CHANGEMASTERS and JAPAN 2000. Does this answer your Ben Fulford questions?

[GenerationIke]

From Down A New York Rabbit Hole: A story of the CIA:

RIT advises CIA to plan for future--report espouses economic espionage (subheading: RIT tell CIA to turn to economic espionage) by Jennifer Hyman Democrat and Chronicle, May 19, 1991


A confidential report produced by Rochester Institute of Techonolgy for the Central Intelligence Agency argues that the CIA should restructure itself and shift its focus to excnomic and technological espionage.
And in a foreword to the document, RIT President M. Richard Rose commits the school to supportring a stong future role for the clandestine agency, in the interest of "national security."
The report, called "Changemasters," was commissioned and funded by the CIA's Office of Technical Service and prepared by Andrew Doughterty, Rose's executive assistant and one of RIT's chief links with the CIA. (Dougherty was the fall guy. I'm positive Rose was the one who really wrote it, but Dougherty took the blame for him.--But I can't yet prove that with documentation.)
In addition to writing the foreward, Rose was one of six panelists whose discussions are reflected in the report. The panel also included ROBERT MCFARLANE, former national security adviser who was implicated in the Iran-Contra guns-for hostages deal in the mid 1980's.
"Changemasters" is one of a series of strategic planning assessments produced by RIT on behalf of the CIA, and part of the agency's current effort to redefine its role in the post-Cold War era. Rose is currently working for the CIA as a consultant on education, training and the future personnel needs of the agency.
News of his four-month CIA sabbatical triggered calls last month for his resignation and a recent investigation by the Democrat and Chronicle which found that RIT has diverse and longstanding ties with the spy agency.
Million of dollars of CIA money have been funneled into RIT in the past 12 years, most of it for secret research on technological aspects of spycraft.
"Changemasters" argues that with the demise of the Cold War, the threat of conventional warfare has diminished and been replaced by economic warfare. It suggests that the CIA should, in the future, be engaged in economic espionage against the "adversarial" trading partners of the United States and that changes in public law might be needed to enable the agency to sell the intelligence it collects.
The CIA must change its way of doing business if it wants to ensure that it continues to be "the nation's leading resource to support clandestine operations," the report says.
"The organization that does not create a climate to take advantage of change will not, in all likelihood, survive."
"Changemasters" comes at a time when a growing number of commentators and politicians are publicly questioning whether the CIA should survive and whether it is needed any longer, in any form.
At the same time, they warn that as the CIA becomes increasingly irrelevant, it will struggle harder to perpetuate itself.
"we see that the nation's spies are eagerly searching for a new mission to justify their existence," said Sen. Danel Patirck Moynihan, D-NY, in remarks to the Senate in January.
Describing the CIA as the "quintessential product of the Cold War," Moynihan introduced a bill that calls for its dissolution and its intelligence-gathering tasks to be transferred to the State Department.

To be continued. we've all been fast asleep

[GenerationIke]

Continued from part one


Moynihan accused the CIA of seriously undermining the roles of successive secretaries of state by usurping their taks of formulating and conducting foreign policy.
In contrast, Rose's remarks in "Changemasters" assert that the changing international scene makes the job of the covert agency even more vital, difficult and important.
He stresses the significance of national security--which he mentions four times in the three-paraagraph foreword--and the "cutting edge" role the CIA plays in protecting it.
He says that RIT's involvement in the report "registers simultaneously our commitment to national security and our recognition of the change environment that make such security more difficult."
He goes on to say: "We have attempted to bring our experience at RIT, and enlist the support of distinguished Americans who feel as we do regarding the importance of the activities of our intelligence community, to bear on national problems."
But faculty members who have seen the report question whether Rose has the right to assume such commitment on the part of RIT, particularly since the relative importance of national security, compared to other problems, is not an issue on which there is consensus.
Timothy Engstrom, an RIT philosophy professor, said Rose seemed unable to distinguish between his role as the public leader of an important academic institution and his private political commitments.
"He has assumed that his constituents share his views and that he can speak for them, but these are issues people would like to question and debate," Engstrom said.

