus who intended to send his son to Yale - because in real life "all the Harvard men are working for Yale men."

But no one has previously asked an obvious question - Why? What is this "Yale power"?

A Revolutionary Yale Trio

In the 1850s, three members of The Order left Yale and working together, at times with other members along the way, made a revolution that changed the face, direction and purpose of American education. It was a rapid, quiet revolution, and eminently successful. The American people even today, in 1983, are not aware of a coup d'etat.

The revolutionary trio were:

• Timothy Dwight ('49) Professor in the Yale Divinity School and then 12th President of Yale University.
• Daniel Coit Gilman ('52), first President of the University of California, first President of the Johns Hopkins University and first President of the Carnegie Institution.
• Andrew Dickson White ('53), first President of Cornell University and first President of the American Historical Association.

This notable trio were all initiated into The Order within a few years of each other (1849, 1852, 1853). They immediately set off for Europe. AD three went to study philosophy at the University of Berlin, where post-Hegelian philosophy had a monopoly.

• Dwight studied at the Universities of Berlin and Bonn between 1856 and 1858,
• Gilman was at the University of Berlin between 1854 and 55 under Karl von Ritter and
Friedrich Trendelenberg, both prominent "Right" Hegelians, and
• White studied at the University of Berlin between 1856 and 1858.

Notably also at the University of Berlin in 1856 (at the Institute of Physiology) was none other than Wilhelm Wundt, the founder of experimental psychology in Germany and the later source of the dozens of American PhDs who came back from Leipzig, Germany to start the modern American education movement.
Why is the German experience so important? Because these were the formative years, the immediate post graduate years for these three men, the years when they were planning the future, and at this period Germany was dominated by the Hegelian philosophical ferment.

There were two groups of these Hegelians. The right Hegelians, were the roots of Prussian militarism and the spring for the unification of Germany and the rise of Hitler. Key names among right Hegelians were Karl Ritter (at the University of Berlin where our trio studied), Baron von Bismarck, and Baron von Stockmar, confidential adviser to Queen Victoria over in England. Somewhat before this, Karl Theodor Dalberg 1744-1817), arch-chancellor in the German Reich, related to Lord Acton in England and an Illuminati (Baco v Verulam in the Illuminati code), was a right Hegelian.
There were also Left Hegelians, the promoters of scientific socialism. Most famous of these, of course, are Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, H=inrich Heine, Max Stirner and Moses Hess.

The point to hold in mind is that both groups use Hegelian theory of :he State as a start point, i.e., the State is superior to the individual. Prussian militarism, Nazism and Marxism have the same philosophic roots.
And it left its mark on our trio.

And what do you think I am "keeping" for? Tell me, some day when you write, for every year makes me feel that I must draw nearer to a point. When I go home to America I must have some definite notions. Day and night I think of that time, and in all I see and do I am planning for being useful at home. I find my wishes cling more and more towards a home in New England, and I long for an opportunity to influence New England minds. If I am an editor, New York is the place; but, to tell the truth, I am a little afraid of its excitements, its politics, its money-making whirl. I look therefore more and more to the ministry as probably the place where I can do more good than anywhere else; that is to say, if I can have a congregation which will let me preach such things as we have talked over so many times in our up-stairs confabs. I am glad you remember those talks with pleasure, for I look upon them as among the greatest "providences" of my life. If ever I make anything in this world or another I shall owe it to the blessed influences of home. For me, it seems as though new notions and wider views of men and things were crowding upon me with wonderful rapidity, and every day and almost every hour I think of some new things which I wish to have accomplished in America I find my thoughts, unconsciously, almost, dwelling on the applications of Christianity or the principles of the New Testament to business, study, public education, political questions, travel, and so forth. I had a long talk with Mr. Porter in Berlin (it was three days long with occasional interruptions) on topics related to such as I have named, and he assures me that there are many places in New England ripe for the advocacy of some such views upon these questions as I have often hinted to you at home.

I told him a great deal about my thoughts on such things, talking quite as freely and perhaps more fully than I have ever done with you girls at home:

He seemed exceedingly interested. He told me that the kind of preaching I spoke of was the kind now needed - the kind which would be most influential of good - and on the whole he encouraged me to attempt it. I feel more and more desirous to do so, and shall keep on, in all I see and hear abroad, with the examination of every influence now working upon men - churches and schools, politics and literature . . .

Daniel Coit Gilman is the key activist in the revolution of education by The Order. The Gilman family came to the United States from Norfolk, England in 1638. On his mother's side, the Coit family came from Wales to Salem, Massachusetts before 1638.

