I wonder how many of you have heard of this book?


I only learned about it three years ago when FlyingPatriot recommended I read it. I ordered it thru Amazon. It’s not an easy read as it is written in the bone-dry style of think tank academics.

The book is supposedly a work of fiction — but many suspect it was categorized as such to protect the author Leonard C. Lewin.

The book’s description:

It is controversial because of the uncertainty of its authorship. Is it a secret document written by a CFR-dominated think tank commissioned by the U.S. Department of Defense during the Johnson Administration, as claimed in the report itself, or was it written by Leonard Lewin, the man who originally said he was given the manuscript by one of the writers who felt it should be leaked to the public?

It is important because it is a blueprint for how oppressive governments can keep their citizens psychologically incapable of rebelling.

The solution, says the Report, is war.

Only during war or the threat of war are the masses compliant enough to carry the yoke of oppressive government without complaint. Fear of conquest and pillage by an enemy can make almost any burden seem acceptable by comparison.

The Report also examines the possibility of an alternative to war that might arouse the same high level of fear. It concludes that an end-of-earth scenario based on projections of environmental catastrophe holds the most promise for that purpose. It says that it makes no difference if the projections are correct. Credibility is more important than truth, and credibility can be achieved by repetition in the media.

Regardless of who wrote it, this book explains the reality of our present world.


“Upon its first appearance in 1967, this best-selling “secret government report” sparked immediate debate among journalists and scholars with its disturbingly convincing claim: a condition of “permanent peace” at the end of the Cold War would threaten our nation’s economic and social stability.

Although finally identified as an antimilitarist hoax by writer/editor Leonard Lewin, who conceived and launched the book with a consortium of peace movement intellectuals including future Nation editors Victor Navasky and Richard Lingeman, novelist E. L. Doctorow, and economist John Kenneth Galbraith, Iron Mountain would eventually take on a life of its own.

Long out of print, the Report suddenly reappeared in “bootleg” editions more than twenty years after the original publication. In a manner never foreseen by the book’s creators, it was now being read as a “bible” by the militias of the radical right – a bizarre reversal that returns this haunting satire to the spotlight and raises uncomfortable questions about the changing nature of today’s political culture.”

Did you get that?  “Militias of the radical right.” A review that must’ve been written by someone in the lamestream legacy media, probably at MSNBC or CNN.

Yet the fascinating thing is that the book’s contents eerily predict exactly what we’ve seen happening to our country at the hands of the Left, the Media, and the Shadow Government (Deep State) since and including the war in Vietnam.

For example, this excerpt from the book describe the military-industrial complex’ vampire-like need to keep us engaged in wars and how to maintain the power structure in the event that a stable peace was accomplished.

“Military spending can be said to furnish the only balance wheel with sufficient inertia to stabilize the advance of [modern industrial] economies. The fact that war is ‘wasteful’ is what enables it to serve this function.”

On Population control:

“Even if [the use of modern methods of mass destruction] is not required to meet the world population crisis, they offer, perhaps paradoxically, the first opportunity in the history of man to halt the regressive genetic effects of natural selection by war.”

A government that is willing to perpetuate war as a form of peace – bringing to mind Orwell’s famous doublethink: “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

The environment (and its daughter “Climate Control”):

Nevertheless, an effective political substitute for war would require “alternative enemies,” some of which might seem equally farfetched in the context of the current war system. It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species.

Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power. But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis for a solution.”

As we look back this week on the 9-11 attack on our soil, this…

Like its political function, the motivational function of war requires the existence of a genuinely menacing social enemy. The principal difference is that for purposes of motivating basic allegiance, as distinct from accepting political authority, the “alternate enemy” must imply a more immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat of destruction. It must justify the need for taking and paying a “blood price” in wide areas of human concern.

If you’ve read Report from Iron Mountain, I’d like to know your thoughts.