Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER 23
Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is April 24, 1977, and this is my monthly Audioletter No. 23.
Two months ago in Audioletter No. 21 for February 1977, I explained how America had been turned into a nation-wide energy addict over the course of two generations and more, and how this energy addiction is to be used against us by the four Rockefeller brothers in turning off our national security; and just four days ago, on April 20, 1977, this process got under way in earnest by way of David Rockefeller's revolutionary energy program announced to the world by his employee, Jimmy Carter. To the casual observer it must seem incredible--a new administration under a new President, with no previous experience in Washington, has in only three short months done what no previous administration has ever succeeded in doing: developed a comprehensive, detailed energy program for the most complex economy on earth. Furthermore, Mr. Carter tells us that we must do as he tells us in order to avoid "a national catastrophe"; and he says we must act now. Why the rush? Why this sudden urgency? And why does he go out of his way to call his energy program "the moral equivalent of war"? The answer lies in what I warned you about at the end of monthly Audioletter No. 22 just last month.
The CIA is hard at work arranging what is to be the CIA's crowning achievement--the staging of a horrendous act of terrorism that is intended to cause war to erupt in the whole of the Middle East. This is to set in motion a modified, up-dated version of the detailed war plan I revealed in monthly Audioletter No. 6 for November 1975. This plan includes a limited nuclear strike from the Sinai to cap off Arab OPEC oil wells except those in Libya, which is controlled by the CIA. This will lead immediately to very harsh energy rationing in the United States, and the Federal government will at last get to issue those precious gas rationing coupons that have been awaiting use now for over three years. So the Carter energy plan with its underlying warlike atmosphere is actually the first step in a gradual shift unto a war footing for the United States. It has the same purpose as the declaration of national emergency which President Franklin D. Roosevelt proclaimed in May 1941, six months before Pearl Harbor, to start getting America ready for war he was helping to bring about. The second major step in our progressive shift onto war footing is intended to occur the time of the cut-off of Middle East oil, by war. This will provide a perfect excuse for an actual Declaration of National Emergency, and that in turn will activate all the dictatorial presidential powers spelled out in Executive Order 11921 signed by President Ford very quietly in June 1976, and described in my Audioletter No. 14 for July 1976.
Audioletter No. 14, of course, is also the issue in which I first revealed the presence of Soviet underwater missiles and bombs in our own territorial waters. The terrible Middle East incident now brewing, which I fervently hope and pray will somehow be sidetracked by its advanced exposure, is to cause a limited nuclear war in the Middle East. That in turn is supposed to initiate a chain of events, culminating in Nuclear War One between the Soviet Union and the United States of America. Originally this was to have been a carefully programmed war for the mutual benefit of the Rockefeller cartel and their Soviet allies, with the Rockefellers and their intimates riding out the war safely in the nuclear-safe zone across the northern United States; but ever since the Soviet Union began its double cross of the Rockefellers last summer 1976, the plans for war have been undergoing frantic revisions. Even the insane Rockefeller concessions to the Soviets, embodied in the Red Friday agreement of October 1, 1976 (which I revealed that month in Audioletter No. 17) have failed to fully reinstate the Rockefeller/Soviet alliance--so now anything can happen. The Rockefeller brothers, who for so long have tried to play God with their immense power, are now finding out that they too are fallible and human, even if they still refuse to consciously admit it. Today, my friends, the power of the Rockefeller empire is in the process of destroying itself; but just as Samson pulled down the temple around him, the Rockefeller brothers threaten to pull down modern civilization around their heads as their power runs out of control and collapses into the inferno of nuclear war.
Earlier this month, on April 7, 1977, Prime Minister Rabin of Israel resigned. The press has played up his resignation as if it were another Watergate, but actually it was only a technicality having to do with a modest bank account held here in Washington, D.C. by Rabin against government regulations. Overnight Rabin was out of office, and his public career has been described as ruined; but the real reason for Rabin's lightning exit from Israeli politics was that he learned of the CIA plot to ignite war in the Middle East, and he wanted no part of it. It's almost a replay of Sir Harold Wilson's sudden unexplained resignation as Prime Minister of Great Britain on March 16, 1976, just over a year ago; and as I explained then in monthly Audioletter No. 10, Wilson resigned because he had learned of the coming war plan and wanted nothing to do with it. And so the build-up toward war continues, and our rulers know it. But what of the American public in general? How many know what danger we are in? And especially, how many believe it enough to do something about it? My friends, most Americans today are on vacation from reality, but reality will have to be faced one day in the not too distant future.
