|
Audio
Letter #61
Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is January 20, 1981, and
this is my AUDIO LETTER® No. 61.
It’s been about a month and a half now since I recorded AUDIO LETTER
No. 60 at the end of November. Beginning with this issue No. 61, I
plan to record my AUDIO LETTER on a slightly more flexible schedule.
I still plan to record a message roughly once a month, but from now
on I want to tie my schedule more to events and less to the
calendar. After all, the AUDIO LETTER is recording history in the
making. Sometimes the end of the month arrives just as a major story
is breaking, either in public or behind closed doors. From now on
when that happens, I may well delay for a few days to give you a
more complete story. On other occasions it may work the other way,
speeding up my AUDIO LETTER schedule. All of this will have no
effect on your subscription. You will receive all the issues you
paid for no matter when they are released; so I hope that with a
more flexible schedule I will be able to serve you better than ever
before because, my friends, events are building toward a climax.
Since I spoke with you last, the world was shocked, saddened, and
angered by a seemingly senseless murder in New York City. The victim
was the former Beatle and rock star John Lennon. Lennon was fond of
saying that a rock star can say things without being killed for it;
and after five years out of the public eye, Lennon was going back to
work—not because he needed the money but because he had things to
say. But the things he had to say this time, my friends, would have
caused trouble for those who are maneuvering us into nuclear war;
and so a former fan of his was turned into a
psychologically-programmed assassin. This was done using the
techniques I made public over five years ago in AUDIO LETTER No. 5.
And on the eve of his return to public life, John Lennon was
silenced.
My friends, lawless forces are destroying our way of life. They have
spawned a soaring crime rate about which many of you have written to
me asking questions. If you want to understand how these lawless
forces affect you personally, there’s a new book I would like to
recommend to you. The author is a highly respected business
consultant, Mr. Fred Muller. His book is titled: “America’s Coming
Nightmare Inflation, Economic Collapse, and Crime Revolution.” The
price is $10.00 postpaid, and you can order it directly from:
Fred Muller
P.O. Box 11909, Columbia, SC 29211.
If we sit idly by and let it happen,
these forces of lawlessness will sweep away everything that is dear
to us. They are destroying our money and our economy, robbing us of
our hard-won assets. They are making many fear for their own lives
when they walk the streets; they are perverting our laws, and
corrupting our lawmakers; and they are working night and day to
betray us into the insanity of nuclear war.
But there is something we can do. Last July 1980 I began answering
your questions about what you can do; and because so many of you
have responded with action, I will continue to tell you more. We are
making progress; and if we do not lose heart, I am convinced that we
are going to win.
My three special topics for this AUDIO LETTER are:
-
Topic #1 - THE LEGAL
SABOTAGE OF THE REAGAN TRANSITION
-
Topic #2 - THE
FORFEITED OPPORTUNITY OF SENATOR WILLIAM PROXMIRE
-
Topic #3 - THE GOLDEN
SWINDLE OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS
Topic #1
- Two months ago America was buzzing
over the great surprise landslide in the name of Ronald Reagan.
There were all kinds of upbeat promises to “hit the ground running.”
But the transition to a new Administration has actually done just
the opposite. First, the early choices for several Cabinet positions
fell apart. People who had appeared interested suddenly just backed
out. Meanwhile the job of filling lower echelon positions became
even worse. Instead of “hitting the ground running”, the Transition
Team was wading through a swamp. Weeks ago the Transition Team
exhausted its Government money and had to start asking their
corporate friends for donations to stay in business. Puzzled
reporters and columnists have been scratching their heads over it
all. Veteran Washington watchers can tell something is wrong. They
can sniff it in the air. And for public consumption, the so-called
“Reagan Team” has tried to blame it all on the “Ethics in Government
Act” of 1978. But, my friends, that is not the real problem.
Something much more far-reaching is involved. The fact is that the
new Administration has been virtually locked out by the Bolsheviks
in bureaucratic power here.
The symptoms of this unprecedented situation are growing on all
sides. For example, a few days ago on January 12, the New York Times
carried an article with the headline: “CAMPAIGN AIDES FOR REAGAN
FEAR THEY ARE LEFT OUT.” The article said, quote:
“The Reagan transition aides now
expect to have only about 50 upper-level officials chosen by the
time Mr. Reagan is sworn in on January 20” and this is in
connection with, quote “filling of the 400 jobs considered
essential for the control of the bureaucracy.”
In other words, my friends, Reagan aides
were saying that the bureaucracy would still be beyond their control
as of today. And one more very significant quote:
“To the Reagan transition staff the
current process of filling the hundreds of jobs below the level
of Cabinet officer is perhaps more important than the filling of
the Cabinet positions. The lower level aides, they said, will be
the ones actually carrying out Mr. Reagan’s policies.”