More to follow.

[GenerationIke]

Part Three

Rose declined repeated requests for a telephone interview at the CIA's Langley, Va, headquarters last week. But Dougherty, his executive assistant, defended Rose, his close friend of 25 years.
"Richard Rose speaks for himself and is aware that RIT is a very large and diverse institution," Dougherty said.
Critics of Rose say that by mixing his private views with his public role, the president risks making RIT a subsidiary of his own political ideology. They resent what they describe as his depiction of RIT as an advocate for a particular agency of central government.
"That opens doors to potential and serious conflicts of interest," said Engstrom.
Engstrom stressed that he was not attempting to deny Rose the fight to hold whatever political views he chose. "Dr. Rose can support anything he likes as a private citizen, but President Rose also has to represent the views of RIT, the institution he publicly leads."
What angers some faculty is that RIT has a policy prohibiting its employees from using their RIT affiliation when they engage in political activities.
Every year, the entire RIT community receives a cautionary letter from
Rose, reminding employees that they may express their personal views on political issues "as long as in so doing they are not acting in their official capacity as an officer or employee of the institution."
RIT history professor Richard Lunt maintains that Rose has contravened his own guidelines by taking a political position on public policy. Lunt also takes issue with Rose's treatment of topics like national security and the activities of espionage agencies as though support from them were absolute and unquestionable.
"He seems to be committing RIT to supporting a strong role for intelligence agencies during the post-Cold War period when in reality, their role is open to debate," said Lunt. "There are many people who believe the key agenda for the United States is not national security, but dealing with its own serious domestic problems, including inequality, a weaking economic structure, education and health care." (HAVE THESE CHANGED ANY OVER THE YEARS? I DON'T THINK SO.)
Faculty point out that Rose has violated his own policy before.
In September last year, for example, he wrote a letter to the editor of the Democrat and Chronicle and Times-Union in support of U. S. Rep. Frank Horton, R-Penfield (a fat cat traitor) who was running for re-election. The Faculty Council sent a letter of protest to Rose, who replied that his letter, published just before an election, had been "an oversight on my part." But he defended his stand on the grounds that Horton was "both a friend of RIT and a personal friend." (and a friend of the CIA, as far as I am concerned.)
Asked why Rose was willing to publicly identify himself, and RIT, with potentially controversial topics such as the CIA, Doughterty said: "There is only one Dr. Rose and he is tottally different. I have known him 25 years. I've never served with anyone of higher, more unflinching moral fiber." (except when it comes to taking from federally desginated legacies of former presidents.)
Dougherty, the CIA's chief contact person at RIT and a vigorous defender of CIA activity there, is a member of the Associaiton of Retired Intelligence Officers. While he confirmed his membership, he denied that he had ever worked for a clandestine organization. (yeah, right.)
Dougherty oversees CIA-sponsored research and training at RIT and is also in charge of the consulting proecess that produces commissioned reports like "Changemasters" (which Rose and Dougherty co-wrote for the CIA, which, I might add, they never worked for according to them!)
Each individual report is funded separately by the CIA, Dougherty said. "They ask us whether we have an interest in doing these things and I select the ones we have the capacity and interest in."
The panel for "Changemasters" met for two days at a hotel near Washington, D. C., in January 1990. Dougherty said they were flown in, had dinner, and then spent the next day together. McFarlane delivered the keynote address. (And he also served as a visiting professor at RIT in 1985. But I'll get to more on that later.)

Tell me Ben Fulford didn't know about this.