My three special topics for today are: Topic #1--THE PRE-WAR SABOTAGE OF AMERICA, Topic #2--THE COMING NAVAL BATTLE FOR THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD, and Topic #3--THE UNTOLD PERSONAL SACRIFICE OF GENERAL GEORGE S. BROWN.
Topic #1--In the early days of the 20th century the Rockefeller/Standard Oil monopoly had already become supreme in the United States, but abroad it faced two powerful competitors in oil. One was the British Empire, whose destruction by means of two World Wars I've discussed in a number of my past talking tapes. The other foreign competitor was even bigger than the British Empire in oil, and it was attacked and destroyed first. That competitor was Czarist Russia. After the Bolshevik Revolution took place in 1917, property owners and businessmen of all kinds were dispossessed and liquidated in great numbers. And included in this, by design, was the utter destruction of the oil fields, refineries, oil tankers, everything having to do with oil. The small band of revolutionaries under Lenin and Trotsky who had been sent into Russia with the help of Rockefeller financing had done their job well; and within a few years the new Communist regime of the Soviet Union welcomed the Rockefeller/Standard Oil interests with open arms to re-develop the huge Russian oil reserves. Ever since that day, right down to the present, practically all of the oil leaving the Soviet Union has been carried in oil tankers of the Rockefeller/Standard Oil empire under various names, nominees, and national flags. For a thorough and most unusual expose of the oil competition presented to the Rockefellers by Czarist Russia, I highly recommend a new book by Robert V. Tolf, entitled THE RUSSIAN ROCKEFELLERS--THE SAGA OF THE NOBEL FAMILY AND THE RUSSIAN OIL INDUSTRY published by the Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. 94305--the price is $15.95 postpaid.
For decades following the Bolshevik Revolution, the Soviet rulers were absolutely dependent upon an uninterrupted flow of transfusions from the West of money, technical know-how, food, and arms. The Kremlin ruled a huge nation with an iron fist, and the Rockefellers shared this rule with the Kremlin. The Soviet Union, therefore, appeared to be the perfect vehicle for bringing the entire world under the control of the super-rich Rockefellers and their intimates. All that was necessary, or so they thought, was to gradually build up the Soviet system while bleeding to death the harder to control United States and the western world. This was the situation the four Rockefeller brothers inherited long ago-they literally grew up with it, and could hardly imagine things being any different. But now things are different. The Soviet Union can now survive without continued outside help, and now they have been double-crossing the Rockefellers and we the people will have to suffer for it. Now, both the Rockefellers and the Soviets are maneuvering, playing a tricky game, and all the while trying to emerge supreme from the conflict to come. But, just as it was planned before the Rockefeller/Soviet alliance began coming apart, the main and prime battleground is to be the United States of America. The Soviet Union is busy at work trying to weaken America here and abroad so that we can be defeated in Nuclear War One; and the Rockefellers are trying to turn our nation into a complete dictatorship under their domination. Both are trying to bend the weakening of America's freedom to their own special advantage.
The centerpiece of the Rockefeller program to completely take over America right now is the so-called CARTER ENERGY PROGRAM. Recently the CIA s-u-d-d-e-n-l-y upgraded its estimates of Soviet spending for new military equipment and installations to four times the previous figure so as to alarm us. In a similar vein, the CIA has also provided Jimmy Carter with grist for his energy mill to grind us into submission by issuing a report saying world oil reserves are much lower than previously thought. Both CIA reports are rubbish, issued purely for propaganda purposes; so the CIA under Admiral Turner, who is a Rockefeller man, is continuing with the preparations for the limited nuclear strike from the Sinai in order to get the war started. American F-15 fighter bombers are now available in the Sinai and would hit all of the five or more Arab target areas with ease; and the special low-yield nuclear weapons for the job are already on the scene, currently stored underground at the so-called American Monitoring Station in the Sinai. The bombs themselves are atomic, not hydrogen, very clean, with primary blast effects confined to a radius of only 300 to 400 yards--just right for a so-called surgical attack to wipe out the oil wells in the target areas.