Gilman was born in Norwich, Connecticut July 8, 1831, from a family laced with members of The Order and links to Yale College (as it was known at that time).
Uncle Henry Coit Kingsley (The Order '34) was Treasurer of Yale from 1862 to 1886. James I. Kingsley was Gilman's uncle and a Professor at Yale. William M. Kingsley, a cousin, was editor of the influential journal New Englander.

On the Coit side of the family, Joshua Coit was a member of The Order in 1853 as well as William Coit in 1887.
Gilman's brother-in-law, the Reverend Joseph Parrish Thompson ('38) was in The Order.
Gilman returned from Europe in late 1855 and spent the next 14 years in New Haven, Connecticut - almost entirely in and around Yale, consolidating the power of The Order.

His first task in 1856 was to incorporate Skull & Bones as a legal entity under the name of The Russell Trust. Gilman became Treasurer and William H. Russell, the cofounder, was President. It is notable that there is no mention of The Order, Skull & Bones, The Russell Trust, or any secret society activity in Gilman's biography, nor in open records. The Order, so far as its members are concerned, is designed to be secret, and apart from one or two inconsequential slips, meaningless unless one has the whole picture. The Order has been remarkably adept at keeping its secret. In other words, The Order fulfills our first requirement for a conspiracy - i.e., IT IS SECRET.

The information on The Order that we are using surfaced by accident. In a way similar to the surfacing of the Illuminati papers in 1783, when a messenger carrying Illuminati papers was killed and the Bavarian police found the documents. All that exists publicly for The Order is the charter of the Russell Trust, and that tells you nothing.

On the public record then, Gilman became assistant Librarian at Yale in the fall of 1856 and "in October he was chosen to fill a vacancy on the New Haven Board of Education." In 1858 he was appointed Librarian at Yale. Then he moved to bigger tasks.

The Sheffield Scientific School

The Sheffield Scientific School, the science departments at Yale, exemplifies the way in which The Order came to control Yale and then the United States.
In the early 1850s, Yale science was insignificant, just two or three very small departments. In 1861 these were concentrated into the Sheffield Scientific School with private funds from Joseph E. Sheffield. Gilman went to work to raise more funds for expansion.

Gilman's brother had married the daughter of Chemistry Professor Benjamin Silliman (The Order, 1837). This brought Gilman into contact with Professor Dana, also a member of the Silliman family, and this group decided that Gilman should write a report on reorganization of Sheffield. This was done and entitled "Proposed Plan for the Complete Reorganization of the School of Science Connected with Yale College."

While this plan was worked out, friends and members of The Order made moves in Washington, D.C., and the Connecticut State Legislature to get state funding for the Sheffield Scientific School. The Morrill Land Bill was introduced into Congress in 1857, passed in 1859, but vetoed by President Buchanan. It was later signed by President Lincoln. This bill, now known as the Land Grant College Act, donated public lands for State colleges of agriculture and sciences and of course Gilman's report on just such a college was ready. The legal procedure was for the Federal government to issue land scrip in proportion to a state's representation, but state legislatures first had to pass legislation accepting the scrip. Not only was Daniel Gilman first on the scene -o get Federal land scrip, he was first among all the states and grabbed all of Connecticut's share for Sheffield Scientific School! Gilman had, of course, tailored his report to fit the amount forthcoming for Connecticut. No other institution in Connecticut received even a whisper until 1893, when Storrs Agricultural College received a land grant.

Of course it helped that a member of The Order, Augustus Brandegee ('49), was speaker of the Connecticut State Legislature in 1861 when the state bill was moving through, accepting Connecticut's share for Sheffield. Other members of The Order, like Stephen W. Kellogg ('46) and William Russell ('33), were either in the State Legislature or had influence from past service.

The Order repeated the same grab for public funds in New York State. All of New York's share of the Land Grant College Act went to Cornell University. Andrew Dickson White, a member of our trio, was the key activist in New York and later became first President of Cornell. Daniel Gilman was rewarded by Yale and became Professor of Physical Geography at Sheffield in 1863.

In brief, The Order was able to corner the total state shares for Connecticut and New York, cutting out other scholastic institutions. This is the first example of scores we shall present in this series - how The Order uses public funds for its own objectives.

And this, of course, is the great advantage of Hegel for an elite. The State is absolute. But the State is also a fiction. So if The Order can manipulate the State, it in effect becomes the absolute. A neat game. And like the Hegelian dialectic process we cited in the first volume, the Order has worked it like a charm.