My friends, the power struggle for
control of the United States Government is continuing. I outlined
that struggle in AUDIO LETTER No. 59 last October, and in AUDIO
LETTER No. 60 I explained how the Election surprise came about. But
as I mentioned then, that was only a mild setback for the Bolsheviks
entrenched in powerful positions here in Washington. The real
problem which is confronting the alleged Reagan forces is not in the
news. It is a Supreme Court decision which was quietly engineered by
the Bolsheviks here on March 31, 1980. For the lawyers among my
audience, the case is that of Branti vs. Finkel. The citation is:
445 U.S. 507 (1980).
The case itself was unspectacular at first glance. A newly appointed
Public Defender in the New York County tried to dismiss two
assistants who were leftovers or holdovers from the other political
party; but the assistants filed suit to keep their jobs. The Supreme
Court upheld them in the Branti decision last March; and in the
process, the Court made new law by declaring that the same principle
applies at all government levels, including federal. That general
principle is that governmental employees cannot be dismissed simply
because of their political affiliation.
The ramifications of this decision are stunning, my friends. They
were spelled out very well in the dissenting opinions under the
names of Justices Powell, Rehnquist, and Stewart. The dissenting
opinions are of many pages long and naturally are filled with
numerous detailed citations and arguments. But let me read a few
quotations to you which speak for themselves, quote:
“The Court today continues the
evisceration of patronage practices.”
And, quote:
“With scarcely a glance at almost
200 years of American political tradition, the Court further
limits the relevance of political affiliation to the selection
and retention of public employees. Many public positions
previously filled on the basis of membership in national parties
now must be staffed in accordance with a Constitutionalized
Civil Service Standard that will affect the employment practices
of federal, state, and local governments.”
And, quote:
“Today’s decision is an exercise of
judicial law-making.”
My friends, almost since the founding of
our Republic, America’s political system has depended upon
patronage. Without patronage, your vote means nothing at all. This
fact is brought out in the dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court
itself in the words, quote:
“Elected officials depend upon
appointees who hold similar views to carry out their policies
and administer their programs. Patronage, the right to select
key personnel and to reward a party faithful, serves the public
interest by facilitating the implementation of policies endorsed
by the electorate.”
Thanks to the Supreme Court Branti
decision, the new Administration is having to take office with a
bureaucracy that is beyond its control. The Bolsheviks entrenched in
key positions nation-wide at all levels of government are immune to
wholesale firing. Instead, they have to be pried loose one by one
based on non-political arguments. Likewise, new appointees cannot be
brought in just because they are Republicans. The result is a
quagmire, a government out of control. The Corporate Socialists have
for the moment succeeded in seizing the White House under the banner
of Ronald Reagan, but it is still the Bolsheviks who control the
Government.
One result will be the opposite of the plans we are hearing for a
“hiring freeze.” There will actually be duplicate hiring under
various disguises in order to get around the entrenched Bolsheviks.
That will lead to a mushrooming, inefficient government, and more
government spending, more bureaucracy—not less. And so, thanks to
the little-known Branti decision of the Supreme Court, the
Bolsheviks here still have a stranglehold on the United States
government. The new Administration will try everything to whittle
away at their power; but the Bolsheviks have no intention of letting
themselves be whittled very far. Before that can happen, they plan
to cut short the new Administration under the name of Ronald Reagan.
THE FORFEITED OPPORTUNITY OF SENATOR WILLIAM PROXMIRE
Topic #2
- For nearly six months now many of you
have been joining me in a preventive war of Truth. Ours is a war to
turn aside the plans for economic collapse, dictatorship, and
thermonuclear war. To do that, we are seizing the chief weapon of
our enemies and turning it against them. That weapon is the GOLD
weapon. Those who have cornered our gold and our money are using it
to destroy our way of life; but their giant GOLD weapon is also
their Achilles’ heel, because they have broken laws and they have
made mistakes. They have left a trail. You and I are following that
trail to track them down; and if we will keep at it and not lose
heart, I firmly believe that we are going to win.
As you know, we began our action campaign last summer with Senator
William Proxmire. At that time he was Chairman of the powerful
Senate Banking Committee. He will no longer be Chairman in the new
Congress because of the change from Democrat to Republican control
of the Senate; but Proxmire will remain on the Committee and he will
continue to exercise a great deal of power, so I want to bring you
up to date on our efforts with him. If you will recall, there were
basically two things which we were asking of Senator Proxmire. Our
main request was that he launch a public, honest investigation into
the true status of America’s alleged gold supplies. We specifically
asked him not to just accept the self-serving words of the Treasury
Department.