As for America, even though the Alaskan oil is supposed to start flowing through the pipeline this summer, it will not come into the lower United States. It happens to be high sulphur oil of a type which west-coast refineries cannot handle even though there have been ten years to get ready for Alaskan oil. Instead, the Rockefeller plan is to ship this oil to Japan at a handsome profit, of course, and make up the difference with more imports of, guess what--Arab oil. When the Arab oil is cut off, there will be some attempts to ship some of the otherwise useless Alaskan oil to the Gulf Coast by small, inefficient tankers through the Panama Canal, which is targeted both by underwater missiles and by missiles in Guyana. The sharp drop in our oil supplies will also help to intensify the reduction in food supplies, which is already resulting from drought here in America. Many factors are contributing to the drought situation, including not only the Soviet weather modification activities I've mentioned in the past, but also activities under Rockefeller control. For example, I mentioned in Audioletter No. 9 for February 1976 that for years the Rockefeller oil companies have been knowingly lowering the underground water table in many areas of the Midwest and Great Plains by means of excessive pumping from their oil wells; and now, in many of these very areas, the problem of low ground water is adding to the drought crisis.
Meanwhile, the Rockefellers never lose sight of their objectives, no matter how much they are forced to change their tactics along the way. Their objective for America is DICTATORSHIP, according to the pattern spelled out in their secret New Constitution, which I revealed in my Audio Book Talking Tape No. 4 released in July 1975. Under the guise of "governmental reorganization", the provisions of their dictatorial new constitution are being imposed on the United States piecemeal, gradually, while our real Constitution is increasingly "interpreted" out of existence.
But of all the things that determine whether a nation will survive or succumb in time of crisis, the human spirit is still the most important. A strong spirit and deep resolve can overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles, and it can make a people impossible to conquer; but a weak spirit, without convictions or values, leaves a people defenseless--defenseless no matter how much armor they may wear or what weapons they may command. This is why the human spirit has been the most consistent target of all, both of the Rockefeller "One World" group and of the rulers of the Soviet Union.
Last month in Audioletter No. 22 I pointed out one of the extremes in church philosophy that has been promoted wherever possible for generations by the Rockefellers and their collaborators. This extreme is to divorce the moral and spiritual lessons of religions from daily decisions and actions, as if the two had no relationship to one another except for lip service. For whatever reasons, this extreme is personified today by one Jimmy Carter. The opposite extreme is equally deadly, if not more so. This is to dilute the spiritual teaching for which churches originally existed and replace it with preaching about economic, political, and social issues. To do this is to play with fire; but this is exactly what the National Council of Churches and its sister organization the World Council of Churches have been doing for decades. Prior to November 28, 1950, the National Council was known as the Federal Council of Churches. For many years the Federal Council had been dominated at the national level by the Rockefellers and their agent John Foster Dulles, and was the recipient of several grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. But the Federal Council became so totally identified with political activism in support of socialist causes that it became an object of increasing distrust. Accordingly, the name was changed to the National Council of Churches, and its tarnished halo was polished up with public assurances that this was a new organization which would devote itself to the real business of the church. There were many influential laymen in the churches under the umbrella of the National Council who wanted to help insure that the supposedly new organization would truly devote itself to proper areas of church concern. As a result, a National Lay Committee was brought into being under the chairmanship of the late J. Howard Pugh, a truly great American, who was the director and president of the Sun Oil Co. when it was still free of the grasping clutches of the Rockefellers. The National Lay Committee existed from March 28, 1951, until June 30, 1955.
The whole story of what happened to the National Lay Committee of the National Council of Churches is told in the "Chairman's Final Report" by J. Howard Pugh. Unfortunately this important report has long been suppressed and buried. I have in my possession one of the very few copies still known to be in existence; therefore I will read a few brief passages from the Chairman's Explanatory Letter, which serves as a Foreword to the Report as a whole. These quotations are taken in sequence; and although they do not do justice to Mr. Pugh's complete explanatory letter, much less the entire 316-page Report, I believe you will find them revealing:
"In the failure of this most important effort to bring about an enduring partnership between the clergy and laity, I feel a very real responsibility to provide a comprehensive and factual account of those steps which led to the Board's action--discontinuing lay participation."
