All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 24, 1994 - Bill Cooper
57:52
Treason #5, Law and Con Record
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Once upon a happy hour, there is a tower of desire.
Once upon a beautiful place, a paradise so big and grand.
The power of the sun.
Let's have a good look at the planet of the sun.
The sun is the sun.
Good evening, I'm William Cooper, and you're listening to the Hour of the Time.
going to go straight to Phoenix right now for a medal report from Gene Miller.
Good evening, Gene.
Good evening.
How are you tonight?
Pretty good.
I just wanted to ask you right off the bat up front, is there any truth to the rumor that Kurt Saxon is spreading that we're going to give this hour to him?
Not that I know of.
Not that I know of either.
You know, I helped get him on the air because I figured if the sheeple are going to be deceived, they might as well be deceived by somebody who's going to teach them how to store food and protect themselves.
How about a metal report there?
Okie doke.
on gold today we had a high of 381.90 a low of 377.90 to close at 381.30 down 30 cents
for the day silver had a high of five dollars and fifteen Platinum had a close high of $380.30, a low of $376.50, to close at $380.10, up $1.80.
and a close at $5.12 up $0.04 for the day.
Platinum had a close high of $380.30, a low of $3.7650, to close at $380.10 up $1.80.
The Dow Jones had a high of $39.3440, a low of $39.0260, to close at $39.1270 down $1.80.
One of the questions that gets asked to me frequently is, where do I think gold's going?
How do we track it?
How do we have an idea?
Well, I was studying with a friend today.
One of the methods is called the candlestick method.
And actually, not to sound like some guru or anything, but it came from an ancient Chinese method of trading when they would trade rice back and forth.
And what they would do is they would take the open and the closed on a metal, such as gold, and that comprises the body of the candle.
And depending on which direction it went, if it went up, the candlestick was white.
If it went down in price, in other words, if the closed was lower than the open, the candlestick was black.
The movement, the high-low movement, it comprises the shadow of which the candlestick emits, and it gives us a direction as to what's happening in the market.
Today, there was a real small opening and close, like a 60 cent margin or a 30 cent margin there, and what it is, what they call is a hammer, and it was called hammering off the bottom, and what it tells us today, in technical terms, is that When it hammers out the bottom, it means that we're basically at the bottom of this recent pullback.
If you remember last week, we were in the 390 range.
We pulled back down to the 390 range.
We pulled back down to about the 380 range, which was normal.
We had about 80% bullish consensus, and so there's going to be a sell-off, and it's just stair-stepping its way up, and we're basically at the bottom of this Uh, current pullback.
So, is it a good time to buy?
Yes.
Uh, it's as cheap as it's going to be probably here in the next few days.
Uh, couple other things.
Um, question about retirement accounts.
When we did the program last week, uh, I basically ran out of time.
Uh, the hour went a lot quicker than I thought it was going to go.
Uh, uh, there is a way.
And, uh, as far as retirement accounts, because there's many people, in fact, most people have some sort of iris.
Some people have what they call SEPs, self-employed pension plans.
Both of those are qualified that you can take them out of cash, out of Federal Reserve notes that are rapidly losing their value, and you can put them into gold.
You can put them into gold bullion.
You can put them into non-confiscatable numismatic coins.
There's a number of different directions you can go.
Some of this stuff is just new recently.
Well, that's illuminating.
And so you might want to call and ask us for some information regarding what can you do
with your IRAs or what can you do with your retirement accounts.
How can you protect yourself?
How can you get out of the government having total control of your money?
Well, that's illuminating.
As far as the new missionary coins, they're doing very well yet.
Those that are into the Morgan's and the Peace dollars, they're doing extremely well.
We have a very limited number of those available, but those that may be interested, they're continuing to go up.
I do have a special that I'm going to run here.
In fact, you may want to write our number down real quick here.
It's 1-800-289-2646.
Number one, call us and get our new updated newsletter and our information that we have out for the 1994.
It's all free.
Uh, free to you and it'll give you a good education as far as what's going on in the market.
Uh, tonight, uh, the phone lines will be open for about 15 minutes.
Normally at this time the phone lines are closed and you just get an answering machine.
But I got three bags of junk silver.
I mean, this is excellent stuff as far as protection.
And what is junk silver?
Junk silver, if you remember last week, are coins that were minted between, uh, before 1964 and they're 90% silver.
They're U.S.
minted coins.
They're very easily spendable.
Uh, extremely liquid and very much a protectionary type thing.
Um, I have three bags that I got in today and normally we take whatever it costs plus 5% commission on top of it.
These three bags and these three bags only, we're going to get rid of them at a 3% commission, which, uh, saves you about 75 bucks.