McFarlane, referred to in a preface by Dougherty as "the Honorable Robert C. McFarlane," was involved in secret efforts to sell arms to Iran and use the money for covert support of the Nicaraguan Contras. By his own admission, McFarlane assisted others in covering up the truth and misled Congress. For the latter misdemeanors, he was fined $20,000 in 1989, and sentenced to 200hours of community service. (not nearly enough!)
THE PANEL also included two retired senior business executives-- Frank Pipp, former group vice president of Xerox Corp., and W. Brooke Tunstall, who was vice president of AT & T during the Bell System breakup in the 1980's.
Their descriptions of how those companies restructured themselves to better confront new challenges are presented in the report as models for the CIA, notwithstanding its "unique mission."
In fact, business rhetoric laces the report, despite the fact that the "business" of the CIA is spying.
Describing the steps needed in strategic planning, Doughterty writes that the first step is to get "the best possible fix on the business you want to become, then understand what kind of organization it will take to run that future business."
New international realignments, he argues, will provide a "golden opportunity" for the agency to shape itself "to the business of the future," which he identifies as economic espionage. (This is in 1991 and earlier--does it ring a bell yet for anyone in the new millenium?)

It gets better and better.

[GenerationIke]

The next installments will reveal a massive Japan bashing--and the accusation that the country was trying to take down the United States economically. Hind sight is twenty-twenty.

[GenerationIke]

SECRET RIT STUDY BASHES THE JAPANESE by Jennifer Hyman The Democrat and Chronicle May 24, 1991


A confidential report on Japan, prepared by Rochester Institute of Technology for the Central Intelligence Agency, describes Japanese people as "creatures of an ageless, amoral, manipulative and controlling culture" who are conspiring to dominate the world through the cunning use of propaganda and economic power.
The foreword to the document, "Japan: 2000," is written by RIT President M. Richard Rose, who endorses the opinions it expresses. He urges Americans to "embrace a shared vision for our future that is essential to counteract Japan's national vision and their pursuit of world economic dominance."
Rose, who is on sabbatical working for the CIA in Langely, Va., as refused to comment on RIT's connections with the CIA. Andrew Dougherty, Rose's executive assistant and the author of "Japan: 2000," did not return several telephone calls. Japan experts from Cornell University and an RIT historian denounced the report as a crude, racist distortion of the truth about that country, and an embarrassment to RIT.
In some respects, "Japan: 2000" reflects the sentiments that have come to be known as "Japan-bashing." But it has the distinction, according to T. J. Pempel, a Japan expert and professor of government, of being "sloppy, riddled with factual errors and about as balanced as a newborn giraffe on roller skates."
Pempel, an authority on Japanese politics and economics, says that despite a disclaimer to the effect that the writers do not believe in a Japanese-led international conspiracty, the report is strewn with classic conspiracy theory. It simply replaces the old notion of a Soviet, or communist, conspiracy to achieve workd domination with a Japanese, or Asian, one, he says. (note Asian conspiracy.)
"Japan is portrayed as a nation with a conspiratorial vision of dominance, first of Asia and eventually the world," he said. "It uses half-truths and distortions to create an image of an all-powerful, ever wise, economic enemy with a conspiratorial plan to undermind the American lifestyle and replace it with racial domination by the Japanese.
"According to this nonsense, we are in imminent danger of becoming serfs in a Japanese feudal system," said Pempel.
Among statements in "Japan: 2000" that Pempel and other experts find objectionable:

"Mainstream Japanese, the vast majority of whom absolutely embrace the national vision, have strange precedents. They are creatures of an ageless, amoral, manipulative and controlling culture--not to be emulated--suited only to this race, in this place."
Another is the assertion that the concept of "might is right" is a sort of Japanese national credo, and that this belief, coupled with "their" extraordinary economic success, "causes them to now feel superior to other people."
"They therefore believe that it is now appropriate for them to exercise dominion," the report says.