Back to Sheffield Scientific School. The Order now had funds for Sheffield and proceeded to consolidate its control. In February 1871 the School was incorporated and the following became trustees:

Charles J. Sheffield
Prof. G.J. Brush (Gilman's close friend) Daniel Coit Gilman (The Order, '52) W.T. Trowbridge
John S. Beach (The Order, '39) William W. Phelps (The Order, '60)
Out of six trustees, three were in The Order. In addition, George St. John Sheffield, son of the benefactor, was initiated in 1863, and the first Dean of Sheffield was J.A. Porter, also the first member of Scroll & Key (the supposedly competitive senior society at Yale).

How The Order Came To Control Yale University

From Sheffield Scientific School The Order broadened its horizons. The Order's control over all Yale was evident by the 1870s, even under the administration of Noah Porter (1871-1881), who was not a member. In the decades after the 1870s, The Order tightened its grip.

The Iconoclast (October 13, 1873) summarizes the facts we have presented on control of Yale by The Order, without being fully aware of the details:

"They have obtained control of Yale. Its business is performed by them. Money paid to the college must pass into their hands, and be subject to their will. No doubt they are worthy men in themselves, but the many whom they looked down upon while in college, cannot so far forget as to give money freely into their hands. Men in Wall Street complain that the college comes straight to them for help, instead of asking each graduate for his share. The reason is found in a remark made by one of Yale's and America's first men: "Few will give but Bones men, and they care far more for their society than they do for the college.' The Woolsey Fund has but a struggling existence, for kindred reasons."

"Here, then, appears the true reason for Yale's poverty. She is controlled by a few men who shut themselves off from others, and assume to be their superiors . . . " The anonymous writer of Iconoclast blames The Order for the poverty of Yale. But worse was to come. Then-President Noah Porter was the last of the clerical Presidents of Yale (1871-1881), and the last without either membership or family connections to The Order.

After 1871 the Yale Presidency became almost a fiefdom for The Order.
From 1886 to 1899, member Timothy Dwight ('49) was President, followed by another member of The Order, Arthur Twining Hadley (1899 to 1921). Then came James R. Angell (1921-37), not a member of The Order, who came to Yale from the University of Chicago where he worked with Dewey, built the School of Education, and was past President of the American Psychological Association.

From 1937 to 1950 Charles Seymour, a member of The Order was President followed by Alfred Whitney Griswold from 1950 to 1963. Griswold was not a member, but both the Griswold and Whitney families have members in The Order. For example, Dwight Torrey Griswold ('08) and William Edward Schenk Griswold ('99) were in The Order. In 1963 Kingman Brewster took over as President. The Brewster family has had several members in The Order, in law and the ministry rather than education.

We can best conclude this memorandum with a quotation from the anonymous Yale observer: "Whatever want the college suffers, whatever is lacking in her educational course, whatever disgrace lies in her poor buildings, whatever embarrassments have beset her needy students, so far as money could have availed, the weight of blame lies upon this ill-starred society. The pecuniary question is one of the future as well as of the present and past. Year by year the deadly evil is growing. The society was never as obnoxious to the college as it is today, and it is just this ill-feeling that shuts the pockets of nonmembers. Never before has it shown such arrogance and self-fancied superiority. It grasps the College Press and endeavors to rule in all. It does not deign to show its credentials, but clutches at power with the silence of conscious guilt."

Memorandum Number Two: The Look-Say Reading Scam

A tragic failure of American education in this century has been a failure to teach children how to read and write and how to express themselves in a literary form. For the educational system this may not be too distressing. As we shall see later, their prime purpose is not to teach subject matter but to condition children to live as socially integrated citizen units in an organic society - a real life enactment of the Hegelian absolute State. In this State the individual finds freedom only in obedience to the State, consequently the function of education is to prepare the individual citizen unit for smooth entry into the organic whole.
However, it is puzzling that the educational system allowed reading to deteriorate so markedly. It could be that The Order wants the citizen components of the organic State to be little more than automated order takers; after all a citizen who cannot read and write is not going to challenge The Order. But this is surmise. It is not, on the basis of the evidence presently at hand, a provable proposition.

In any event, the system adopted the look-say method of learning to read, originally developed for deaf mutes. The system has produced generations of Americans who are functionally illiterate. Yet, reading is essential for learning and learning is essential for most occupations. And certainly those who can read or write lack vocabulary in depth and stylistic skills. There are, of course, exceptions. This author spent five years teaching at a State University in the early 1960s and was appalled by the general inability to write coherent English, yet gratified that some students had not only evaded the system, acquired vocabulary and writing skills, but these exceptions had the most skepticism about The Establishment.

The Order comes into adoption of the look-say method directly and indirectly. Let's start at the beginning.

