Google Find us on Google+

An Interview with Beverly Eakman: The Games Continue as the Debates Continue: AGENDA GAMES INTERVIEW Part II

Oct 15, 2012 by

Michael F. Shaughnessy –

1) Beverly, we recently did an interview about your most excellent book “Agenda Games”…   How has the book been received incidentally?

The book has been exceptionally well-received.  What I was aiming for was a work that would give average readers a comprehensive understanding of politics and the various “games” that politicians play to secure their endorsement of various causes they might otherwise reject.  But I wanted to make this a fast-paced read for those who have not been particularly political “junkies,” yet have something new and compelling for the political old-timer and insider.  It was a difficult balancing act.  So you can imagine how pleased I was to see, just this week, this excerpt from a review by journalist Carl Strauss, of “Durham Conservatives” in North Carolina:

Eakman does a great job of defining the Left’s techniques—sociological, psychological or otherwise—and then using that theme to explain and expose the truth about world events and societal changes. For those who have not been following politics and current events closely, this book would be an excellent way to get up to speed quickly. Not only does it explore most of today’s hot button issues, and allow the reader to quickly “get in the game” with the basic facts, but it also adds in detail and perspective that will provide the neophyte a much broader perspective than would otherwise be expected. For the beginner, this is advanced, but because of the hierarchical style that Eakman uses—born out of her background in education, no doubt—it doesn’t seem too advanced for beginners. Perhaps it could be called an advanced-primer.

Within its common theme, Agenda Games covers a broad spectrum of topics, and most of them should be discovered by the reader. However, this review would not be complete without specifically mentioning Eakman’s recommended United States Foreign Policy Statement. This portion of the book, alone, is worth the price of admission. Below is a small excerpt, but it is extensive, and each portion is as great as any other. With a title like, ‘Don’t Make Us Fight You’, it’s clearly a statement that speaks firmly, and carries a several-megaton stick….

Also last week, the following excerpt came from Tom DeWeese, President of the American Policy Center (an organization spearheading the opposition against a United Nations construct called “Agenda 21,” which is now pervasive here in America under monikers such as “Sustainable Development,” “Smart Growth,” and “Green Energy”).  Mr. DeWeese had this to say about the book:

In her vital new book, Agenda Games: How Today’s High-Stakes Political Combat Works, Beverly Eakman nails how the major powers players, which label themselves Democrat-Republican and Left-Right, are really pushing for the same agenda. Eakman shows how every aspect of our lives is decided for us by some unseen entity hiding in the shadows, away from public debate. Government decides which rights we will be granted, how much of our own wealth we may keep, how much energy we can use; how much of our own yard we can build on; how much health care we may have. Eakman shows — in one of the easiest reads of any of the books she has written— [the near-totality of government control].   In uncanny, but easy-to-understand detail, she describes how [government] controls the larger Agenda:  the economy, the education curriculum, and [an increasing] surveillance society that keeps tabs on how each of us is reacting to what Al Gore called a “wrenching transformation of our society.” [She notes] that  politicians, when running for office, give lip-service to rights and the ideals of the Founders, but in reality, it’s all about power — their power over individual Americans. No matter which party wins or loses an election, the ‘Agenda’ wins.

2) Let’s talk about national security.  How secure have we been since 9/11, and what are the various “games” surrounding national security?

Mike, our nation is becoming progressively less secure in the shadow of 9/11, even as harassment of good citizens has been ratcheted up by government in the name of “national security.”  In Agenda Games, I detail the spectacular flops of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), for example, some which were widely reported and some not.  I refer to an interview with the former head of TSA, Kip Hawley, with ABC news journalist Jim Avila.

Hawley verified what most people already believe, but cannot act upon:  that “the TSA is sitting on important technology that screens liquids for explosives and could, as soon as tomorrow, allowing passengers to carry everything from water to shampoo, through security and onboard.”  In other words, it’s all a game of “let’s pretend.”  The TSA—and even the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is has failed to discern the difference between what is known in intelligence circles as “actionable intel” and ”non-actionable intel.” Instead our security services are hoping that if they can just irritate the living daylights out of enough people, they will deter real terrorists.