The time is long over due for proof, not
words, so we wanted Senator Proxmire to press for an impartial,
independent, complete physical inventory. Either America’s gold is
there, or it is not there; so I urged you to challenge Senator
Proxmire to prove Dr. Beter wrong. But we did not expect Senator
Proxmire to do all that out of a clear blue sky. Any investigation
as large as that must have a starting point; and so as a preliminary
step, we gave him that starting point. We asked him to look into one
very specific matter first. That was the matter of the missing gold
shipment from Fort Knox of January 20, 1965, the very day Lyndon
Johnson was inaugurated! Any truthful, independent inquiry about
that one shipment alone would raise questions that are far broader
in scope, and those questions would have led into the complete
investigation we are asking for.
But what has the champion of the “Golden Fleece Award” done up to
now? First, consider the matter of the missing gold shipment which I
discussed in AUDIO LETTER No. 56. Proxmire has yet to launch an
independent investigation of any kind. Instead he started off by
doing what we asked him not to do. He asked for a report by the
Treasury’s own Inspector General. Then he wasted months of precious
time in sending computerized brush-off letters in reply to your
letters. Following standard procedure in Washington today, he gave
you nothing but lip service. He kept promising you that as soon as
he received the Treasury report, he would decide what to do next.
My friends, even when Proxmire did receive the worthless Treasury
report, he just sat on it. He was hoping that he could stall you
until you lost interest and went away. Proxmire never made the
promised report available until you insisted that he do so around
early December. The report of the Treasury’s Inspector General
carries a hand-stamped date of September 30, 1980. It adds nothing
new about the missing shipment; instead it just expands on a
5-year-old letter of Mrs. Mary Brooks, then Director of the United
States Mint. I first made that letter public in AUDIO LETTER No. 2
for July 1975.
The Brooks letter of 1975 served only to multiply the questions
about the missing Fort Knox gold shipment. And the 1980 report by
the Treasury’s Inspector General only muddied the waters still
further. No wonder Senator Proxmire tried to sit on the report for
two months, because it is an unsatisfactory report. As such it calls
for Proxmire to do his duty to dig deeper—and digging deeper is the
one thing Proxmire seems determined not to do.
The missing gold shipment of January 20, 1965 is only one thread in
the giant web of scandal surrounding our missing gold, and Proxmire
has stubbornly refused even to take a glance at the giant scandal as
a whole. To show you what I mean, let me remind you of a letter to
Proxmire which I quoted in AUDIO LETTER No. 59 last October. It was
written by an acquaintance of Proxmire in Proxmire’s home state of
Wisconsin. As an astute business man, he asked Proxmire some very
penetrating questions. This man has kept my good friend, Mr. Edward
Durell, informed about his correspondence with Proxmire. As a
result, I can give you the sequel to what I reported to you in
October. It is very revealing.
To begin with, Proxmire never answered the letter from his friend
which I read to you. After a few weeks, Proxmire’s friend wrote
again. He made it abundantly clear that he expected an answer. And
answer Proxmire did.
Proxmire’s letter dated December 3, 1980 begins with the words,
quote:
“I have no record of having received
your earlier letter concerning a physical inventory of the
nation’s gold reserves. I have received a great deal of mail
regarding this issue, so I do apologize for the oversight.”
By the way, some of you have asked me
how many people are joining in our campaign, so now you have
Proxmire’s own words, not just mine, that you have a lot of company.
You are making yourself heard.
But Proxmire spends the rest of the letter giving nothing but
excuses for refusing to do his duty. It is little more than a rehash
of things you have already heard, including factual errors. The
letter was so bad that his friend wrote again and picked it apart
almost line by line. But for you and me, there’s no point in wasting
any more time on Proxmire right now. My friends, we gave Senator
Proxmire the benefit of the doubt. He has responded by forfeiting
the opportunity to take the lead which could have been his. Under
British common law he would be considered a traitor, so for now we
will just go away and leave him alone. But Proxmire will remain a
powerful member of the Senate Banking Committee. We may have
occasion to deal with him again; but if we do, my friends, it will
be on very different terms.
Topic #3
- Just after Christmas last month a big
article about Fort Knox began appearing in newspapers nation-wide.
Alert listeners all over the United States have sent me copies. The
publicity counterattack against our “preventive war of TRUTH” has
now begun.
The article had three basic points to get across. Two of these were
familiar from countless gold propaganda in the past.
One of these old familiar points was a rehash of the old myth about
the impregnability of Fort Knox. The officer in charge of
the Bullion Depository, George B. Wright, was photographed at
attention outside the locked gates, and there were quotes from him
like:
“This is the most secure facility
you will find anywhere. We are continually improving our
security system” and “We have tanks and personnel carriers
standing by.”