"We lay people found ourselves not only deeply in the minority but often poles apart from the clergy who invariably out-voted us 10 to 1 in these sessions."
"The members of the Lay Committee were often misunderstood in their urgency to keep the churches out of politics and their insistence on the promisee evangelism. Our premise was that instead of appealing to government, the church should devote its energies to the work of promoting the attributes of Christianity--truth, honesty, fairness, generosity, justice, and charity in the hearts and minds of men. We attempted to emphasize that Christ stressed not the expanded State, but the dignity and responsibility of the individual."
"Their philosophy, it seemed to the Lay Committee, looked to an ever-expanding government."
"With few exceptions, the members of the Lay Committee had agreed to serve only because they had been assured that the new National Council would avoid the political involvements and controversies of the old Federal Council of Churches, which was now superseded."
"Most of the members of the Lay Committee came finally to the realization that a wide chasm existed between the thinking of the laity and the clergy and executives of the denominational bodies which comprise the National Council."
"Thus, on June 30, 1955, the Lay Committee ceased to exist as a committee of the General Board."
"The members of the Lay Committee believed, and so stated, that the political adventures of the National Council in the fields of economic and political controversy would seriously hinder and not further Christian leadership in the pressing fields of evangelism, fellowship, and education."
"It appears from the record that the National Council could find no room for opposition to the philosophies and practices carried over from the old Federal Council. Lacking the patience to resolve the basic problem, it has sought to bury it."
Thus ended, my friends, more than 20 years ago the last major effort to deflect the Rockefeller-dominated National Council of Churches away from its political programs and toward concern for spiritual matters. After more than four years of frustrating effort, the National Lay Committee was dissolved. This signaled the end of any influence of the general church population of America on the policies of the National Council of Churches. The National Council proceeded on its way, proclaiming to the public that it represented 34,000,000 Protestants, while using this power base to help undermine our free Republic. The National Council has done much to help dull and weaken the spirit of millions of Americans, softening our approach in opposition to Communism. Let us hope and pray that in these dangerous days they will at last see the light and begin to work at last to build up the American spirit, instead of destroying it.
Topic #2--In monthly Audioletter No. 15 for August 1976, I explained that the planting of short-range underwater-launch nuclear missiles in our territorial waters was part of the Soviet naval strategy for the United States and world conquest. The same continues to be the case now. Admiral Gorshkoff, who has commanded the Soviet navy for more than 20 years, has built it into a fighting force that is radically different from any other navy the world has ever seen; and as we near the very threshold of war, it is no accident that the Rockefeller insider who now heads the CIA is also an Admiral--4-star Admiral Stansfield Turner. The CIA has become the most powerful military organization in the United States, and Nuclear War One will revolve around naval strategy. Both the importance of the Soviet Navy and its great difference from our own United States Navy can be illustrated by just one fact: When the supersonic Backfire long-range bomber entered operational service in the Soviet Union late in 1974, it did so simultaneously with the Soviet Navy as well as with the Soviet Air Force. This is like giving our own new supersonic bomber, the B-1, to our Navy to fly--or, since we still do not have the B-1 to counter the Soviet Backfire, having our navy fly B-52s. Of course our own navy does not fly strategic bombers. The United States Navy, like the British Navy and most of the other great navies of history, has as one of its primary missions the protection of our sea lanes of commerce--a war which is basically defensive in nature. Since World War II our navy has also acquired offensive missions which have gradually assumed greater importance, including the ability to attack an enemy from the sea with the submarine-launched ballistic missiles. But the traditional defensive mission of protecting our sea lanes can never be neglected. Admiral Gorshkoff, however, has been able to concentrate on building a navy which is almost totally offensive in character. Soviet fishing trawlers, some of them genuine, roam the world; but the Soviet Union does not depend for its survival on the sea nearly as much as the United States. So the Soviet Navy is designed first and foremost for offensive operations; and this not only includes the ability to interdict enemy sea lanes and attack enemy naval forces at sea, it also includes an unprecedented emphasis on projecting naval power ashore. This in turn means not only the ability to carry out amphibious assaults and tactical bombardment, but strategic attack--a role we usually tend to think of only in terms of the Soviet Air Force with its ICBMs and bombers.