The Founder Of Deaf Mute Instruction

Look-say reading methods were developed around 1810 for deaf mutes by a truly remarkable man, Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet. Thomas H. Gallaudet was the eldest son of Peter Wallace Gallaudet, descended from a French Huguenot family, and Jane Hopkins. Jane Hopkins traced her ancestry back to John Hopkins and the Reverend Thomas Hooker in the seventeenth century, who broke away from the Congregational Church to help found Hartford, Connecticut. This parallels the story of the Lord family (see Volume One). The Lords also traced their ancestry back to Hopkins and Hooker and the Lords founded Hartford, Connecticut. And it was in Hartford, Connecticut in 1835 that a printer named Lord produced Thomas Gallaudet's first look-say primer, Mother's Primer.
Gallaudet's original intention was to use the look-say method only for deaf mutes who have no concept of a spoken language and are therefore unaware of phonetic sounds for letters. For this purpose, Gallaudet founded the Hartford School for the Deaf in 1817. The Gallaudet system works well for deaf mutes, but there is no obvious reason to use it for those who have the ability to hear sounds.

Anyway, in 1835 Mother's Primer was published and the Massachusetts Primary School Committee under Horace Mann immediately adopted the book on an experimental basis. Later we shall find that Horace Mann ties directly to The Order - in fact, the cofounder of The Order. On pages 73-74 we reproduce two pages from the second edition of 1836, with the following directions to the teacher: . . . pointing to the whole word Frank, but not to the letters. Nothing is yet to be said about letters..."

Why did Horace Mann push a method designed for deaf mutes onto a school system populated with persons who were not deaf mutes? There are two possible reasons. The reader can take his or her pick. First, in 1853 Mann was appointed President of Antioch College. The most influential Trustee of Antioch College was the co-founder of The Order - Alphonso Taft.
Second, Mann never had a proper education and consequently was unable to judge a good method from a bad method for reading.

Here's a description of Mann's school days:

"The opportunities for the lad's schooling were extremely meager. The locality enjoyed the reputation of being the smallest school district, with the poorest school house and the cheapest teacher in the State."

Mann's teacher was Samuel Barratt and we quote:

"In arithmetic he was an idiot. He could not recite the multiplication table and could not tell the time of day by the clock ... Six months of the year he was an earnest and reliable teacher, tasting nothing stronger than tea, then for another six months he gave himself up to a state of beastly drunkenness . . ."

By 1840 there was a backlash, and the look-say system was dropped in Massachusetts.

The Second Attempt

Towards the end of the 19th century The Order came on the scene - and the look-say method was revived. The youngest son of Thomas Hopkins and Sophia Gallaudet was Edward Miner Gallaudet.

Two of -is sons went to Yale and became members of The Order:

• Edson Fessenden Gallaudet ('93), who became an instructor of physics at Yale, and
• Herbert Draper Gallaudet ('98), who attended Union Theological Seminary and became a clergyman. Then the method was adopted by Columbia Teachers' College and the Lincoln School. The thrust of the new Dewey-inspired system of education was away from learning and towards preparing a child to be a unit in the organic society. Look-say was ideal for Deweyites. It skipped one step in the learning process. It looked "easy," and de-emphasized reading skills.
The educational establishment rationalized look-say be claiming that up to the turn of the century reading was taught by "synthetic" methods, i.e., children were taught letters and an associated sound value. Then they learned to join syllables to make words. This was held to be uninteresting and artificial. Educational research, it was claimed, demonstrated that in reading words are not analyzed into component letter parts but seen as complete units. Therefore, learning to read should start with complete units.


Of course, there is a gigantic non-sequitur in this reasoning process. Certainly a skilled reader does see words as complete units. And a really skilled reader does see lines and paragraphs at a glance. But the ac¬curacy of perceiving the whole is based on the degree of understanding and knowledge of the component parts.

The educational establishment argues today in the 1980s that, based on further experimental testing, it is easier for a child to read the line "the rocket zoomed into space" than "the cat sat on the mat." The first line has "contrasting visual structure" and the second quote has a "similar visual pattern."

What they have done now is to make a mountain out of a molehill, convert the relatively simple task of learning to read into an unnecessarily complex system. Why? That we shall see as the story progresses.

Kitap: Americas Secret Establishment An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones
Yazar: Antony C Sutton
Kullanıcı avatarı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Dön İngiltere ve Amerika Birliği Faaliyetleri: 2. Dünya Savaşı ve Türk Soyumuzun Baş Düşmanı olan Cermen Menfaat Merkezi'nin Kuruluşu

Kimler çevrimiçi

Bu forumu gezen kullanıcılar: Hiç bir kayıtlı kullanıcı yok ve 2 misafir