"Japan: 2000" is one of a series of strategic planning studies RIT had conducted on behalf of the CIA and was commissioned and funded by the agency.
The report is not readily available, although the Democrat and Chronicle obtained a copy.
According to a preface written by Dougherty, "Japan: 2000" grew out of discussions among panelists over two days in October last year (1990). Among the participants, whom Doughterty describes as "some of the most respected, knowledgable experts" on Japan, was Robert "Bud" McFarlane, the former national security adviser who was implicated in the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal and who is a close friend of Rose's; Tim Stone, a former CIA officer and currently director of corporate intelligence for the Motorola Corp.; and Frank Pipp, a retired Xerox Corp. senior executive. There were also two Japan scholars on the panel.
Roise's decision to spend a four-month sabbatical working for the CIA has caused controversy on RIT's campus and produced calls for his resignation, as well as protests in support of Rose. Reports in last Sunday's Democrat and Chronicle of his involvement in another CIA-commissioned study called "Changemasters" led to a renewed call by some faculty and students this week for his dismissal and the severing of the school's CIA ties.
"Japan: 2000" comes at a time when RIT has cemented a close relationship with several Japanese companies from whom it solicits funds for programs. Five Japanese corporations are among the 11 founding members of the school's Center for Imaging Science, (biting the hand that fed them) while another four are industrial associates of the center. In addition, RIT has several Japanese students, at both the graduate and undergraduate level (by which one of my college professors had a major hand in getting onto the RIT campus--he had no knowledge of this garbage at the time.)

Dear Ben: Are you getting the 1991 picture here? RIT had CIA hands in Japan's business!!!!!! Of which I'm positive you should have known about.

Cornell anthropologist Robert J. Smith, an expert on Japanese society and culture, describes "Japan: 2000" as crude, garbled, confused and self-serving, but says it is also "profoundly disturbing, considering the audience it is designed for."
Smith fears the report, with its RIT stamp of approval and its appearance of being the product of a "high-powered group," (it was; remember, McFarlane worked for Reagan and Rose worked for Nixon) could contribute to a new antagonism toward Japan in Congress and wherever else the CIa uses it.

To be continued next entry.

[GenerationIke]

"If one was assigned the task of putting the worst possible face on every aspect of Japanese culture and society, this would be the result," he said.
As an example of the conspiracy theories in "Japan: 2000," Pempel and Smith cited the statements that Japanese companies use fax machines and supersonic aircraft "to better control their American empire."
The report explains how such Japanese mastery of technology has already put Western values at risk and how it could erode them completely.
'"Japan's economic power will be used to impose its culture and values throughout the world," the report explains. "This is particularly troubling because of the absence of any absolutes or moral imperatives in the Japanese paradigm, unlike the Western paradigm, which is anchored in the Judeo-christian ethic."
Elsewhere, it claims Japan has manipulated and exploited the American media and the American political process, resulting in views sympathetic to Japan, and decisions favorable to its economic goals. It also accuses American think-tanks, universities and the U. S. media of being "willing reporters of news that is frequently tilted to achieve Japanese propaganda goals and often wrapped in money or favors."
Japan, according to the report, controls "the most effective and efficient lobbying/influence peddling machine in the United States," while a "meticulously planned and executed" propaganda offensive targeted governors, U. S. trade representatives, and former intelligence officers, among others.
As a result, the report says, Japan posseses "probably the best data base on U. S. federal officials and other targeted government areas of any intelligence servie in the world."
Apart from "artfully" manipulating American politics, the Japanese also effectively control U. S. interest rates, according to the report.
In an apparent evocation of the Japanese air attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the report claims that because of American ignorance and lack of insight about the true Japanese nature, Japan will be able to launch "an economic sneak attack, from which the U. S. may not recover."


WERE THEY DOING THIS, MR. FULFORD, in the 1990's? Are they still?

And the conclusion states: "Japan; 2000" should provide notice that 'the rising sun' is coming--the attack has begun."

In addition, to aggressive propaganda abroad, the report accuses Japan of spreading disinformation at home.
"There is a continuous and deliberate misinformation campaign carried out in Japan, aimed at coalescing the Japanese people against the U. S. by showing Americans as Japan bashers, or alleging that the U. S. wants to 'change Japanese culture,'" the report says.
Despite reports to the contrary, Japan is not becoming 'a kinder, gentler nation," it concludes.
The report highlights the "national security" implications of Japan's economic success and proposes a significant role for U. S. espionage agencies in combatting the supposed Japanese agenda to dominate the world.
It claims Japan has targeted the U. S. for economic and technical espionage, as well as political influence, and says this intelligence "is used to sharpen Japanese strategic decision-making and serves as a basis for extensive disinformation and proopaganda against the U. S. public.
"Considering how they manipulate American public opinion and make use of U. S. power to their own ends, it is clear they represent significant national secuirty threats to the U. S.," the report says.
In a twist near the end of "Japan; 2000," the writers appear to suggest that America's best defense against the Japanese onslaught is to become more like the Japanese and pursue its own economic domination.
Pempel finds it amusing that the report initially portrays the United States as moral and righteous, in contrast to a devious, artful and manipulative Japan.
"Then, suddenly, they suggest that we had better become devious, wily and conspiratorial as well," said Pempel.
But he is bothered by the suggestion that there should be less openness and sharing of information in the United States, less adherence to individual freedom in the national interest, and an education policy designed to serve "national security."
The report claims that America's biggest problem is its commitment to individual freedom and human rights, and that these values, as well as legislation to protect them, have "crippled" the country by preventing it from developing a "unified, national vision" that would produce global economic success.