A second familiar point of the long
article was the standard personal attack on me. My 1974 charges
about our missing gold are mentioned, but those are dismissed with a
yawn, as quote:
“Beter’s farfetched claim.”
But the third propaganda trick in the
article was new. In AUDIO LETTER No. 60 four weeks earlier I had
reported, quote:
“Watch for the non-existent gold reserves to be revalued at current
market prices. In terms of dollars, our fictitious gold reserves
will suddenly look 15 or 20 times bigger.” The Fort Knox newspaper
article started the ball rolling. It never mentioned the old
official gold price of $42.22 per ounce which is reflected in
Treasury balance sheets. Instead, it hammers away at the great
increase in market prices of gold, and so our psychological
conditioning has now begun. We are being mentally set up for the
gold revaluation publicity stunt to come. In AUDIO LETTER No. 59 I
discussed the way in which America’s gold reserves are listed on
Treasury and Federal Reserve balance sheets. I did that in order to
call your attention to a little known but crucial fact.
Our gold is often referred to loosely in
the press as the “Treasury’s gold” or the “government’s gold”, but
that is not correct. The gold actually belongs to the Federal
Reserve System. The Treasury only serves as a physical custodian for
the Federal Reserve gold, and the Treasury and the Federal Reserve
balance sheets confirm that this is the situation. If this sounds
like a strange arrangement, you’re right. It is. But it was set up
that way for a reason.
Treasury custody of Federal Reserve gold created a situation of
mixed responsibility, and it enabled those lines of responsibility
to be blurred wherever convenient. This made it easier for those who
stole our gold to hide what they had done. Even so they have broken
laws and they have left a trail. The legal evidence is mounting that
points to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board of
Governors here in Washington as co-conspirators. The legal principle
involved is that of a pledge, misapplied in a wrongful and
fraudulent manner. And, my friends, you and I are not the only
victims! By and large the Presidents and Directors of the Regional
Federal Reserve Banks have also been victimized. They have been
placed in positions of enormous liability by the actions of the
Board here in Washington, and the evidence so far indicates that
they do not realize what has been done to them.
What I want to do now is to outline the legal case that is taking
shape. Laws have been broken, and some very powerful men are
destined for prison! I know that I have many lawyers among my
listeners, and it is as a lawyer that I speak to you now; but I will
also try to make my comments as clear as possible for everyone. We
are being forced to try our case first in the “court of public
opinion”, and I will conclude this topic with a new suggestion for
action for you and for the Regional Federal Reserve Banks.
On December 3, 1974, then Secretary of the Treasury William Simon
testified before a Subcommittee of the House Banking Committee. The
Congressmen were asking about various details of the Treasury’s
announced plans to start holding “gold auctions.”
The auctions were to begin a few weeks later in January 1975. In the
course of the questioning, then Congressman John Conlan in Arizona
asked:
“Is the government gold owned by the
Federal Reserve or is it owned by the Treasury but the Federal
Reserve has a mortgage-like interest on that gold?”
Simon’s answer included the words, and I
quote:
“It is sort of a pledge.”
When Simon said those two words “sort
of” he almost let the cat out of the bag. Fortunately for him,
Simon’s slip of the tongue went unnoticed at the time; and
Government witnesses before Congress always have a special
privilege. It goes under the euphemism “correcting for the
record”—that is, a Government witness can revise his oral testimony
before it is printed by the Government Printing Office. So the
officially-published version of Simon’s testimony was sanitized in
several places. Among other things, it omits those two incriminating
words “sort of” which Simon said. According to the officially
published version, Simon said to Congressman Conlan, quote:
“Legally, I want to check with my
attorney. Yes, it is the same. I thought it was. It is a
pledge.”
Later in the same testimony Conlan asked
Simon how the decision is taken to sell gold. In his replies Simon
said he took the decision to the President; but he also claimed,
quote:
“I have the authority to do that.”
Now, my friends, please notice something
very important. The then Secretary of the Treasury, William Simon,
was questioned about sales of Federal Reserve gold, and yet he never
once made any mention of obtaining Federal Reserve permission to do
so! Instead he asserted that the Treasury itself can sell the gold
without asking anyone else, not even the President. The only legal
basis held out for this is the claim that the gold is “a pledge.”
My friends, please bear with me now. There is an essential legal
point here which has to be made. Those who need to know about it
most urgently are the Officers and Directors of the Regional Federal
Reserve Banks, but I will need your help to bring this about. As I
am about to explain, the wool has been pulled over their eyes as
well as ours.
When I use the word “conspiracy”, I’m doing so in the strict legal
sense.
