From the Radio Free Michigan archives



ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot



If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to

bj496@Cleveland.Freenet.Edu.

------------------------------------------------



This is the Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER(R), 1629 K St., NW, Washington, DC

20006



   Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is January 20, 1981,

and this is my AUDIO LETTER(R) 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 the

pledgee; (2) Title to the property--that is, actual ownership--is

retained by the pledgor; (3) and this is essential: There must be a

lien of some sort against 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 claim that

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 p ut 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.

------------------------------------------------

(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the

Radio Free Michigan site by the archive maintainer.


 All files are ZIP archives for fast download.


 E-mail bj496@Cleveland.Freenet.Edu)