Our borders are filled with unattended crossing points; our border security forces are told, in effect, to be a presence, but not detain anyone—in other words, to “stand down.”  Then there are the plethora of privacy-invading laws and new-generation cyberspy tools, both of which I cover extensively.  But our intelligence is not making the necessary dent on the kinds of suicidal terrorist organizations that continue to infiltrate our country and the free world.

3) I was thinking of going to a conference in Greece next summer, but given the recent Syria events, I am concerned.  Should I, as an American, be afraid of traveling in Europe? What about the Far East?

Well, I wouldn’t think this is a good time.  But, the again, even our own public subways and shopping malls are targets, right here in America.  The difference is that Europe and the Far East are within easier range, being closer to more terrorist cells.

Another problem, however, is kidnapping of tourists, American heads of companies, etc. — i.e., attempts by terror organizations to arrange a ransom, with torture always in the offing.  Our foreign policy is such that our government simply will not go to bat for a U.S. citizen.

While Osama bin Laden was finally taken out, it was “for show,” not “for policy.”  There is virtually nothing a foreign power can not do to us that is considered, automatically, an Act of War.

4) Now, the “border” (if you can call it that) between Mexico and the United States remains porous. Is this a matter of national security or a mere inconvenience or nuisance that the poor folk in Arizona (and New Mexico and Texas) have to deal with?

As I explain in Agenda Games, it is too easy to bring precursor radiologic, biologic and chemical elements into the U.S. across the border via a plethora of “footpaths” and walkways (mini-bridges) that are virtually unattended.  Our state and national leaders are quibbling over the definition of “bridge”—narrow metal footpaths on either side of our all-but-useless $2.4 billion border fence that provide easy passage for illegal immigrants and smugglers without their even getting wet as they cross the Rio Grande.

Veteran journalist Jerry Seper, of the Washington Times, exposed how violent drug gangs not only are expanding into the U.S., but doing so with a “disparate band of criminals known as Los Zetas.”  Los Zetas, revealed Seper, was originally an elite band of anti-drug commandos that evolved into mercenaries that escalate the drug trade rather than fighting against it.

Worse, a 2010 GAO Report identified other vulnerabilities at our borders. One report, compliments of the Terrorism Committee of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, concluded that terrorists were sauntering through most of the covertly tested ports of entry using counterfeit identification! Undercover agents examined ports of entry—by air, sea, and land, wherever international travelers can legally enter the United States. These undercover investigators “made 42 crossings with a 93 percent success rate,” revealed Jim Kouri in an article for NewsWithViews.

Then, we have environmental extremists putting their designated “wetlands” over national security, meaning that border security cannot be set up there, even electronically.

5) “Perception management”– what is it and how does it fit into the picture of “national security”?

“Perception management,” or PM, which is such an insidious way of molding public opinion that even two of our top writers in the thriller genre — one liberal and one conservative — have been moved to comment on it.  Both David Baldacci and the late Michael Crichton were troubled by speed at which an untruth can be institutionalized and legitimized by popular and trendy sources.  At that point, regardless of any proof to the contrary, there is little chance of altering the mistaken viewpoint.

That is how PM works, and we can thank World War II behavioral scientists working with both the allied and axis powers for discovering the techniques of the game.  John Rawlings Rees, a British Brigadier General helped pioneer what was called “military psychiatry” in the 1940s.   Among the techniques are “mass neurosis,” “cognitive dissonance,” “artificial disruption,” “involuntary attention,” “superimposing value structures,” and other complex approaches.   Since that time, it has been behavioral scientists and their later enablers in the marketing and advertising industries (where psychology is the major course of study), who made “perception management” the force that it is today.

If you “Google” Department of Defense + Perception Management, you will find PM characterized as “actions to convey and/or deny selected information…, to influence…emotions, motives, and objective reasoning…ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. [P]erception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.”