A CONSPIRACY is the term which refers to any situation in which two
or more individuals join together to plan and execute a crime; and
that is exactly what the Federal Reserve Board, not the Banks, and
the Treasury have done.
The key to it all is the legal concept of a pledge. For nearly 20
years now, the United States Treasury has been using a pretended
authority to sell Federal Reserve gold at will. That pretended
authority is based upon a claim which has been made to sound
plausible but is totally false. That claim is the Treasury’s
assertion that the Federal Reserve gold is a pledge; or, as Simon
really said, “sort of a pledge.” That is why Simon’s testimony of
1974, which I just quoted, was sanitized so carefully.
To show you what has been done, first I should define what a pledge
is in law. First I will describe it in legal terminology because
this is a legal battleground. The Officers and Directors of the
Regional Federal Reserve Banks will have to take legal steps if they
are to save themselves. But I also want to make sure everyone
understands what is involved, so I will try my best to give you
examples of what I am talking about.
Legally, a PLEDGE is defined as a bailment or transfer of personal
property as a security for some debt or obligation. It is redeemable
on certain terms; but if the Debtor defaults on the contract, the
Creditor can sell the property which the Debtor has turned over to
him. In this situation, the debtor is called a pledgor because he is
pledging to pay or repay something. The creditor is called the
pledgee. He holds on to physical possession of the pledgor’s
property until the pledge is satisfied.
For a contract of pledge of property to exist, three elements must
be present:
(1) The pledgor must turn
over possession of the property to thepledgee
(2) Title to the property—that is, actual ownership—is
retainedby the pledgor
(3) and this is essential: There must be a lien of some
sortagainst the property involved for payment of a debt or
performance of an obligation, and that debt or obligation must
be due the pledgee by the pledgor or some other person
For my fellow attorneys, just a reminder
that a contract of pledge is one form of hypothecation.
Hypothecation, of course, is the contractual power of a creditor
over the property of a debtor to cause the property to be sold to
satisfy the debt. “Pledge” applies specifically when the property of
the debtor is physically handed over to the creditor.
Now let me come down to earth and give you an everyday example.
Suppose you needed some money and decided to pawn your gold watch.
You go to the pawnshop and physically turn over your gold watch to
the pawnbroker. In return, the pawnbroker gives you two things: He
hands you some money as a loan, and he also hands you a receipt for
your watch. Your pawn receipt gives you the legal right for some
period of time to go back in and redeem your watch. That is, if you
want your watch back, you give the pawnbroker the receipt plus the
money you borrowed plus some interest.
My friends, a pawn transaction like this is a contract of pledge.
You are the debtor because he has loaned you money. He keeps your
watch in his possession as security for your loan. During the
redemption period you have the right to get your watch back if you
pay the loan; but if you do not repay the loan by a certain
deadline, you default on your loan. The pawnbroker may then sell
your watch.
Now then, my friends, the United States Treasury claims that a
similar arrangement applies to the Federal Reserve gold. The
property at issue is America’s entire monetary gold hoard instead of
a gold watch; but they claim that the same principle applies, that
the gold is “a pledge.” In effect, the Treasury thereby claims to be
in the position of a giant pawnbroker. By referring to the gold as
“a pledge”, the Treasury has claimed in effect that the Federal
Reserve System pawned the gold. Can you imagine? Beyond that, the
Treasury is behaving as if the Federal Reserve System had defaulted
in some way. The Treasury has disposed of most all of the Federal
Reserve gold, just like a pawnbroker; and this has been done without
even notifying 11 of the 12 Regional Federal Reserve Banks!
The Federal Reserve Board of Governors
right here in Washington knew about it, so did certain people at the
New York bank, but they have left the other 11 Regional Banks in the
dark.
My friends, the United States Treasury pretends to have the
authority to sell off the Federal Reserve gold at will. That is what
William Simon, who parades today as the darling of the
Conservatives, said as Treasury Secretary in 1974. This pretended
authority to get rid of our gold is based on the Treasury’s
contention that it is “a pledge.” But is it? Or was it ever really a
pledge? The Treasury’s claim does not make it so all by itself. That
famous quotation of Abraham Lincoln applies just as well now as it
did in AUDIO LETTER No. 59:
“A flower does not become a
rose just because I call it a rose.”
I will now point out some facts which
prove that the Treasury’s possession of the Federal Reserve gold was
never on the basis of a pledge.
The Treasury’s pretended authority to sell the gold is completely
fraudulent, and there has been collusion between the Treasury and
the Federal Reserve Board here in Washington. As a result, 11 of the
12 Regional Federal Reserve Banks have been swindled. They are
claiming assets—gold assets—in the mistaken belief that those assets
still exist.