Can you see where this report is REALLY going?!??!?

In addition, the report argues, America's atmosphere of openness and sharing "has enabled our economic competitors to acquire our most important technology and they are using it to defeat us, to lower our own standard of living and to threaten our national security."

They needed someone to blame the economic collapse on.

"This is a very frustrating argument because--the U. S. has very stringent patent regulations and we don't go running around giving computer secrets or nuclear weapon secrets or semiconductor technology to everyone else," said Pempel.
The report blames antitrust legislation, as well as "a lack of focus and consensus on matters other than individual human rights and 'equality for all,'" for sapping America's strength and placing it "increasingly under the control of Japan and in harm's way."
The solution, according to the report, is a "shared vision of our own role in the global economy." This is to be accomplished by transferring government-funded technolgy into the private sector, providing competitive advantage to American business, and by excluding all "competitive" governments and industries from access.


Excerpts from the report are to follow.

This needs to be noted and studied with great care.

[GenerationIke]

Excerpts from the books. I don't have the entire booklets, nor have I read them, but these are what was published in the Democrat and Chronicle:

The following exerpts are expamples of what "japan: 2000" has to say on different topics.

On cultures: "The cultures of the West and East are worlds apart and very few values are shared. We often fail to understand that Japanese culture does not assume human nature is fundamentally good; (it) is not directed by uniform principles of behavior or dogma similar to our own."

On values: The Japanese have different values which, by definition, "are not designed to benefit the rest of the world."
There is also no equivalent of the concept of "fairness" in Japan. "The weak, downtrodden, and the failed do not receive sympathy in Japan, but rather contempt."

On morailty: In Japan, issues such as the morality of power are irrelevant. "The essential amorality of the Japanese paradigm is in direct conflict with widely and deeply held Western moral imperatives."

On power: "The struggle for economic power is paramount. The group, and by extension, Japan as a nation, must win at any cost. In their value system, almost any tactic is acceptable."

On race: Japan is a country obsessed with race purity and intolerant of deviant behavior. It practices "systematic discrimination against non-mainstream Japanese and foreign workers, even those who marry foreigners."

On Japanese history: "Japan's centuries old philosophical/religious/cultural base provides a historically accepted and unrelenting long-term suppression of both thought and action . . . these beliefs pervade the culture and are reflected in every mainstream Japanese action."

On propaganda: A "steady drumbeat" of Japanese propaganda suggests that Japan is changing and that trade imbalances unfavorable to the United States will be adjusted.
In fact, this is not happening and the propaganda is intended merely to "lull Americans" into believing that the two economies are converging, to mutual advantage.
"Since relatively few people in the U. S. realize the nature, scope or impact of Japanese economic, political and propaganda manipulation, there is no effort to counter it."

But wait, there's much more

[GenerationIke]

I hope someone is reading my posts. I am now looking to find someone who had some knowledge of what happened up at RIT themselves on this forum and / OR if anyone is familiar with the 4 years of service Dr. Rose had at Alfred University where he established a research center there ripe for CIA picking. (1974 to 1978)

[Carol]

Very interesting thread Ike and also thought provoking. I can see how easy it is for US citizens to be totally ignorant of reality outside of this country. In fact... some of this other reality takes time to digest as it paints such a different picture then what CNN delivers.