The new Soviet Navy of Admiral Gorshkoff also differs from ours in another way. Aside from missile submarines, the American Navy is structured around the aircraft carrier; whereas the Soviet Navy is built around the submarine. American task forces include all kinds of ships designed to coordinate with the needs and capabilities of the aircraft carrier. By the same token, Soviet surface ships of all kinds are intended to support the huge submarine force in various ways. This applies even to the new Soviet aircraft carriers which are now beginning to appear on the scene since Soviet naval aviation is heavily oriented toward anti-submarine warfare, although it has other capabilities as well. The relative naval capabilities of the Soviet Union and the United States have never been considered in the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks, the SALT talks, except with regard to sea-launch ballistic missiles; and yet it is the coming naval confrontation that could all by itself determine the outcome of Nuclear War One. It is often forgotten, for example, that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is primarily a naval alliance. We hear frequently about NATO in the controlled major media of the United States as though the only problems were Army problems--such as rusty tanks and lack of spare parts; and when the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, who is presently General Alexander Haig, is mentioned in the news, he is often called the head of NATO, or some such, but actually he's only one of three co-equal Commanders in NATO. The other two are Naval Commanders--they are the Commander-in-Chief, Channel Command; and the Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic, the latter based at Norfolk, Va. NATO depends for its very life on its naval strength, including the ability to keep open the vital North Atlantic sea lanes. But now, Soviet naval Backfire bombers with air-to-surface, anti-ship missiles threaten to cut those North Atlantic sea lanes in time of war; and the Mediterranean, which was once dominated by the United States Navy, is now heavily populated by the Soviet Navy as well. While the Soviet Navy has undergone explosive growth over the past decade to the formidable armed force that it is today, the United States Navy has been allowed to shrink to half its former size with more and more ships aging and obsolescent. When the Arab oil is cut off by war soon, Europe will have to fall back on its meager reserves, which will run out within 60 to 90 days. Interdiction of NATO sea lanes at that point by the Soviet Union could cause all of Europe to fall like a plum into Soviet hands. This is especially true in light of the short-range Soviet underwater missiles in European territorial waters, which I mentioned in Audioletter No. 22 last month. So far only Great Britain shows signs of being able to withstand such a course of events. As I mentioned last month, the British government had requested the latest missile coordinates from me, and I had supplied them. Of the 29 Soviet missiles around the British Isles at that time, all but one had been removed by the Royal Navy as of April 18--6 days ago. However, I have been informed of 3 newly planted missiles there, and I have relayed these to the British for action. Great Britain also may have the benefit of her new North Sea oil fields which, barring sabotage or the like, should make Britain independent of foreign oil producers in the near future.
Since I spoke to you last, action has been taken in another area also. Acting on information which I relayed, of the 8 missiles around southern Africa, seven have now been taken up. At last report, however, the missile lying off Mozambique targeted on Rhodesia was still in place. Such removals of missiles are better than no action at all, but they are still no more than holding actions. What is needed, if war is to be prevented, is for this deadly cat-and-mouse game to be stopped altogether by revealing to the whole world what the Soviet Navy is up to. Late last September, as I revealed in monthly Audioletter No. 16, the United States had a golden opportunity to do just that, and to do so while the Soviet underwater missile threat was only a small fraction of what it is now. At that time, a Soviet missile-laying mini-sub equipped with sonar-defeating design features entered Chesapeake Bay and became trapped there, due to a malfunction that ultimately killed the crew. It was a perfect opportunity for the United States to pick up the sub, display it on television world-wide by satellite, and tell the Soviet Union that the jig was up; but instead, as I revealed in Audioletter No. 17 the following month, the Red Friday agreement on October 1, 1976 reinstated a strained alliance between the Rockefellers and the Soviets, and the Soviet Navy was allowed to enter Chesapeake Bay under cover of darkness and recover the mini-sub. But now, a similar opportunity exists once again--not in American waters but in those of Norway. In March 1977 a Soviet submarine entered the fjord of Folda on the north coast of Norway. The Norwegians detected its presence and sealed off the exit to wait for the sub to surface. On April 4, 1977, the story was broken in European press, although the location was not mentioned. To my knowledge, however, it has received no mention anywhere in the United States. I strongly suggest to the Norwegian government that before the Soviet submarine be allowed to escape, a search be made at the navigational coordinates 64 35' 23" north, 10 23' 14" east. This location is not far from where the Soviet submarine is trapped and is the site of one of the seven Soviet underwater missiles that have been planted recently in Norwegian waters. Should the government of Norway so request, I will naturally provide the other locations as well, through proper channels.