To trace the true status of the Federal Reserve gold, we need to go
back to the beginning—in 1933 and 1934. On March 4, 1933, Franklin
D. Roosevelt was inaugurated President for his first term. The very
next evening just before midnight he declared a “National
Emergency.” He proclaimed a week-long Bank Holiday, closing all
banks and placing an embargo on gold payments. Then the Treasury
Secretary, William H. Woodin, made a public statement to quiet the
fears of the people. He said, quote:
“It is ridiculous and misleading to
say that we have gone off the Gold Standard any more than we
have gone off the Currency Standard. We are definitely on the
Gold Standard. Gold merely cannot be obtained for several days.”
But they always lie, my friends. The
Treasury Secretary said it would be just a few days, but IT WAS 42
YEARS before Americans would regain the right to own gold, because
only four (4) days after he spoke, on March 9, 1933, the “National
Banking Emergency Act” was rushed into law. Under that Act, American
citizens were forced to turn in all of their gold. It was collected
by the Federal Reserve System at the old bargain price of $20.67 per
ounce.
Despite those soothing words of the Treasury Secretary only days
before, America was off the Gold Standard. The Act also authorized
the Treasury Secretary to instruct the Federal Reserve to deliver
its gold into possession of the Treasury. The Treasury Secretary did
issue those instructions on January 17, 1934, but the 1933 Law did
not take title of the gold away from the Federal Reserve. It only
required that it be physically held by the Treasury for safekeeping.
Finally, the “Gold Reserve Act” of 1934 was passed on January 30 of
that year. Section 2-A of the Act says, quote:
“Upon the approval of this Act, all
right, title, and interest in every claim of the Federal Reserve
Board of every Federal Reserve Bank and of every Federal Reserve
Agent in and to any and all gold coin and gold bullion shall
pass to and are hereby vested in the United States.”
My friends, that sounds ironclad,
doesn’t it? It sounds as if the Treasury took over ownership of the
gold from the Federal Reserve, but the fact is that it was only a
pretended transfer. On January 24, 1934, six (6) days before the Act
was passed, one brave Congressman tried to expose the entire ruse.
He was a bitter enemy of the Federal Reserve System, and on the
floor of Congress he gave a speech that revealed exactly what was
afoot. Describing the provisions of the Act for the gold transfer,
then Congressman Louis T. McFadden said, quote:
“It provides that the United States
Government shall give the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal
Reserve Banks new Gold Certificates to the full value of the
loot. The Gold Certificates will give the Federal Reserve Board
and the Federal Reserve Banks legal title to the gold, and the
United States Treasury will be nothing more than its physical
custodian. The Secretary of the Treasury will give the Federal
Reserve Banks gold for their new Gold Certificates whenever they
ask for it. It is a fraudulent transfer.”
The situation McFadden described is
exactly what happened. The Federal Reserve System owns the gold
through its Gold Certificates, the Treasury only acts as physical
custodian; and this arrangement has, in legal terms, been confirmed,
ratified, and condoned by the Federal Reserve and Treasury balance
sheets for 46 years. It is the fact, no matter what the words of the
1934 Act may seem to say; and law, my friends, deals with the
questions of fact, not just assertions.
Now let me return to the present-day claim of the Treasury that it
holds the Federal Reserve gold as “a pledge.” That claim is in
direct contradiction to the Treasury’s own balance sheets. As I
detailed in AUDIO LETTER No. 59, the Treasury is a debtor with
regard to the gold, while the Federal Reserve is the creditor; but
if it were a pledge, as claimed by the Treasury, the reverse would
be true. The Treasury is trying to turn day into night, and night
into day, simply by calling it “a pledge.” That raises two
questions, my friends.
(1) What pretended authority was the
basis of Simon’s 1974 claimthat the gold is “sort of a pledge”?
(2) How could the Treasury get away with this fraud?
The answer to the first question is a
June 30, 1961 Act of Congress, the “Old Series Currency Adjustment
Act.” The citation is: 31 USC 912. The Treasury misled Congress in
1961 with the excuse that it was to enable the retirement of a
variety of old obsolete currencies including certain Gold
Certificates used as currencies, but nowhere did the Act define the
term “Gold Certificates.” The real but unstated purpose of the Act
was to provide a pretended authority to dispose of Federal Reserve
gold. In fact, gold began leaving the country under the “London Gold
Pool Agreement” only three (3) months later. By virtue of that Act,
the Treasury pretends that the gold became what Simon called “sort
of a pledge.” The Treasury claims a right that it does not legally
have to convert the gold to its own use and give the Federal Reserve
System nothing but paper money or bookkeeping credits in exchange.