If you call within the next 15 minutes, I'll be here.
There's somebody at the front desk to answer the phone.
It's 1-800-289-2646.
Uh, the price on a junk bag, just so you know, there's 715 ounces of junks of silver in a junk bag of silver.
Uh, the price on these is $3,872.13.
Like I said, it's about a $75 savings over the normal cost and I have three available.
So for the first three people that call me and give me their name and their number and their address and say they want them, they're yours at that savings.
So that's my special for the week.
And I think that's about all I have to say.
How's everything going on your end, Bill?
Well, I'm getting well, and Carolyn's sick.
My voice is still not too good.
My throat is still sore, but I feel a lot better.
Carolyn is flat on her back now, and that's why she wasn't introduced at the beginning of the show.
So if you all want to send her a get well card or something, I'm sure she would appreciate that.
Well, thank you, Gene, once again for giving us the scoop on what's happening in the market.
And we'll talk to you later tonight on the second hour.
Yeah, okay.
Thank you.
Give us a call.
Take care.
Bye-bye.
I'm sorry.
Well, for those of you who have not been listening or just tuned in or maybe started listening
last Thursday and are not catching the later shows, you had either better catch the later
shows or send for the tapes or have a radio that has a tape recorder in it so that you
can record these broadcasts if you're sleeping.
And if you don't know how to do that, folks, if you've got a radio that you can program to come on and stay on for one hour, all you need is a quiet room, put that radio in there, program it to come on at whatever hour that you want to tape, and put a voice-activated tape recorder right beside it.
So if you don't have a tape recorder in your radio, that's the way to do it.
The voice tape recorder, if you put it on record, not pause, now you have to put it on record, and then leave the room, make sure it's a quiet room, The recorder will not record, but when the radio comes on and noise starts coming out of that speaker, it will activate the voice activation in the tape recorder, and it will record the entire hour.
So that's just one way you can do it, and that suggestion was sent in by one of our listeners who did not have a tape recorder in his shortwave radio.
If you have the funds and would like to buy a super, super shortwave radio, Sanjean sells a top-line model.
With a tape recorder built right into it, and it's programmable, and also you can get the exact same radio from Radio Shack, only the name is different.
It's the Realistic DX392.
The Realistic DX392 from Radio Shack.
After I get through with this series on all of these documents, we'll probably do a show on just shortwave radio listening.
Right now, I don't have time.
I've got to get all this stuff out to you folks.
Tonight, I'm going to cover a lot of things.
I'm going to start off with the 2nd Annual Report to Congress, January 1st, 1962.
December 31st, 1962, the 2nd Annual Report to Congress from the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.
It's United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Publication 14, released February 1963.
So pay attention, folks.
You need to know all of this.
And, uh...
Heh heh heh.
Okay.
I'm going to read from page 10 of this report.
The United States plan also provides for the reduction of forces of the United States and the Soviet Union to 2.1 million in Stage 1 and 1.05 million in Stage 2, with corresponding reductions by other nations.
Stage 1 of the U.S.
plan contains essential measures to meet the nuclear threat, especially by a cutoff of the production of fissionable materials for nuclear weapons purposes.
Further measures to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear weapons remaining in national arsenals would be carried out in Stages 2 and 3 of the United States program after the completion of international expert studies.
The United States proposes completion of Stages 1 and 2 and three years each in Stage 3 as soon as possible.
Now, they never did stick to their three years.
It took them a lot longer than that for both Stages 1.
We are in stage two right now.
According to the timetable, we have one more year in stage two, and then it goes to stage
three.
Now, remember, these are actual documents, folks, that you can look up yourself.
I've been reading directly from actual United States government documents since the early
show last Thursday.
This is the fifth hour of broadcast of these documents, which reveal that our government,
the one that calls itself our government, is in fact illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional,
treasonous, and is destroying this nation from within to bring about a one-world totalitarian
socialist government under the United Nations.
It is not conjecture.
It is not looney tunes, it's not prophecy, as Mr. Kurt Saxon deems it.
It is fact, and it's coming to you right out of these documents that prove it beyond any shadow of any doubt.
And by the way, folks, if you see a black helicopter flying in your area, don't report it to us, because according to Kurt Saxon, it's only a UFO.
I'll tell you, I never laughed so hard in my life as I did during the last hour listening to Kurt Saxon.
But I helped him get on radio because he does teach you how to store food, teaches you how to defend yourself, and a few other things.
But, folks, you better be listening with the right ear when you listen to that man and all these other people, too.
He was, in fact, one of the first founding members of the Satanic Church in America.
He was, in fact, as he said, kicked out of the John Birch Society because he was subversive.