As for the United States, there continues to be no effort at all to clear our waters of the Soviet nuclear weapons which threaten our country. As of my latest report a few days ago, not one of the 158 Soviet missiles and hydrogen bombs lurking in our territorial waters has been removed, and I have not been approached in any way by the United States government with requests for their locations. Meanwhile the Soviet plutonium cloud attacks on the United States are still continuing by means of the new canisters which are being deployed close to shore along the West Coast, which I mentioned last month. Of the 16 canisters which were deployed at the time I recorded Audioletter No. 22 last month, 11 had been discharged as of April 15, but by then there were 17 new ones. At last report, these canisters are being deployed along the entire West Coast from San Diego to Seattle. These are extremely easy and simple to deploy--for example, they are dropped from aircraft flying under our radar like the Soviet Bear bombers that we were told about by news reports the other day. They are also planted by Soviet trawlers, since they are allowed to enter our new 200-mile fishing zone to catch certain fish there. The fact that this is being done was proven by the arrested Soviet trawler Taras Shevchenko which was carrying plutonium canisters in a compartment near the stern of the ship.
Thus the maneuvering in preparation for Nuclear War One continues with a strong naval emphasis. At one level, Rockefeller agents in America appear to continue to cooperate in the joint plan of conquest with the Soviets; but on the real level the Soviets and the Rockefellers are both jockeying for a decisive knock-out blow. In this, time is on the side of the Soviet Union, so they're trying to delay war slightly while the Rockefeller brothers are trying to hurry it up; and to condition us all for it, the Carter Administration is flexing its muscles to show us how strong it is when it comes to the Soviets. In short order it has forcefully espoused Human Rights, handed the Soviets an ultimatum on SALT talks, seized Soviet fishing trawlers, chased Soviet Bear long-range turbo-prop bombers away from the southeast coast of our country--and what's next? A photo of a Soviet submarine in our waters? Already the Rockefeller position has decayed further in the past several months because of the further deterioration of their CIA undersea super-missiles in the Atlantic and Pacific. Of the fleet of 14 such missiles which I described in Audioletter No. 20, January 1977, all 5 in the Pacific have now sprung leaks and are no longer usable. Of the 9 in the Atlantic, 4 have now failed--missiles #4, 6, 7, and 8. That leaves only 5 of the original fleet of 14 CIA missiles still available for Rockefeller threats against their Soviet partners. Meanwhile the Soviet short-range missiles in our waters in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico are now being used by the Soviets to further weaken our position as a nation.