In this way, the Federal Reserve Banks have been swindled out of
their gold bullion.
That brings me to the second question. That is: How could the
Treasury get away with it? The answer involves collusion by the
Federal Reserve Board of Governors here in Washington. In AUDIO
LETTER No. 59 I suggested that you write to the President and
Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank in your Region. I suggested
that you urge them to press for an independent, reliable, physical
inventory of the Federal Reserve gold in Treasury vaults. Based on
the replies of which you have sent me copies, a very significant
pattern has emerged. I do not include the New York bank in what I am
about to say, but the responding Chairmen and Presidents of the
other 11 Regional Banks have said basically two things:
No. 1 - Not one single
Chairman or President of a Regional Federal Reserve Bank says he
has ever seen the gold or had it inventoried. Instead to a man,
they are all relying totally on the assurances of the Treasury
and their own Federal Reserve Board here in Washington.
No. 2 - Not one single reply reflects a correct
understanding of his own enormous legal liability involving the
gold. Every indication is that they were never properly informed
that they were taking on this responsibility.
My friends, I know this sounds
astonishing, but the correspondence demonstrating these two points
is just too overwhelming to ignore. Let me just read you a few
quotes to show you what I mean.
From the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, President William F. Ford
wrote, quote:
“As you may know, I have no
jurisdiction over the stock of gold at Fort Knox. However I have
discussed the issues that you raise with my colleagues at the
Federal Reserve Board in Washington.”
From the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston,
President Frank E. Morris wrote, quote:
“I have never had reason to doubt
that the gold stock and shipments have been properly accounted
for.”
From the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas
City, President Roger Guffey wrote, quote:
“I did not perform a physical count
of all assets of the Bank at the time I became president, nor
have I conducted a physical inventory of the nation’s gold stock
held by the United States Treasury Department.
As I am sure you are aware, the nation’s gold reserves are no
longer held by the Federal Reserve System but rather the title
and custody is held by the United States Treasury as a result of
the ‘Gold Reserve Act of 1934.’”
From the Federal Reserve Bank of
Philadelphia, Chairman John W. Eckman wrote, quote:
“While the 12 Reserve Banks and
their Directors have a degree of local autonomy, the questions
you and Mr. Durell ask and the actions you request are more
logically in the province of the Board of Governors.”
From the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas,
President Ernest T. Baughman wrote to my good friend, Mr. Edward
Durell, quote:
“With respect to the gold which
underlies the Gold Certificates held by the Federal Reserve
Banks, I have made no effort to eyeball that gold. I am prepared
with no reservations whatever to accept the representations of
those government officials responsible for the gold that they do
in fact have it.”
And from the Federal Reserve Bank of
Richmond, President Robert P. Black wrote, quote:
“I would like to emphasize as
strongly as I know how that neither the Federal Reserve System
nor the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond has custody or control
of the gold stock of the United States.”
Then he quotes the gold legislation of
1933 and 1934 which I discussed for you earlier, and he concludes on
that basis that, quote:
“It seems clear to me that this
legislation removes from the Federal Reserve System any
responsibility for the custody and control of the gold stock of
the United States.”
My friends, it is little wonder that the
Chairmen and Presidents of the Regional Federal Reserve Banks are so
dangerously misinformed. Their own legal responsibility for the gold
is based not on custody but on ownership. And as I have already
established in detail for you, that ownership is not open to
dispute. It is reflected in the Gold Certificates owned by the
Federal Reserve Banks, but here is the shocker: The 12 Regional
Banks do not have those Certificates, even though they are shown on
their respective balance sheets as “Gold Certificate Accounts.”
Where did all those certificates go? Here is the answer. I quote now
from a letter dated January 9, 1981 to my good friend Mr. Durell. It
was written by Robert P. Black, President of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Richmond, quote:
“I am unable to send you a copy of
the certificate you requested. The ‘Gold Certificate Account’
shown on the balance sheets of the Federal Reserve Banks is
managed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
in Washington, D.C. Amounts in this account are allocated to the
12 Federal Reserve Banks by the Board of Governors.”
My friends, I speak again now as a
lawyer. In any conspiracy to commit a crime, the circle of
conspirators is always kept as small as possible. The fewer the
people involved, the less the risk of exposure, and that is exactly
the pattern that is emerging now.
By every evidence up to now, the officers and directors of 11 of the
12 Regional Federal Reserve Banks are not party to the gold
conspiracy. They are dangerously misinformed, but they appear to be
acting in good faith. It is they who will be faced with enormous
fines, prison terms, and ruined lives when the Scandal breaks; and
yet they appear to be blissfully unaware of their great danger. And
that, my friends, is the second telltale sign in all great
conspiracies—the conspirators always make sure that there will be
someone else handy to take the blame!
