Copy Link
Add to Bookmark


eZine's profile picture
Published in 
dr beter audioletter
 · 19 Mar 2023

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--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.


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 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.


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.

← previous
next →
sending ...
New to Neperos ? Sign Up for free
download Neperos App from Google Play
install Neperos as PWA

Let's discover also

Recent Articles

Recent Comments

Neperos cookies
This website uses cookies to store your preferences and improve the service. Cookies authorization will allow me and / or my partners to process personal data such as browsing behaviour.

By pressing OK you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge the Privacy Policy

By pressing REJECT you will be able to continue to use Neperos (like read articles or write comments) but some important cookies will not be set. This may affect certain features and functions of the platform.