But, my friends, that's not all. For the very first time Soviet missiles have now been planted in the Great Lakes. From there they now threaten Chicago, Racine, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Bay City, Erie, Buffalo, Rochester, and other cities of our industrial heartland. At present there are exactly 50 such missiles in the Great Lakes. These, however, are single warhead, short-range missiles, and are even smaller in size than the multiple warhead missiles that have been planted along our East, West, and Gulf Coasts. As if this were not enough, I have just been alerted that Soviet agents are now fanning out across America planting small hydrogen bombs in selected inland lakes. The primary targets here are major dams, but some other targets are also involved. Since the Federal government refuses to take action, it's imperative that State governments--especially those in the West--take action now to protect their citizens. Security patrols around major dams and lakes should be beefed up immediately and placed on full alert. In addition, search operations must be performed to locate those bombs that have already been planted so that they can be removed. Already, Soviet underwater nuclear devices have been planted in 21 places within the United States, and more are being planted. Nineteen (19) of the targets are dams, the other 2 are cities. CALIFORNIA has 4--Oroville Dam north of Sacramento, Castaic Dam north of Los Angeles, Shasta Dam in north California, and Otay Reservoir Dam near San Diego. ARIZONA also has 4 bombs--Glen Canyon Dam, Coolidge Dam, Theodore Roosevelt Dam, and Lake Pleasant Dam near Phoenix. NEW MEXICO has 3--the Navajo Dam, Blue Mesa Dam, and Alfa Butte Dam. MONTANA has 3--Fort Peck Dam, Yellow Tail Dam, and Hungry Horse Dam. NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA, NEBRASKA, NEVADA, and WASHINGTON STATE so far have 1 bomb each, threatening dams which are among the world's largest--these are respectively Garrison Dam, Oahe Dam, Fort Randall Dam, Hoover Dam, and Grand Coulee Dam. IDAHO has 2 bombs, both threatening towns--one is in the north end of Cour d'Alene Lake, threatening the town of that name; the other is in the north end of Lake Pend Oreille near the town of Sandpoint. My friends, this would not have been possible had it not been for the destruction of the FBI beginning with the murder of J. Edgar Hoover. God help us all.
Topic #3--With our military situation so serious, one would naturally expect someone to come forward to take action against the Soviet underwater missiles. For example, General George S. Brown, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, brought about the removal of many of these ocean and gulf missiles during August and September 1976. But where is he now?!! My friends, here is what has happened to General Brown. No matter how much the tactics of public manipulation change and shift, some things never change. I mentioned several months ago in connection with the disgraceful Sputnik One episode that nowadays accolades and awards go to the spoilers and traitors in our midst, while the true heroes who dare to raise their heads are beaten down, suppressed, and forgotten. Today there is no more grim testimony to this fact than the current predicament of General George S. Brown.
As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Brown is the top military officer in the United States, and therefore in some respects in the entire free world. As I revealed in detail in monthly Audioletter No. 16 for September 1976, it was he, General Brown, who more than any other person in the United States government, prevented a surprise Soviet nuclear attack on America during August and September 1976. Under extremely adverse conditions, he obtained the go-ahead to remove Soviet underwater missiles and hydrogen bombs then planted in our own territorial waters and then ordered the United States Navy to do the job, which it did quickly. And on September 16, 1976, I met for over an hour with General Brown in his office at the Pentagon to discuss the continuing Soviet underwater missile crisis and to relay new information to him which had been prevented from reaching him through normal channels. In meeting with me, General Brown was accepting terrible personal risks, and he knew it. He had overruled his entire staff in order to meet with me, and the meeting itself was completely free of interruptions of any kind. Nor was there any cut-off due to time; the meeting simply continued without pressure until we finished the business at hand. Then I left, along with an associate who had accompanied me to the meeting as a witness. We drove away from the Pentagon that day in a driving rainstorm; but the brave patriot whose office we had just left now faced a far worse personal storm--thanks to his efforts on our nation's behalf. I warned my listeners about this in monthly Audioletter No. 16 last September, and asked that everyone strengthen his hand by expressing their support for him.
General Brown, alone among the top echelons of the United States government, had stood by us and had saved millions of our lives in the process. Now he was depending on us to stand by him in his continuing efforts to carry out his Constitutional duties to the letter. Some of us did so, my friends, but far too many of us did not. During August and early September 1976, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were flooded with demands for action against the Soviet underwater missiles; but after that action was taken, there was no such massive outpouring of thanks for General Brown's crucial leadership or support for the continued positive efforts needed to save our country. Far too many of us forget that it is not enough just to complain about what is wrong; we must also actively support that which is right, or it will wither and die. After the crucial actions taken under General Brown's leadership late last summer, far too many of us just relaxed and went back to sleep, leaving General Brown to fend for himself.