For example, when the CIA, on orders, assassinated President John F.
Kennedy, they made sure a “patsy” named Lee Harvey Oswald was on
hand; and they also made sure he was silenced before he could raise
too many doubts. Likewise, the conspirators within the Treasury and
the Federal Reserve Board of Governors have made sure that they,
too, will have their scapegoats. Those scapegoats are to be the
officers and directors of the Regional Federal Reserve Banks.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse; so when the Gold Scandal breaks,
as it will, they will be bundled off to prison to satisfy the rage
of the American public—that is, my friends, unless they take action
now to save themselves. During the past six weeks or so they have
been put on legal notice for the first time ever about the missing
Federal Reserve gold—so they can break free of the web of intrigue
if they will. They can do this by taking the initiative to bring
about an independent, conclusive, physical inventory of the gold. By
doing that, they can free themselves of any taint of suspicion; but
if they choose not to act, my friends, they will only be sealing
their own fate because they are now on legal notice. And if they
choose inaction, they will make themselves accessories after the
fact in the biggest scandal in American history—the GOLD SCANDAL.
The choice is up to them!
My friends, it’s up to us—you and me—to alert the Federal Reserve
Bank officials to these things, and so I will be sending a copy of
this tape to the President of each Federal Reserve Bank by
Registered Mail. I need for you to back me up with your letters.
I am about to read you a sample letter to get you started. Please,
write a letter like this to the President of the Federal Reserve
Bank in your Region. I told you how to get the address in AUDIO
LETTER No. 59.
Send the original to the President of the Federal Reserve Bank, and
send a copy to each one of the other Directors. A photo copy will
do; and as always, be sure to keep a copy for your own file.
Now here’s the sample letter I suggest. Feel free to use your own
words, but please do not cut corners. WE MUST HAVE ACTION—AND SOON,
because time is fast running out:
“Dear Mr. (so and so):
I am writing to you again because of my continuing deep concern
over the loss of our gold reserves. Thank you for your earlier
reply; but I am concerned that you do not appear to be aware of
certain extremely large legal responsibilities on your part. In
a recent cassette tape, Dr. Beter has given a legal discussion
of these responsibilities on your part. Dr. Beter speaks as a
lawyer and a former Counsel to the United States Export-Import
Bank, the largest governmental bank in the Western world.
Therefore I do not believe that you can safely afford to ignore
his legal briefing of your responsibilities regarding the gold.
Dr. Beter has notified his listeners that he is sending a copy
of this cassette tape—AUDIO LETTER No. 61 - to you by Registered
Mail. It will take you and the other Directors of your bank just
one hour to hear what he has to say. I cannot urge you strongly
enough to do just that.
After you hear Dr. Beter’s tape, I believe you will agree with
me that you should take steps to protect your own personal
interests. To that end, I urge you to demand immediate action by
the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to arrange an
independent, conclusive, physical inventory of the gold in
Treasury vaults. As you will hear Dr. Beter explain, you do have
the authority to bring this about.
Please insist that the committee which oversees the inventory
include the President or another Director from each one of the
Regional Reserve Banks. You dare not delegate this duty to
anyone else, including even the Federal Reserve Board of
Governors. Your own personal vital interests are at stake! If
you will do this, it can only have one of two possible outcomes,
both good. One possibility is that the inventory will prove that
all the gold is there, and Dr. Beter is wrong. That would lay to
rest seven years of unanswered questions which have undermined
confidence in America’s banking system. The only other
possibility would be to prove that much, if not all, of the gold
is missing. In that case, you will be taking the first step
toward correcting the real causes of our crumbling economy, and
you will have removed yourself from any taint of suspicion.
Either the gold is there—OR—it is not there. Dr. Beter is not
afraid to learn the truth. Are you?”
• Followed by your signature.
My friends, once again I’m asking you to
go to work. Please get your letter and copies off to the Federal
Reserve Bank in your Region right away. As I said before, I hold out
no hope for the New York bank, but the other 11 Regional Banks
appear to be a real ray of hope; and if they will do their duty and
use their latent powers, they can save themselves while doing a
great service to America.
LAST MINUTE SUMMARY
Now it is time for just a few final words as my “Last Minute
Summary.” Today, January 20, 1981, is Inauguration Day. To all
outward appearances, a new Administration has begun; but thanks to
the obscure, recent Branti decision of the Supreme Court, the change
is only on the surface. The real battle to control the United States
Government continues unabated.
My friends, these things cannot be allowed to continue. It is up to
you and me to do our Constitutional duty to save our land.
Until next month, God willing, this is
Dr. Beter. Thank you, and may God bless each and every one of you.
|