Ladies and gentlemen, that man is Not on our side.
According to his own broadcast, according to his own broadcast, as soon as they get rid of all the people who should never have been born, then this is going to be a better world.
Instead of calling in and asking the questions that you do, why don't you call in and ask him who those people are?
Who's he talking about?
You might find out that you're on his list.
Then again, you might find out it's somebody else.
It might be all the black people, or all the red people, or all the Chinese people.
I guarantee it's somebody that doesn't look like him.
I guarantee you that.
I continue.
Ladies and gentlemen, provision is also made for appropriate inspection and verification at all stages.
Adequate assurance must be provided not only as to arms destroyed, but also as to permitted levels of retained arms.
It is not anticipated that verification would have to be excessive to be effective, but its intensity would be commensurate with the specific disarmament measure under consideration.
The United States has suggested a progressive zonal system of inspection as a possible way of assuring observance of the treaty.
Now, if you recently purchased a box of Kicks and looked on the back of it, you saw the regions that the United States has been divided up into.
They are teaching the children.
Of course, most parents don't pay any attention to what's on the cereal box, nor what children watch on television, nor what children watch in their movies and videos.
So, of course, most of you parents don't even know that.
The United States plan further proposes the establishment of an international disarmament organization within the United Nations framework.
It also contains specific provisions for a prohibition against placing weapons of mass destruction in outer space, the institution of measures aiming at reducing the risk of war which could be initiated prior to the conclusion of an overall disarmament treaty, and the strengthening of peacekeeping arrangements through improved procedures for peaceful settlements of disputes and the eventual establishment of an international peace force.
Now, I'm sure even the most stupid listener out there can understand that if the United
Nations has a peacekeeping force, then the United Nations is the boss, and that the United
States has no sovereignty, and in fact will be subject to the United Nations.
The truth is, folks, it happened years ago.
The United Nations and the United States of America are one and the same.
The United States, the United Nations, and the Soviet Union are one and the same.
Make you angry?
Good.
I hope you have a fit of apoplexy.
I hope it makes you run out and get these documents so that you can confirm it for yourself instead of sitting there and fuming and blustering.
A lot of Archie Bunkers in this world, folks.
Don't confuse me with the facts.
I already know what I believe.
Isn't that right?
Okay, here we go.
In contrast, the Soviet plan places emphasis on reducing selected categories of armaments in each of its three stages.
See, their plan has three stages also.
Accordingly, the Soviet draft treaty initially sought a 100% reduction in nuclear delivery vehicles in Stage 1, although the nuclear weapons themselves would not be eliminated until Stage 2.
The Soviet plan was more restrictive than ours, ladies and gentlemen.
they wanted to come to one world government first, because in the entire history of the
Socialist movement, their goal has never been hidden, and it's always been one world government,
a democratic Socialist state.
Democracy and Socialism are the same word with the same meanings, as you will find out
as you continue to listen to the Hour of the Time.
I'm going to skip over to page 11, I believe it is.
However, the overall Soviet approach remains substantially the same as the United States' plan in that, even in the light of this shift, it is inadequate in terms of preserving the existing relative military balance.
This remains a subject for further exploration.
The Soviet Union later agreed, however, to a percentage reduction of conventional armaments, coupled with the almost complete elimination of delivery means in stage one.
It also insists on the abolition of all foreign military bases and the withdrawal of all foreign troops from abroad.
On the matter of force levels, the Soviet Union originally proposed Stage 1 levels of 1.7 million for the United States and the Soviet Union and Stage 2 levels of 1 million, although later expressing a willingness to accept a level of 1.9 million for Stage 1.
The Soviet position on verification calls only for arrangements to verify the destruction of agreed numbers of armaments.
It makes no provision for a check of remaining levels to determine, for example, whether weapons have been secretly hidden.
According to the initial Soviet plan, all three stages were to occur over a four-year period, with stage one being carried out in twenty-one months.
The overall time period was subsequently extended to five years, with stage one extended to two years.
Although the Soviet plan also advocates reliance upon a strengthened United Nations to maintain peace.
You see, folks?
This is back, way back there, ladies and gentlemen.
This was written, remember, 1963.
One year after, one year after the documents that I read to you last Friday.
The key task involved backstopping the United States delegation to the eighteen nation disarmament
committee meetings in Geneva beginning in March 1962, including detail of Secretariat
personnel to the United States Delegation Secretariat, communications and documentation
to and from Geneva, and liaison with the Department of State's Office of International Conferences
on Administrative and Personnel Arrangements for the Delegation.
Under Reference Research Staff, from page 45, another prominent activity of this staff
arises from Executive Order number 11044 on Inter-Agency Coordination of Arms Control
and Disarmament Matters.
See Appendix 1.
Under this order, the Director of ACDA is responsible for planning and developing a
program of government research and studies on arms control and disarmament policy.
The order enjoins him to maintain a continuing inventory of government research activities and to submit two parties to the treaty and other transition requirements have been satisfied.
And from that point on, it is a carbon copy of the blueprint For the peace race presented to the United Nations by President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, nothing was changed.
And I'll remind you that under Stage 2, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph 8, specified types of small arms, declarations by types, which is happening right now, and specified categories of ammunition for armaments listed in Stage 1, Section A, Subparagraph 1B, and Subparagraph B above would be reduced to levels consistent with the levels of armaments agreed for the end of Stage 2.
And they're not talking, ladies and gentlemen, about military armaments there.
Go to page 82, General Provisions Applicable to All Stages, and under Paragraph 2 in the Interim Agreement, it talks about a preparatory commission.
And, let me see, paragraph three, sub-paragraph C. The treaty would come into force when it had been ratified by a blank number of states which had not been agreed upon at this time, including the United States of America, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and an agreed number of the following states.
Again, that's left blank because it had not been agreed upon at that particular point.
D. In order to assure the achievement of the fundamental purpose of a permanent state of general and complete disarmament in a peaceful world, the Treaty would specify that the accession of certain military significant sites would be essential for the continued effectiveness of the Treaty or for the coming into force of particular measures or stages.
Notice, folks, how they keep referring to disarmament in a peaceful world.
There has been no peaceful world in the history of the world.
The world is not at peace now, and we continue to disarm.
E. The parties of the treaty would undertake to exert every effort to induce other states or authorities to accede to the treaty.
F. The treaty would be subject to ratification or acceptance in accordance with constitutional processes.
The folks remember they're talking about all the nations of the world, most of whom don't
have a constitutional process.
Thereby, when they say constitutional process, that's meant to fool Americans into thinking
it's going to be done by our Constitution.
It's not true.
It will be done according to the United Nations Charter, the United Nations Treaty, and the
resolutions passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations.
And none of it, none of it, is a constitutional process.
Gee, a depository government would be agreed upon which would have all of the duties normally
incumbent upon a depository.
Alternatively, the United Nations would be the depository.
Now listen to that carefully, folks.
I'm going to read it to you again.
Here they say that the United Nations will be the depository government of the world which will oversee and have all of the duties normally incumbent upon such a government.
I'm going to read it to you again.
G. A depository government would be agreed upon which would have all of the duties normally incumbent upon a depository.
Alternatively, the United Nations would be the depository.
Welcome to the real world, sheeple.
It's about time.
It's about time you left the theme park and came out into the real world.
The gates are closing.
Your e-ticket is no good anymore.
Even if the riots kept going around, they're not going to take your ticket.
I now have here Public Law 101-216.
101-216 Public Law 101-216 from the United States Code, Congressional and Administrative
News, Volume 2, R347 1989 v.2, whatever that means.
Public Law, 101-216.
It was H.R., or House Resolution, 1495, December the 11th, 1989.
So if you're sitting there thinking, ah, Cooper's reading all this old stuff that they never implemented and he's trying to scare us, listen to this, sheeple.
Listen to this, Archie Bunker.
Listen to this, all you good people who have already awakened and just need the ammunition to be able to fight.
I'm giving it to you now.
Public Law 101-216, which was H.R.
1495, December the 11th, 1989.
to 16 which was HR 1495 December the 11th 1989 1989 arms control and disarmament amendments
1989.
act of 1989 so this is a new act ladies and gentlemen.
These are disarmament amendments of the original law that I've been reading to you.
For legislated history of the act, see page 1292, and on that page it recounts everything that you've heard from me since Thursday.
So I'm going to go directly to these amendments.
An Act to Amend the Arms Control and Disarmament Act to Authorize Appropriations for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and for Other Purposes.
Being enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled.
Section 1.
Short Title.
This Act may be cited as the Arms Control and Disarmament Amendments Act of 1989.
Title 1.
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Section 101. Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 1988. Section 49A of the Arms Control and Disarmament Act is amended to read as
follows. Section 49A. To carry out the purposes of this Act, they are authorized to be appropriated
A. $36 million for the fiscal year 1990 and $37,316,000 for the fiscal year 1991 and B.
and this is the key, such additional amounts as may be necessary for fiscal years 1990
and 1991 for increases in salary, pay, retirement, other employee benefits authorized by law
and other, quote, non-discretionary costs, unquote, and to offset adverse fluctuations
in foreign currency exchange rates. How do you like that?
And these monies are not disclosed.
Section 102. Duties of the Deputy Director. Go down to Section 103. Duties of the Special
Representatives. A. In general, Section 27 of the Arms Control and Disarmament Act, 22
United States Code, 2567, is amended by striking out, quote, Who shall perform, unquote, and
all that follows through the period and inserting in lieu thereof the following, quote, One
of whom should serve as Special Representative for conventional arms control negotiations
and the other should serve as Special Representative and Chief Science Advisor to the Director.
The two Special Representatives shall perform their duties and exercise their powers under
the direction of the President and the Secretary of State, acting through the Director.
Now we go over to, excuse me folks, we go over to Public Law 101-216, Laws of the 101st
Congress, First Session, December the 11th, and I quote verbatim,
The Director of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency should study and report
to the Congress on the advisability of establishing in the Agency an Arms Control Implementation
and Compliance Resolution Bureau or other organizational unit that would be responsible
for, number one, managing the implementation of existing and future arms control agreements,
two, coordinating the activities of the Special Verification Commission, and three, and I
And the Standing Consulted Commission, and three, preparing comprehensive analysis and policy positions regarding the effective resolution of arms control compliance questions.
Section 105, Arms Control Verification.
Establishment of Working Group.
the President to establish a Working Group 1. To examine verification approaches to a
Strategic Arms Reduction Agreement and other arms control agreements, and 2. To assess
the relevance of such agreements of the verification provisions of the Treaty between the United
States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the, quote, elimination of their intermediate
range and short-range missiles signed at Washington, December 8, 1987, unquote.
Go down to B, subparagraph B. Proposed, prospective, and potential bilateral or multilateral arms
treaties in the areas of nuclear, conventional, chemical, and space weapons. 2. The Agency
shall seek to improve United States verification and monitoring activities through the monitoring
and support of relevant research and analysis. And 3. The Agency shall provide detailed information
on the activities pursuant to this section in its annual report to the Congress. Don't
go away, folks. I'll be right back after this very short break.
Thank you. I'm going to go back to my presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Well, I hope you have a pad of paper and pen with you folks, because we're going to continue.
And I go down to Section 107, Reporting Requirement on Prospects for Conversion of United States
Defense Industries.
Now, did you hear me, ladies and gentlemen?
Section 107, Reporting Requirement on Prospects for Conversion of United States Defense Industries.
The Director of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, in consultation with
Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce,
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce, shall study, and not later than
shall study, and not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, submit to
180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, submit to the Congress a report on concrete
the Congress a report on concrete steps which could be taken to improve prospects for
steps which could be taken to improve prospects for The Director of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament
conversion of United States defense industries to non-defense-related activities as opportunities are
presented through the achievement of successful arms control agreements.
Title II, On-Site Inspection Activities.
And this, this will verify a lot.
The Arms Control and Disarmament Act is amended by adding the, at the end, the following.
Title V, On-Site Inspection Activities.
Section 61, Findings.
The Congress finds that, one, under this Act, the United States Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency is charged with the formulation and implementation of United States arms control
and disarmament policy in a manner which will promote the national security.
That, folks, is a laugh.
As defined in this Act, the terms arms control and disarmament mean, quote, the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction and elimination of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement to establish an effective system of international control.
International control.
International control.
3.
The On-Site Inspection Agency was established in 1988 pursuant to the INF Treaty to implement on behalf of the United States the inspection provisions of the INF Treaty.
4.
On-site inspection activities under the INF Treaty include Subsection A. Inspections in the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and the German Democratic Republic.
B. Escort duties for Soviet teams visiting the United States and the basing countries.
C. Establishment and operation of the Portal Monitoring Facility in the Soviet Union and D. D. Listen to this very carefully, sheeple.
Support for the Soviet instructors at the Portal Monitoring Facility in Utah.
Support for the Soviet inspectors at the Portal Monitoring Facility in Utah.
The personnel of the On-Site Inspection Agency includes civilian technical experts, civilian
5.
support personnel, and members of the armed forces.
Public Law 101-216 to Section 63, Authorizations of Appropriations for On-Site Inspection Agency.
They are authorized to be appropriated $49,830,000 for FY1990 and $48,831,000 for FY1991 for
the expenses of the on-site inspection agency in carrying out on-site inspection activities
pursuant to the INF Treaty.
Section 64 definitions as used in this title.
The term INF Treaty means the treaty between the United States and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics on the elimination of their intermediate range and shorter-range
missiles signed at Washington December 8, 1987, and 2.
The term OSIA means the On-Site Inspection Agency established by the President or such
other agency as may be designated by the President to carry out the on-site inspection provisions
of the INF Treaty approved December the 11th, 1918.
Act cited by popular name.
This is from United States Code 1988, Supplement 3, Popular Names Index.
Arms Control and Disarmament Act, Public Law 101-216, Title 1, Subsection 101-103A, 106,
Title 2, Subsection 201, December 11, 1989, 103 Statutes at Large, 1853 to 1855.
Public Law 102-228, Title 4, Subsection 401A, B, 402, December 12, 1991, 105 Statutes at
Large, 1698 and 1699.
The Arms Control and Disarmament Act, Public Law 87-297, September 26, 1961, 75 Statutes
at Law, 631, Title 22, Subsection 2551, Ex Equitur.
Public Law 88- Public Law 88-426, Title III, Subsection 305, 17, August 14, 1964, 78 statutes at large, 424.
August 14, 1964, 78 statutes at large, 424.
Public Law 88-426, Title IV, Subsection 401-D, August 19, 1964, 78 statutes at large, 490.
Public Law 88-426, Title IV, Subsection 401-D, August 19, 1964, 78 statutes at large, 490.
Public Law, 90-314, May 23, 1968, 82 statutes at large, 129.
Public Law 89-27 May 27, 1965 79 statutes at large 118 Public Law 90-314 May 23, 1968 82 statutes at large 129
Public Law 91-246 May 12, 1970 84 statutes at large 207 Public Law 92-347
Title I, Subsection 301, July 13, 1972, 86, Statutes at Large, 494.
Public Law 94-141, Title I, Subsection 141, 144-149, November 29, 1975, 89, Statutes at
Large, 757-760.
Public Law 95-108.
Ninety-one statutes at large, 871 through 873.
Public Law 95-338, Subsection 1 to 3, August 8, 1978.
August 17, 1977. 91 Statutes at Large, 871 through 873.
Public Law 95-338, Subsection 1 to 3, August 8, 1978. 92 Statutes at Large, 458 and 459.
Public Law 96-66, Subsection 1 to 2, Paragraph A, Sept. 21, 1979. 93 Statutes at Large,
414. Public Law 96-465, Title 2, Subsection 2204, October 17, 1980. 94 Statutes at Large, 2159.
Public Law 97-339.
Public Law 98-202, Subsections 1 through 6, A, December 2, 1983, 97 Statutes at Large, 1381 and 1382.
October 15, 1982, 96 Statutes at Large, 1635 and 1636.
Public Law 98-202, Subsections 1 through 6a, December 2, 1983, 97 Statutes at Large, 1381
and 1382.
Public Law 99-93, Title VII, Subsection 701.
Public Law 99-550, Section 2c, October 27th, 1986, 100 statutes at large, 3070.
August 16, 1985, 99 statutes at large, 444 and 445.
Public Law 99-550, Session 2, C, October 27, 1986, 100 statutes at large, 3070.
Public Law 100-213, Subsections 2 and 3B and 4 and 6A, December 24, 1987, 101 statutes
at large, 1444 through 1446.
In there you will find that they took out, ladies and gentlemen, the portion which stated
that no section of this treaty would be considered a requirement to disarm the American people.
It is no longer in there, and they are, in fact, doing it.
You cannot have a treaty that specifies complete and total disarmament if somebody's going
to be still keeping their arms.
It's gone.
It's not there.
Now I go to the Congressional Record of the House of Representatives, October 12th, 1989, H7007.
12, 1989, H7007. Listen carefully. The Chairman. Are there further amendments to the amendment
in the nature of a substitute?
If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Faschel, as amended.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended was agreed to.
The Chairman.
Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose, and the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, having
assumed the Chair.
Mr. Coleman of Texas, Chairman of the Committee of the whole House of the State of the Union,
reported that the Committee, having had under consideration the Bill H.R. 1495 to amend
the Arms Control and Disarmament Act to authorize appropriations for the Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency and for other purposes pursuant to House Resolution 255.
He reported the Bill back to the Committee of the whole.
The Speaker pro tempore, under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Speaker pro tempore, the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the Bill.
The Bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time and was read the third time.
The Speaker pro tempore, the question is on the passage of the Bill.
The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to
have it.
Mr. Broomfield, Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present
and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
The Speaker pro tempore, evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, electronic device, electronic device, and there were
yeas 400, nays 11.
Not voting 21.
All the names of who voted on this bill in the original Disarmament and Control Act is in this documentation of papers also.
And now I go to the Congressional Record of the Senate.
The Senate, November 17th, 1989.
Mr. Powell, Mr. President, I strongly commend to the Senate this measure now before this body, the Arms Control and Disarmament Amendments Act of 1989.
The amendment being offered today contains the mutually acceptable provisions of both the House Bill H.R.
1495 and an original bill, S.
recorded on November 9th by the Committee on Foreign Relations.
And it goes through all this gobbledygook until we get to what's important here.
And it talks about, The Committee is concerned about the sharp reduction of
resources devoted to research from verification issues and wishes to make certain that
verification and compliance are accorded the attention which will be necessary in the years
ahead, as intensive and complex verification proposals are agreed upon and implemented
accordingly.
The armament of the amendment incorporates a House provision urging the President to
establish a working group to examine various verification approaches to strategic arms
reduction and other possible agreements, and to assess the relevance for such agreement
of the verification provision of the International Nuclear Forces Treaty.
Moreover, the amendment contains a provision proposed by the Senator from Massachusetts,
Mr. Carey, calling upon the agency to allocate sufficient resources to develop and maintain
a comprehensive information and database on verification concepts, research technologies,
and systems.
The amendment also incorporates provisions on unsigned inspection activities, and the
appropriation authorized is $49,830,000 for FY1990 and $48,831,000 for FY1991 for the
expenses of the unsigned inspection agency in carrying out unsigned inspection activities
pursuant to the INF Treaty.
Finally, this committee bill includes a provision completely acceptable to both sides offered
by the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Simon, which calls upon the Director of the Agency to report
to the Congress within 180 days on concrete steps which could be taken to improve prospects
for conversion of significant portions of United States defense industries to non-defense-related
activities as opportunities are presented through the achievement of successful arms
control agreements.
Thank you.
Excuse me folks, I gotta take a little drink here.
Mr. President, I believe that this amendment provides a reasonable and practical level
of authorization.
It will ensure that the agency is able to perform its expanding duties in a manner that will bring credit to the United States.
Other provisions in this legislation will help ensure that ACDA focuses on the areas
of greatest need and will do so with improved management and structure.
Mr. Helms Mr. President, I have a few points to make about the Fiscal Year 1990 Authorization Bill for the Arms
Agency, but before I make these points, I congratulate my distinguished colleague, the
Chairman, Senator Pell, for his diligence and leadership in the Foreign Relations Committee's work on
this important bill.
Senator Pell and I, together with our professional staff, have cooperated on a spirit of friendship and comity on this bill.
That's Jesse Helms and Senator Pell, Claiborne Pell.
Mr. President, I would make three points at the outset.
Number one, in my priority for the first time, the bill assigned specific duties to improve security at ACDA to the Deputy Director of ACDA.
The ACDA Deputy Director is now assigned specific responsibility for managing the important areas of security and administration.
This provision was put in the bill in order to correct the serious security problems that were discovered during the 1983-87 period at ACDA headquarters and at the Geneva negotiations.
These security problems were so serious that they required new management at ACDA and direct attention at the highest management level.
Second, the bill gives the two special representatives for arms control and disarmament negotiations specific assignments in, quote, discrete areas, unquote.
For example, one ACDA special representative is now assigned specific responsibilities for the high priority area of conventional arms negotiations.
Under the heading of conventional arms, under the definitions attached to the bill, is your weapons, ladies and gentlemen.
The amendment number 1171 was agreed to.
The bill, H.R.
1495, as amended, was read the third time and passed.
and past. Congressional Records Senate, March 1st.
Under disarmament, Mr. Clark.
Mr. President, I now desire to speak for a few minutes on the subject of disarmament, the climate toward disarmament in the Senate and in the country, and the prospects for disarmament in the coming conference at Geneva which convenes on March 14th of this year.
Mr. President, the morning newspapers carry the statement that the President is about to authorize the resumption of nuclear testing in the atmosphere.
If he does this, I shall support him because I am confident that he has carefully weighed on the basis of information not available to me, or to most of my colleagues, the basic facts involved in that fateful decision.
I am also confident he would not and will not take this tragic step unless he is convinced it is the only wise way to maintain our national security and our freedom.
If atmospheric nuclear testing is to be resumed, obviously there is merit to making the decision before the disarmament conference meets.
When it is the darkest, it is frequently just before the dawn.
When it is the darkest, it is frequently just before the dawn.
In business, in the law, and in other instances, when men came together to negotiate, frequently the break or the agreement comes at a time when things seem most hopeless, at a time when both sides are of the view that no progress is possible, but each is determined to make one more effort to achieve a mutually desired result.
Mr. President, I suggest that we should look forward to the Disarmament Conference in the hope that something meaningful can come out of it.
In considering that conference, we must give some thought to what is the position of the government of the United States.
I think that position has been substantially misunderstood both in the country and in the Congress.
One reason for my soul thinking arises from a relatively short insertion in the record made by my good friend, the Junior Senator from Texas, Mr. Tower, on January 29th of this year, which appears in the record at page 1043.
Look it up, folks.
I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that my colleague's comments and a column which he introduced into the record at that point, written by a man named Ken Thompson, published in a Dallas newspaper, entitled, quote, 123 Surrender, unquote, may be printed in the record at this point in my remarks.
There being no objection, the excerpt was ordered to be printed in the records, and as follows.
The Surrender of American Rights and Sovereignty Mr.
Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. Mansfield, I yield.
Mr. Tower, every day more and more people share a growing concern for the preoccupation of the State Department and some people in high places with the issue of disarmament.
I think we all look forward to the day when men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks.
But at a time when Western civilization is confronted by an extreme militaristic threat looking toward world conquest, I think it is naive and unrealistic to be preoccupied with the question of disarmament.
We know that the Communist conspiracy has no intention of coexisting with us.
We know that they are bent on domination of the whole world.
I think we show weakness in the eyes of all of the nations at this time in talking of disarmament.
In this connection, I ask to have printed In the record, a very fine editorial entitled, quote, 1-2-3 Surrender, unquote, by Ken Thompson, editorial staff writer, published in the Dallas Morning News of January 23, 1962.
There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the record as follows, 1-2-3 Surrender by Ken Thompson.
One of the most incredible documents ever to emerge from the foggy corridors of the State Department is a bulletin entitled, quote, Freedom from War, the United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, unquote.
Those of you who thought that William Cooper made this all up, now you know I didn't.
In fact, all of these will be made available to you.
We are in the process of making arrangements to publish everything.
As skeptical as I have always been of the measure of good sense and loyalty within the State Department, I never would have believed that these people we call our diplomats could so completely and unabashedly advocate the surrender of American rights and sovereignty until this bulletin appeared.
What it amounts to, in effect, is the official United States position on the subject of disarmament.
More specifically, it is the basis of proposals which have already been submitted to the United Nations by the United States.
Although this bulletin was published last fall and is available for just 15 cents from the Government Printing Office in Washington, there has been very little attention paid to it.
Now, remember, folks, it was printed in 1962.
Why, I cannot tell you, for it is certainly the most fantastic harebrained blueprint for surrender on record.
Old Nikita himself might just as well have written it, and if more of the American people knew about this scheme, there would be a nationwide uproar that would make the reaction to the Alger Hiss scandal look like another era of good feeling by comparison.
For those of you who don't know, Alger Hiss was a Communist, a Communist, who had infiltrated
our government at high levels, and it was Alger Hiss himself sent by the President of
the United States, who wrote the United Nations Charter.
It was Alger Hiss who is mainly responsible for the formation of the UN in the form that
it has taken.
And it is Alger Hiss who is responsible for convincing the President and his advisors
to go along with the whole scheme, ladies and gentlemen.
Bye.
Communists.
Now, if you've been reading the liberal press, now that the Socialists and Communists are in charge, you know that there is a move afoot to exonerate Alger Hiss.
To exonerate him.
I continue.
Last September, President Kennedy Address the United Nations and spoke of the desire of the United States to reach an agreement on disarmament.
His stand has been echoed by Adlai Stevenson, our Chief Delegate and Ambassador to the United Nations.
Where Kennedy and Stevenson spoke in general terms, the State Department Bulletin deals in specifics.
It supplies the term for those vague goals the administration hopes to gain through the United Nations.
What are these terms?
The State Department document summarizes the proposals as a new program which provides for the progressive reduction of war-making capabilities of nations and the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace.
This program is broken down into three phases or parts.
In the first phase, all nuclear weapons tests by nations would be prohibited, production of fissionable materials stopped, strategic delivery systems reduced, and conventional arms and armed forces would be cut.
In the second phase, present stocks of nuclear weapons would be reduced, further cuts would be made in armed forces, armaments and delivery systems, and military bases and facilities would be dismantled.
At the same time, a peace force would be established for the United Nations.
In the third and final phase, all nations would possess only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order.
They would also support and provide agreed manpower for the United Nations Peace Force.
This force would be fully functioning and would be sufficiently strong to overpower Any individual nation or combination of nations resisting its will.
Now, I'm going to read that again for all you silly, stupid people out there who think that this is funny.
This force would be fully functioning and would be sufficiently strong to overcome any individual nation or combination of nations resisting its will.
There you have it, ladies and gentlemen.
One, two, three, bingo!
The United Nations rules the world.
Good night.
Make sure that you do not miss the hour of the time later at 9 p.m.
Pacific, 10 Mountain, 11 Central and Midnight Eastern Standard Time.
▲
Export Selection