Now I must tell you what has happened to General Brown as a result. For many months now I have been cut off from direct contact with General Brown; and in recent months General Brown has seemed like a completely different person than in the past whenever he appears in public. In place of the outgoing personality which has been General Brown's trademark in the past, there is nothing but resignation and acceptance of the dictates of his civilian superiors. The change has been so dramatic that it has even been commented upon by syndicated columnists, who are mystified. What has happened to General Brown, my friends, is known to very few. I myself have been able to confirm it only within the past few days. General George S. Brown, the nation's top military officer, is now virtually under house arrest. This is exactly the same kind of confinement that was meted out, for example, to Army Lieutenant William Calley during his court martial for the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. But there are two differences in General Brown's case. First, there has been no court martial. Instead, he is living under the threat of a court martial, for its twisted evidence and perjuring witnesses have already been assembled. Second, General Brown's isolation at the Pentagon and confinement to his Fort Myer residence are not absolute. Instead, they are interspersed with very carefully controlled appearances at official functions, since his absence from these would quickly arouse suspicions that something was terribly wrong. Now, should General Brown attempt again to step out of line and defy those in high places by giving orders to remove the missiles, doing his Constitutional duty, the suspended threat of court martial would instantly come crashing down upon him. By means of the elaborately doctored and falsified evidence I've already mentioned, General Brown would be railroaded into certain conviction for treason for doing his duty. Already alleged statements by General Brown have been published recently to make him appear to be a dangerous man. Were General Brown to be courtmartialed with falsified evidence, it would destroy him personally. It would also prevent his efforts from producing any benefits to America--such as a resumption of the removal of Soviet nuclear missiles from our waters. Any such orders of his would be rescinded; and his courtmartial would be used to make any attempts by him to warn America useless, by destroying his credibility.
As long ago as October, 1976, just a month after my meeting with him, General Brown was given a powerful demonstration of the ability of his enemies to crucify him publicly. As I discussed that month in Audioletter No. 17, a six-month old interview of General Brown was dredged up and used to subject him to intense public embarrassment and criticism. A few alleged statements of his from the interview were made public and played up by the controlled major media to such an extent that he was forced to make a public apology on nationwide television. Can you imagine? All of that for a few relatively insignificant comments which, if he really made them at all, had attracted no attention six months earlier. This episode had just one purpose--to prove to General Brown that if the falsified charges of treason should ever be leveled at him, he would have no chance at all either to defend himself or to do a service to America. His only recourse now would be to himself publicly demand a court-martial, but even that would not be successful without a massive outpouring of public support for him ahead of time--and that, my friends, has so far been denied him to the everlasting shame of our entire nation. Should General Brown come to any physical harm, the responsibility for it will rest squarely on the shoulders of David, Nelson, Laurance, and John D. Rockefeller III; but meanwhile, he's a secret captive, keeping millions of Americans reassured that all is well merely by his presence on the scene. Whenever a public or official appearance or statement by General Brown is called for, it's arranged and carried out under the watchful eyes of a heavy escort, although this is not always apparent. Otherwise the openness, the accessibility, and warmth that has always distinguished General Brown among newspaper reporters is now gone. He's a virtual prisoner at the Pentagon, held practically incommunicado except for the carefully controlled communications and appearances I have already mentioned. As soon as this Audioletter is released, you can expect to see things happen that may seem to disprove what I am telling you--for example, General Brown may become more visible publicly for a while. It is even conceivable, though highly unlikely, that this might even be carried to the point of having General Brown publicly deny that he has come under any new restrictions in recent months as the result, say, of the unfavorable publicity he received some months ago. Should that happen, keep in mind that General Brown is now a prisoner of war, imprisoned by the enemies within our own midst; and we've already seen many examples of the kinds of things American prisoners of war are forced to say for propaganda purposes.
Yes, my friends, General Brown stood up for all of us only to have too many of us let him down by failing to follow through with our thanks and our overwhelming support; but there is one way that we can still keep General Brown's great personal sacrifice on our behalf from being in vain, and that is for us, each and every one of us as individuals, to begin right now to do whatever we can to save our beloved country. My friends, there's no vacation from reality. It's up to you to do what you can--there's no one else; and even though you may not be able to do more than write a letter or two, do it. You never know how far your few words may spread. They may pass from one person to another, finally reaching the ear of someone you don't even know, someone with far more resources than you have who may play a vital role in saving our nation, yet who may never hear and never act if you fail to do your part. If all you have to offer is 5 loaves and 2 fishes, offer it; you just might be amazed at the results.
Until next month, God willing, this is Dr. Beter. Thank you, and may God bless each and every one of you.