The Wikipedia definition of PM adds the “imposition of falsehoods and deceptions,” seen as important to getting “the other side to believe what one wishes it to believe.”

So, PM functions, in effect, as a euphemism for molding public opinion—a psychological conditioning (“psy-ops”) program that can be disseminated through the media and by other means, against any target, including average citizens.  That means information warfare—and anybody is fair game.  One result is that no one challenges the validity of the TSA.  The TSA is worthless against terrorists and only harasses upstanding travelers.  So, why aren’t people rising up and saying they won’t have it?   Conditioning.  PM.  And you notice the topic has yet to be brought up in the presidential debates.

6) Should ALL immigration be immediately stopped for national Security (sure I realize this is preposterous, but sometimes I have found that you need to be extreme in games to get people’s attention)?

Actually, I explain in my book exactly how, and using what criteria, a moratorium upon further immigration could be instituted.  The key word is “sponsorship.”  It is not that difficult, and we used to have a very specific process in place.  Sure a few still got in, but not like today.  It is out of control today, and bringing not just terrorists, but posing a health threat, an economic threat and weighing down social services that should be placing American citizens first.

7) What do you see as the top five issues in terms of national security–and what games are the Democrats playing, and what games are the Republicans playing?

National Security encompasses six facets:

  • intelligence gathering: data-collection, spying
  • investigation: research, inquiry and analysis
  • prevention: pro-active measures to pre-empt attacks, illegal immigration, infiltration and border patrol
  • counteraction: non-military counter-measures such as economic sanctions, intended to thwart actions harmful to the U.S. or its citizens
  • military response: defense and interdiction
  • foreign policy: economic sanctions, negotiation, humanitarian aid

The U.S. Constitution requires government to provide for the common defense and general welfare. (The term “welfare” actually belongs in the context of national security activities, not entitlements.)  The six undertakings associated with national security are supposed to be accomplished without trampling the rights of either the 50 states or individual citizens. Sadly, our nation’s leaders and those appointed to head the various agencies tasked with safeguarding the country are moving ever farther in the other direction.

In Agenda Games, I explain that the biggest problem is that “national security” has become confused with “criminal justice.”  This has led to the individual’s right to “a reasonable expectation of privacy” being thrown to the wind. This is occurring under both Democrat and Republican administrations, and regardless of which side prevails in Congress.  The same goes for “probable cause.”

Popular television shows like NCIS, NCIS Los Angeles, Hawaii Five-O, the various CSI series, among others, are normalizing—even popularizing—the newest generation of whiz-bang “crime-fighting” gadgets.

But many of them grossly undermine or violate individual rights, especially when used in combination.  The more we see of these, the more accustomed to it we get.  The more domestic crime is allowed to swell—police hardly bother with the common burglary anymore, and most criminals have enormously long “rap sheets”—the less people care about the concept of individual rights.  Until it’s their rights being violated, of course.  Then they wonder what happened to the “presumption of innocence.”  What happened is the line between national security and criminal justice became blurred, and “individual rights” became a casualty.

Here’s a real-time result of this:  Suppose you report your child missing. Guess who is going to be investigated first and harassed continually, in the absence of a perpetrator popping up like a Jack-in-the-Box?

8) Where can people get a copy of Agenda Games?

The publisher has set up a website for the book, with excerpts, descriptions and some of the reviews so far (http://www.agenda-games.com/).  Clicking on the cover art takes you to the online bookstore Amazon.  Or just go to Amazon directly here: (http://www.amazon.com/Agenda-Games-Todays-High-Stakes-Political/dp/0615675433/ref=sr_1_14?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347630697&sr=1-14&keywords=agenda+games), as well as other online bookstores.  Any book store can order it if you can’t find it on the shelf, of course.  It’s in every computer system.

Or go to Midnight Whistler Publishers (http://www.midnightwhistler.com/).

Advertisements
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponPrint this pageEmail this to someone

Leave a Reply

UA-24036587-1
%d bloggers like this: