Dr. Peter David Beter - Audio Letter No. 49.
"AUDIO LETTER(R)" is a registered trademark of Audio Books,
Inc., a Texas corporation, which originally produced this tape
recording. Reproduced under open license granted by Audio
Books, Inc.


This is the Dr. Beter AUDIO LETTER(R), Box 16428, Ft. Worth,
Texas 76133

Hello, my friends, this is Dr. Beter. Today is August 27,
1979, and this is my AUDIO LETTER(R) No. 49. As I say these
words, the slow, lazy days of summer 1979 are drawing to a close.
Most of us are sorry to see them go. For many people summer is a
time to ignore the outside world as much as possible. It's time
to relax, to bask in the sun, to pretend that today will blend
into tomorrow without change or trouble. Television news
programs in these later days of August have been filled with
items that reinforce this mood. Even the alleged President has
seemingly found time to lay aside the tedium of doing his job,
and for a week or more we were assured by television reports that
the Carter robotoid family were enjoying a tranquil steamboat
ride down the Mississippi River. To all appearances, this
robotoid President has had nothing to do except jog around the
boat deck, shake hands with well-wishers, and give the same
Energy speech over and over. If he can take life that easy, we
think, why shouldn't we relax too? But, my friends, at this very
moment the world is in ferment as never before.

If you depend on television news and newspaper headlines as
most people do, the world may seem to be just rolling along just
like Old Man River; but if you want to have some hint of what is
really taking place today, you should listen to the short-wave
radio. Get into the habit of listening to the BBC World Service,
to Radio Moscow World Service, to Radio Australia, to Radio South
Africa, even Radio Canada right next door to us. It often
contains important reports which you will never hear through our
domestic major media. You might even tune in the Voice of
America once in a while--there, too, you may hear things you will
never hear in our domestic news media, and without commercials.
But, my friends, you should listen to these with a certain amount
of charity for they all have their own biases. There is not
enough time in this entire tape even to list all the important
areas of ferment in our world; but for a moment let me just skim
the surface for you, then ask yourself whether the slick major
media image of our country and the world is real or artificial.

Not long ago the Boat People from Vietnam were filling our
headlines. Vietnam was expelling large numbers of its
people--most all of them were Chinese, not Vietnamese. Vietnam
has become a client state of Russia, and is preparing for
possible all-out war with China. Of all countries, Vietnam knows
the dangers of internal strife at this time, and so all those who
refuse to cooperate with the present regime are being rounded up
and expelled in one way or another. Vietnam is in a hurry
because already tensions are building again along the border with

The Boat People now constitute a refugee problem of staggering
proportions. Hundreds of thousands of people are crammed into
refugee camps. Even so, the recent actions of Vietnam should be
placed in proper perspective. In 35 years of continuous war in
Indochina, the mass expulsion of political undesirables is a new
phenomenon. In the past, the actions of the former Pol Pot
regime in Cambodia, now known as Kampuchea, would have been more
typical. When the Chinese-backed Pol Pot regime took control of
Cambodia several years ago, a reign of terror began. It was
alleged that more than a million Cambodians were murdered by
their own government. Most of them were members of the middle
class, regardless of their ethnic background. In that way the
Pol Pot regime broke the back of any possible resistance. If the
present regime in Vietnam were carrying on according to these
traditional methods, there would be no Boat People--instead,
there would be only mass graves throughout Vietnam. There would
be no television pictures of pathetic refugees crammed into
boats, and there would be no controversy over Vietnam's actions;
because, at most, all we would hear would be a few passing
rumors--then, all would be quiet again.

The shift in Vietnam's behavior, my friends, is the result of
Russian pressure. Since the end of the Vietnam war, all
remaining Chinese influence in Vietnam has been rooted out.
Vietnam is now purely a Russian client state; and like Russia
herself, Vietnam is getting rid of internal enemies by expelling
them. As for the bloody Pol Pot regime in Cambodia, that was
recently overthrown by the Vietnamese invasion.

The ferment in Indo-China is visible elsewhere too. Recently
the United States has started speeding up arms shipments to
Thailand, but the United States Government is now coming under
Russia's control, so for all intents and purposes, Thailand's
fate is already sealed. Soon it, too, will enter the Russian

Russia's continuing encirclement of China is moving right
along. Early in 1978, my friends, I alerted you to watch for
America's doors to start opening wide to Red China. Within a few
months the news was filled with comments that we had decided to
play the so-called "China card." It was all a panicky attempt by
America's real rulers to buy time against Russia. During the
final months of 1977, Russia had wrestled the military control of
space away from the United States. This had altered completely
the East-West balance of power; but due to the death of the real
Leonid Brezhnev on January 7, 1978, our Rulers thought they had a
chance. They expected the Kremlin to be divided by infighting to
decide Brezhnev's successor. They thought they could keep the
Kremlin off balance for two to three years. Using that time,
they would rush ahead with secret weapons programs on a crash
basis. And so America tried to play the "China card." Before
the year of 1978 was out, the Carter Administration announced
that the United States was establishing diplomatic relations with
China, but it was an act of pure desperation. The late four
Rockefeller brothers had badly underestimated the tightly knit
band of Christians who now rule Russia. Since March 1978,
Marshal Dmitry Ustinov has been the top man in the Kremlin. At
the proper time he will step down in favor of a younger man, but
for now the Kremlin power structure is stable and effective.

Current events in Asia demonstrate an important fact.
America's attempt to play the so-called "China card" was a
failure. It's no longer fashionable even to speak in those
terms. China's invasion of Vietnam early this year of 1979
showed up the United States as a paper tiger in Asia. By
contrast, Russia's profile there is becoming taller and taller.
As I revealed long ago, China was actually playing the "America
card" to get the best deal possible with Russia. Next month,
formal talks will begin in Moscow between China and Russia toward
improving relations between the two.

Six years ago in my book I warned about the forces leading to
a vast new Asian Axis. Today this axis built around Russia,
China, and Japan is coming together, but Russia is making sure
there's no doubt in anyone's mind about who will be its leader.
Even on the eve of major talks between Russia and China, Russia
does not hesitate to point fingers at China. For example, look
at Afghanistan on Russia's southern border which is now a Russian
client state. Civil war has been underway there for nine months.
Early this month a four-hour pitched battle took place right in
the capital city of Kabul. Afghan Radio has charged that trained
guerrillas, anti-revolutionaries, have entered Afghanistan from
neighboring Iran and Pakistan; and Russia charges that some of
these intruders were trained in China.

In ways like this, my friends, Russia is putting pressure not
only on China but also on Pakistan and Iran. This is part of
Russia's preoccupation with bordering states, which I have
explained in the past. Afghanistan and Iran both border on
Russia, and Russia wants secure borders. Pakistan is a land
bridge from Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea. Russia has
historically wanted a land corridor in this area for access to
the Indian Ocean. In other ways too, Pakistan is being given
good reason to think over her attitude toward Russia.

Lately Pakistan's relations with the United States have taken
a turn for the worse. Earlier this month, on August 11, the New
York Times made public some stunning policy planning within the
State Department. Pakistan is very close to creating its own
atomic bomb, but the Times revealed that the United States
intends to stop Pakistan one way or another. One of the options
under specific consideration has brought a stinging protest by
Pakistan--and no wonder. That option is: covert operations.
That, my friends, is exactly the option used by the United States
in Guyana last November. In the case of Pakistan, those
operations would involve sabotage of her atomic installations.
Here at home, of course, sabotage is supposed to be

All across the world, the ferment increasingly has the flavor
of dramatic change. For example, less than a decade ago the
United States supported Pakistan in the war with India; and for
five years now India has had the atomic bomb--but now, the United
States reportedly wants to stop Pakistan from getting it. But
things have changed, my friends. The Rockefellers a decade ago
were at the peak of their power. India was slated for conquest
in a plan which later ousted Indira Gandhi from power. But as I
have revealed in recent tapes, the four Rockefeller brothers are
no more. Their old allies who overthrew them, the atheistic
Bolsheviks, have also been stopped in their tracks. It is now
Russia who controls most all of the top echelons of the United
States Government; and as Pakistan ponders a changed America,
Indira Gandhi is staging a comeback in India.

In the past year the biggest change of all has gone
unannounced in our daily news. The end of a dynasty has taken
place, the Rockefeller dynasty. It began a year ago last month
with the eldest of the four brothers, John D. III. In AUDIO
LETTER No. 36 I revealed how his death would cause Rockefeller
efforts in Africa and Asia to start unraveling, and today the
headless Rockefeller cartel is losing fast in southern Africa.
The initiative is shifting back to Britain, which has established
a special secret relationship with Russia. As for Asia, I have
already pointed out the collapse of America's so-called "China
card" strategy, notwithstanding the present visit to China of the
robotoid Mondale.

Turning to the Persian Gulf, we keep hearing about United
States plans for a large contingency force. This force, known as
the "Quick Reaction Corps", would rush to the Gulf to protect our
oil lifeline in time of crisis; but throughout the Gulf region
itself, this plan has raised cries of protest. It's an offshoot
of the plan I made public a year ago to set up an American first
strike against Russia; but even without knowing that, it's
obvious to everyone that the force would mean trouble. Kuwait
has already served notice in public that the United States must
not deploy these forces in the Gulf. If we do, Kuwait will
destroy her own oil wells.

At this time last year the Shah of Iran was still in power,
but the upheaval in Iran which was tied to the secret American
war plan ended his rule earlier this year. The revolution in
Iran was also designed to break the access by British Petroleum
to Iranian oil. That has left practically the whole pie to the
Rockefeller big oil cartel; but increasingly the Khomeini regime
has turned out to be an awkward puppet for big oil. Now Iran is
becoming destabilized by internal strife among Kurds, Arabs, and
leftist Iranians; and lately there have been huge demonstrations
in Iran favoring the Palestine Liberation Organization. The
Iranian demonstrations have also been against Israel and the
United States, as if the two were one. Meanwhile Israeli
artillery continues to pound southern Lebanon almost daily, and
yet there's been an obvious shift in America's Middle East
policy. Several weeks ago Israeli Foreign Minister Dayan said
publicly that a shift had taken place recently. There were
official denials but now the Andrew Young affair has created a
bombshell for United States policy in the Middle East, and here
at home smoldering tensions between Blacks and Jews have been
fanned into open flames.

And so it goes, my friends. Wherever you look you will see
the ferment of change. One way to look at this is to tell
yourself that all these things are unrelated just as they are
presented in the news. Viewed in that way, world events are
impossible to understand or even remember. That's the attitude
that says: There's no cause for human events, they just happen.
But, my friends, there is a cause for everything we see. The sun
does not rise every day by accident--there's a reason for it; and
the world is not stirring with the winds of change by
accident--there's a reason for it. This month, as always, I want
to focus your attention on the reasons behind current events.
Knowing these, you can better understand the individual events in
the news for yourself. Maybe you can't always affect these
events directly, but it's always better to be aware than to be
taken by surprise; and for those who are not aware, there will be
many surprises in these days of radical changes.

My three special topics this month are:


Topic #1--One summer night in 1974 I was in the studios of a New
York City radio station. The station was WMCA, the program was
the famous LONG JOHN NEBEL SHOW. For quite some time the late
Long John Nebel had been having me on his program as a guest once
a month for about six hours. But that night I was asked a
question about the Middle East. In my answer I said among other
things that the troubles there began with the Palestinians and
the Israelis, and they will end with the Palestinians and
Israelis. Now many Zionist listeners were shocked to hear these
words. For them, the Palestinians did not exist; and since that
night I have never again been allowed to appear on WMCA or any
other New York radio station. The then owner of WMCA is now the
head of the VOICE OF AMERICA. Can you imagine?

It has now been five years since I said those forbidden words
about the Palestinians. Today, as then, the Zionists here and in
Israel bristle with hostility at the very word "Palestinian"; and
for most of those five years, American policy toward the
Palestinians has echoed that of Zionists and of Israel.

Four years ago, in 1975, Israel was secretly guaranteed that
this policy would continue by the late Secretary of State Henry
Kissinger. This policy was never passed on by Congress. As
recently as last March 26, 1979, American policy was still to
exclude the Palestinians. On that day the so-called
"Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty" was signed in Washington. It did
not amend this 1975 policy in any way, and so it continued to
lock out the Palestinians.

In AUDIO LETTER No. 44 I explained how this secret policy was
intended to lead very quickly not to peace but to war in the
Middle East. That in turn was to lead to an American nuclear
first strike against Russia. The secret American plan, which I
made public one year ago this month in AUDIO LETTER No. 37, was
moving fast, but since that time dramatic changes have been
taking place in America's foreign policy. This includes our
foreign policy in general and our Middle East policy in
particular. The changes began last April 1979 behind the scenes.
At that time the changes were not yet visible to the public, but
that month I reported to my listeners that a secret war of
"doubles" had broken out in Washington. The Intelligence
Agencies of Russia, Britain, and Israel were struggling for
control of the United States Government. Our own CIA was in
disarray. The CIA had always been David Rockefeller's private
detective agency, but by then David Rockefeller was dead,
replaced by a "double." Rockefeller power in America had been
shattered. In AUDIO LETTER No. 45 I reported that Russia was
gaining the upper hand in the war of "doubles." The following
month I was able to reveal why they were winning. I also
reported that two supersecret diplomatic shuttles to the Middle
East had taken place. The shuttles involved what appeared to be
top American officials, but it was actually a Russian operation
to stop the Middle East war plan. And that was only the first
step in Russia's plan to revolutionize United States policy in
the Middle East.

Many of my listeners seem to have ignored the detailed report
I gave on these shuttles in AUDIO LETTER No. 46. For one thing,
there was no hint about these developments in the major media
news at that time; and if anything, the Middle East appeared to
be on the back burner. But I think the significance of the
shuttles may have been overlooked by many people for another
reason. AUDIO LETTER No. 46 was the tape in which I first
revealed Russia's secret weapon--that is, "Organic Robotoids."
These artificial, living, robot-like creatures are shocking and
mind-boggling. Their mere existence is a hard fact to absorb; so
when I described their use in the shuttles later in the tape, it
may have sounded minor by comparison. My friends, the events of
recent days regarding the Middle East are the direct result of
those shuttles! They initiated a radical shift in America's
Middle East policy because that policy is now being established
by the Kremlin. I would urge you to go back and listen again to
what you heard in AUDIO LETTER No. 46, especially regarding the
Middle East shuttles, then the events of recent days should be
much easier for you to understand.

On June 18, 1979, the SALT II signing took place in Vienna,
Austria. America's turnabout in favor of SALT II is another
aspect of Russia's take-over here. I have discussed that in
recent tapes; but on the same day as the SALT II signing, another
important meeting took place in Vienna. The robotoid replacement
for Secretary of State Cyrus Vance met with Austria's Chancellor,
Bruno Kreisky. Kreisky is a Jew; but like many Jews, he has no
sympathy with the political force known as Zionism. In the
recent past, he has made scalding attacks on the ruling circles
in Israel. In public statements about this, Kreisky has used
words such as "paranoid", "a police state", to describe the
Israeli government. The tough band of Christians who now rule
Russia agree completely. Like Kreisky, the Russians have often
made public statements blasting Zionism. In Topic #3 I'll say
more about the controversy over Zionism because this controversy
is now moving onto center stage in a struggle over the future of
all mankind.

In the Kreisky meeting with the Vance robotoid, the diplomatic
status of the Palestinians was discussed. Ten days earlier,
United States Ambassador to Austria, Milton Wolf, had already had
a meeting with the representative of the PLO. Kreisky said he
intended to invite Arafat, the PLO leader, for a formal visit to
Vienna. In that way, Kreisky would be initiating a
quasi-official recognition of the PLO as a political force. On
July 8 Arafat arrived in Vienna, creating headlines in Europe.
Meanwhile, there had already been three meetings in Austria
between United States Ambassador Wolf and a PLO representative.
On July 31 a Jimmy Carter robotoid began setting the stage for
the Andrew Young affair. In an interview, robotoid Carter
compared the Palestinian problem to the Civil Rights movement in
the United States. For days Israeli leaders were boiling, and
their sympathizers in this country denounced the Carter remarks.
On August 5, Israeli Foreign Minister Dayan complained publicly
that in the past two months or so, quote: "There has been a shift
in United States policy." That shift, my friends, began with the
secret robotoid shuttles, which I revealed three months ago. On
August 13, special Middle East Envoy, Robert Strauss, or rather a
Strauss robotoid, spoke before the American Bar Association in
Dallas. He said the United States is committed to the security
of Israel but also, quote: "the legitimate rights of the
Palestinian people." The same day, the Andrew Young affair
began. NEWSWEEK magazine broke the story that Young, as
Ambassador to the United Nations, had met with the UN observer of
the PLO, Zehdi Terzi. The next day the Israeli government loudly
protested Young's action. The day after that, August 15, he

Last month I alerted you to watch for more changing faces in
positions of power here in the United States. The departure of
Andrew Young is part of this "changing of the guard", but it's
also much more. For one thing, the Young affair has highlighted
the fact that America's Middle East policy is changing, and it
did so in a way that cast the Palestinians in a far more
favorable light than in the past. Equally important to Russia,
Israel has been lured into giving itself a black eye. In the
past, Israel could always claim that the PLO was making peace
impossible, but now the PLO is concentrating on a diplomatic
drive for a peaceful accommodation with Israel. Israel's
response has been to try to sabotage this process. World-wide
the reaction has been to start questioning whether Israel really
wants peace. For example, on August 17, the BBC carried an
interview with Antony McDermott of the Financial Times of London.
He was asked his opinion of the Israeli objective in bringing
about the Young resignation. He replied in part, quote: "I would
speculate that if the PLO were through some miracle to come out
and say 'We accept the existence of Israel', it would be
extremely embarrassing to Mr. Begin because he's constantly
comparing them to the Nazis." Russia had foreseen that Israel
would try to stop the United States policy shift. The Andrew
Young affair has caused Israel to injure herself by these

World opinion toward Israel is changing; but for Israel, the
worst setback of all may be right here in the United States
because the domestic fallout, my friends, of the Andrew Young
affair is not at all what Israel had in mind.

Topic #2--When Israel was proclaimed a separate nation in 1947 by
the United Nations, the United States was the first great power
to give it diplomatic recognition. Ever since that time, there
has been a special relationship between the governments of the
two countries. An essential ingredient in maintaining this
relationship has been domestic support within the United States.
For more than three decades American public opinion has been
generally pro-Israel, but the Andrew Young affair is causing
Israel to be seen in a different light by many Americans. For
one thing, questions are now being raised about Israeli
Intelligence activity in the United States. In the past this has
never been a public issue, but that is changing because of the
way in which the Young affair broke wide open.

On August 16, the day after he resigned, Young held a news
conference at the United Nations. In the words of the BBC that
evening, Young blamed Israel for the events which led to his
resignation. That same day, the Atlanta Constitution reported
that Israeli Intelligence agents had spied on Young's meeting
with PLO representative Terzi. The newspaper said that this
enabled Israel to challenge Young's original statement that the
meeting had been inadvertent. Israel's United Nations Ambassador
Blum immediately denied the report; but when Young was asked
about it, he said that he assumed he was being bugged but he did
not care. Since then reports have continued to multiply about
Israeli spying in the Young episode.

Israeli denials have just led to increasingly detailed reports
about the spying, and in the process broader questions are being
asked about Israeli spying here in the United States. All this
is very worrisome to the government of Israel because they have,
my friends, left a trail. The fact is that the Mossad, Israel's
Intelligence Agency, is very active in the United States, but
this is in violation of a secret agreement under which the Mossad
is forbidden from this activity. In return, our own CIA is
forbidden from the clandestine activities in Israel. Strangely
enough, I can report that the CIA has adhered to the agreement,
but both did work together in the Jonestown, Guyana tragedy, as I
revealed in AUDIO LETTER 40. Israel is fearful of having Mossad
activities here exposed as a cause celebre. Technically, the
hundreds of Mossad agents in the United States could be rounded
up and expelled. If this was done with great fanfare, the impact
on Israel's image here in America could be devastating. World
opinion would also veer away from Israel, so the Zionists are
doing everything in their power not to have an investigation.
What they want most is for the controversy to just go away. At
the same time, they're trying to put the best possible face on
Israeli Intelligence. For example, on August 21 an article
appeared in the Washington Star entitled: "Discreet Mossad called
World's Best." The article is built mainly around the statements
not by Israelis but by former American Intelligence officials.
The impression conveyed is that the mighty Mossad easily could
spy on anyone it wants to, but we are also to believe they just
wouldn't do such a thing as spy on the Young-Terzi meeting. So
far though the questions about Israeli spying in the Young affair
are refusing to go away. On August 23 the Washington Star
carried a story in which an unnamed United States source is
quoted as saying: "The Israelis have staked out the Arabs around
the United Nations with bugs, taps, and surveillances. Young
walked right into it." The article says considerably more about
the Young episode, then it expands into the subject of Israeli
spying here in general. For example, quote: "According to one
source, New York City is the center of Israeli spying in the
United States and has been for years." Another quote: "On one
occasion United States officials learned that an Israeli wire tap
operation was using a local synagogue as a cover." And a final
quote: "Each year in New York, moreover, there are numerous cases
in which Israeli agents have been identified posing as FBI
agents, complete with seemingly authentic credentials."

By any standards, my friends, words like these in a major
American newspaper signal a change from the past. Controversy
over Intelligence activities could become a major fallout against
Israel from the Young affair, but there is another domestic
fallout which is even more important and that is the rupturing of
political and other ties between the Blacks and the Jews. These
tensions are very real, my friends, and have been building since
the mid-sixties; but they have only now burst into the open for
all to see. The catalyst, of course, was the Young affair. Up
until now, practically the only Americans who were aware of these
tensions were the Blacks and Jews themselves, but the strongest
feelings in this rift are felt by the Blacks. They are the ones
who feel they have been wronged, so I think the easiest way to
describe the situation is in the words of Blacks themselves.

On August 16 Young himself blamed Israel for making his
resignation necessary. The same day it was disclosed that United
States Ambassador to Austria, Milton Wolf, had met three times
with PLO representatives; but Wolf, who is Jewish, was not being
reprimanded, much less forced to resign! For Blacks, that news
added insult to injury. It got still worse the next day, August
17. It was announced that the United States had made a surprise
proposal regarding the Security Council resolution on Palestinian
Rights. The United States had asked Israel to support an
American-sponsored resolution to that effect, but without
success. With that news, Andy Young looked like nothing more
than the fall guy for a new American policy. Blacks wondered:
"Why Andy? Why a Black?" The same day, Young made comments on
the NBC "Today Show" which were repeated on the BBC World
Service. Young was asked about latent anti-Semitism in the Black
community, and said, quote:

"I think there may be a resentment of a certain kind of
arrogance that was played up, especially in the New York press;
and there was a kind of arrogance of Jewish power, headlines
saying: 'Jews demand Young's ouster.' I think that's caused the
reaction by the Black community, which is a natural reaction, but
in no way does that constitute anti-Semitism."

The following day, August 18, an article in the New York Daily
News illustrated the growing reaction of Black America. The
article was by Black columnist Earl Caldwell. It was titled:
"Finally Played the Game, and Lost." Referring to the day after
Young's resignation, Caldwell wrote, quote:

"On Thursday, the afternoon was filled with the fallout. The
clamor for his resignation had come primarily from the Jewish
community. That is fact. And now the backlash that Andrew Young
had warned the Israeli Ambassador about was rising. Downstairs
on the steps of the Mission the Rev. Jesse Jackson was saying
that Andrew Young was the fall guy, and that it was not the Klan
that brought the Bakke case, that it was not the Klan that deals
with Southern Africa, and that it was not the Klan that brought
the pressure to fire Andrew Young; it was our former allies. And
the backlash was building." (End of quote from the Earl Caldwell

The rift between Blacks and Jews is continuing to grow, my
friends. Already a group of Black ministers of the Southern
Christian Leadership Conference has held a meeting with
Palestinians, and they have announced their support for
Palestinian rights. And during the past several days, a series
of very powerful commentaries about the situation were carried
over the American Forces Radio and TV Service. The commentator
was James Rowe of the Mutual Black Network. Unlike most other
programs on the American Forces Radio, the Rowe commentaries are
followed by a disclaimer originating with the Mutual Black
Network; but they are being beamed straight to our troops here
and overseas. And, of course, our Armed Forces of today have a
very high proportion of Blacks, here and abroad.

The Rowe commentaries on the Young affair are instructive for
two reasons. For one thing, they illustrate the growing backlash
by many Blacks against Israel, but also Rowe reminds his
listeners of some historical background facts which must be taken
into account. Most Americans, Black or otherwise, do not
remember this background, or at least do not think about it. In
his commentary four days ago, August 23, Rowe began, quote:

"It's time the United States stopped placating the Israelis and
got down to the serious business of negotiating Peace in the
Middle East. Every time something offends Israel, the Jewish
American population rises up. They expect Black Americans to
support them, despite the refusal of Jewish groups to support
some of our most recent concerns. The Jewish groups left us when
it came to reverse discrimination. Despite that, what is more
important is RIGHT and WRONG. It is wrong that we support an
ethnic group when they are mistaken, and Israel is mistaken in
the treatment of the Palestinians. We cannot continue to pay for
Hitler's mistakes. Israel cannot be permitted to perpetrate upon
another group of people what the Germans tried to do to them in
World War II. If Israel has a right to exist, then so does the
State of Palestine. The goal now should be: How do we achieve

Further on, Rowe said:

"The United States Ambassador to Austria was not asked to resign
although he had several meetings with the PLO representatives.
So why did Andrew Young have to resign? Why did the first black
United States Ambassador have to become the fall guy in a plan to
appease Jerusalem and the Jewish lobby here? It is extremely
complicated and much greater than concerns for oil from the

The next day, August 24, James Rowe had more to say about the
Young resignation, and he included some history in very concise
terms. Here's an excerpt from his commentary; quote:

"We cannot let ourselves go on the defensive every time the
Jewish American lobby criticizes Blacks as anti-Semitic because
we don't agree with them. Anybody that doesn't agree with
Israel's hard line stand is considered anti-Semitic in Jerusalem.
If anyone is to be charged with responsibility for the current
crisis in the Middle East, it should be Great Britain. And if
anyone is to be charged with the protracted conflict in that
region of the world, it is to be Israel. Britain had control
over the land that made up Jordan and Palestine under a League of
Nations' mandate. The British wanted to end their colonialism
there, and permitted Zionists to move in uncontrolled, and left
the Palestinians to the Jordanians. The Palestinians were left
without a home because London did not follow through on the
United Nations' recommendation of creating two separate
states--one for the Israelis and one for the Palestinians. It
appears Israel wants the Palestinians completely removed from the
scene. Now comes the Andrew Young card. How does the United
States support the human rights of the Palestinians without
offending our long-time and hard-line friends in the Zionist
movement? The United States is faced with supporting the human
rights of the Palestinians--but to the offense of Jews. Perhaps
Andy Young was the test of how offended Israel would be if
America decided to give in to demands from the Palestine
Liberation Organization." (End of quotation from the Rowe
commentary of August 24.)

My friends, there was nothing accidental about the Young
affair. To those who do not know about Russia's secret take-over
here in Washington, it all looks like a big mistake; but in
reality Israel's mighty Mossad has just been out-foxed by
Russia's KGB. The Russians, through the robotoids in the White
House, control most all the top positions in the United States
Government. They brought about the Young-Terzi meeting of July
26, and in doing so they knew it would be monitored by Israeli
Intelligence. The Russians succeeded in planning and guiding
events in a way beneficial to Russia.

In AUDIO LETTER 46, I mentioned that Prime Minister Begin of
Israel had been replaced with a robotoid, as had Sadat of Egypt.
Wholesale robotizing is not taking place in those countries. By
using their Begin robotoid, Russia was able to make sure that
Israel's policy would be to make an issue of Young's PLO contact.
This action has caused the backlash reactions against Israel
which I have already discussed. It has also enhanced the image
of the Palestinians internationally. In addition, the Young flap
provides an excuse for the United States to back into a more
favorable treatment of the Palestinian cause. But, my friends,
there will be other manipulated events to distract you from the
Andrew Young affair, all created by friends of Israel still in
our United States State Department.

The Russian target in the Andrew Young affair appears at first
glance to be all the Jews in both Israel and the United States,
but that is not the case. The true target in these Kremlin
maneuvers is the political force called ZIONISM. Many Jews are
not Zionists, and there are also Zionists who are not Jews; but
Zionism masquerades as a movement that speaks for all Jews. For
reasons I will discuss in Topic #3, the Christ-ones who rule
Russia today intend to utterly break Zionism as a force in the
world. A major part of this is to be the dismantling of Zionist
power here in America. To that end, the Andrew Young affair was
engineered to uncork the political pressures between Jews and
Blacks. On the surface, this appears to mean all Jews; but the
commentaries I quoted by James Rowe suggest that already the
focus is narrowing. Black leaders are looking around carefully;
and as they look at the Zionists, they are doing so with frowns
and narrowed eyes.

Topic #3--It has now been nearly two years since I first made
public the overthrow of the Bolsheviks in Russia; and as my older
listeners know, this is the outcome of six decades of struggle by
a tightly knit band of native Russian Christians. Now they are
out to destroy Bolshevism world-wide. The Kremlin's campaign to
wipe out Bolshevism is still a secret officially; but as
important as Bolshevism is, the Kremlin rulers regard it as just
one major tentacle of a giant serpent; and if they keep their
anti-Bolshevism secret, they make no bones about their opposition
to what they see as another tentacle. That tentacle is ZIONISM.

The origins of modern-day Zionism trace back to the late 19th
Century, but the first major milestone toward the creation of a
Jewish state happened in 1917. Great Britain was looking for all
the friends she could find in what was then called "The Great
War." That year the United States was drawn into that war with
the deliberate help of President Woodrow Wilson. But that same
year, Russia was removed from the war against Germany by the
Bolshevik Revolution. So the Allies were still under great
pressure; and in order to enlist the growing power of the Zionist
movement on the side of Britain, the famous Balfour Declaration
was announced. Lord Balfour announced that Britain would look
with favor on the creation of a national home for the Jewish
people in Palestine. Most Americans were too preoccupied with
news of the war to think long about the Balfour Declaration in
Britain; but soon after the war ended, a major protest was
published against the plans of the Zionists. On March 5, 1919,
readers of the New York Times saw a long PETITION on page 7 with
STATE." Nowadays if we saw a headline like that, most of us
would probably pay little attention. We would assume that it was
the work of the Arabs and turn the page; but that 1919 protest
was presented and signed exclusively by Jews. And these were not
some small splinter group of malcontents, they were a galaxy of
Jewish stars in American politics, education, law, business,
medicine, journalism, banking, as well as prominent rabbis;
people like Congressman Julius Kahn of California who headed the
list; Henry Morganthau, Sr., ex-Ambassador to Turkey; Simon Wolf,
former consul to Egypt; Max Senior, former president of the
National Conference of Jewish Charities; Professor Morris Jastrow
of the University of Pennsylvania; Adolph Ochs, publisher of the
New York Times; Lessing Rosenthal, Chicago attorney; Dr. Julius
Rosenstein, surgeon at Mount Zion Hospital in San Francisco; L.
H. Kampner, mayor of Galveston, Texas; I. W. Hellman, president
of the Union Trust Company in San Francisco; and many others.

The PETITION begins, quote:

"As a future form of government for Palestine will undoubtedly
be considered by the approaching Peace Conference, we, the
undersigned citizens of the United States, unite in this
statement setting forth our objections to the organization of a
Jewish State in Palestine as proposed by the Zionist societies in
this country and Europe."

The petitioners felt that they were, quote: "voicing the opinion
of the majority of American Jews." To back that up, they pointed
out, quote:

"The American Zionists represent, according to the most recent
statistics available, only a small proportion of the Jews living
in this country, about 150,000 out of 3-1/2 million."

As their source, they cited the 1918 edition of the "American
Jewish Yearbook" in Philadelphia.

The PETITION goes on to sound not only a protest but a series of
warnings. The signers did sympathize with the concept of, quote:
"A refuge in Palestine or elsewhere." They felt that this would
be a good thing purely as a haven for Jews living under
oppression; but they were bitterly opposed to the Zionist demands
for, quote: "Reorganization of the Jews as a national unit to
whom now or in the future territorial sovereignty in Palestine
shall be committed."

The Jews who published that PETITION against a Zionist State
60 years ago turned out to be prophets. Like most prophets,
their warnings went unheeded; but for more than three decades
events in the Middle East have been acting out their warnings in
flesh, blood, and tragedy.

I can do no more than highlight a few points from the
anti-Zionist PETITION, which is long and detailed, but history
demands that we be aware of the efforts of the anti-Zionist Jews
to turn aside tragedy, deep tragedy. They pointed out that the
Zionists were demanding, quote:

"A home not merely for Jews living in countries in which they
are oppressed, but for Jews universally. No Jew, wherever he may
live, can consider himself free from the implications of such a

From a practical standpoint, my friends, they pointed out that
tiny Palestine could not hold all the Jews then living in the
world. The 6 to 10 million in Russia and Romania alone would
have produced hopeless overcrowding; but beyond that, they
objected to what they termed "political segregation." They felt
it was both undemocratic and dangerous to Jews themselves the
world over. They worried, quote:

"All Jews repudiate every suspicion of a double allegiance; but
to our minds, it is necessarily implied in, and cannot by any
logic be eliminated from, the establishment of a sovereign state
for the Jews in Palestine."

They added that, quote:

"As a rule, those who favor such a restoration advocate it not
for themselves but for others. Those who act thus and yet insist
on their patriotic attachment to the countries of which they are
citizens are self-deceived in their profession of Zionism."

They were worried that Jews themselves would be torn internally
by pressures for double allegiance, and they were concerned that
this would play into the hands of those who considered Jews,

"Aliens in every land, incapable of true patriotism, and
prompted only by sinister and self-seeking motives."

Quoting Sir George Adam Smith, an authority of that day on
Palestine, they also foresaw the bloodshed to come, quote:

"It is not true that Palestine is the national home of the
Jewish people and of no other people. It is not correct to call
its non-Jewish inhabitants Arabs, or to say that they have left
no image of their spirit and made no history except in the great
mosque; nor can we evade the fact that Christian communities have
been as long in the possession of their portion of this land as
ever the Jews were."

The PETITION also says, quote:

"The claims to various sections of this undefined territory
would unquestionably evoke bitter controversies. To subject the
Jews to the possible recurrence of such bitter and sanguinary
conflict, which would be inevitable, would be a crime."

Finally, they concluded with the words:

"We do not wish to see Palestine, either now or at any time in
the future, organized as a Jewish State."

But, my friends, the Zionists were successful in thwarting this
appeal by prominent American Jews. Israel became a nation in
1947, and the predicted bloodshed began immediately. Israeli
terrorism by Menachem Begin and others caused Palestinian blood
to run red in the streets. Palestinians became refugees in their
own land, and the borders of Israel began expanding. Soon there
was nothing left of what had been called Palestine.

The Middle East war plan, which the Russians halted in May
1979, involved the Zionists in alliance with the Bolsheviks. The
Russians are determined to end the threat of nuclear war; and
after 30 years of Israeli history, they have concluded the same
thing about Zionism as about Bolshevism. They are convinced that
there will be no peace in the world for Jew, Moslem, or Christian
so long as Zionism exists. So they are now in a two-front war to
destroy both Zionism and Bolshevism.

Long ago Russia's new rulers discovered that Zionism and
Bolshevism had common origins. These origins involved the
ROTHSCHILDS, but others are involved also, so they are now
following the trail of Satanic power towards its origins using
their secret weapons--the robotoids. Right now they are striking
at the tentacles of world power, like ZIONISM and BOLSHEVISM; but
when the time is ripe, they are hoping to strike at the very head
of world Satanic power.

Until next month, God willing, this is Dr. Beter. Thank you,
and may God bless each and every one of you.

Back to Main Page of Dr. Peter Beter Audio Letters Serie