Treason

The "space race" began on October 4, 1957, when the Russians announced that they had orbited the first man-made satellite in history, called Sputnik.

But Russia's ability to orbit an earth satellite was given to the Russian government by the American government at the end of World War II.

General George Patton, as he moved eastward into and through western Europe and Germany, captured the two German towns of Peenemunde and Nordhausen, where the German scientists were developing the V-l and V-2 rockets. Patton was ordered by his commanding officer, the Supreme Allied Commander, General Dwight Eisenhower, to turn over these two cities in their entirety to the Russians. Included in this turn-over were thousands of German scientists who were transported to Russia with the factories of the two towns, removed down to the last office desk.

Fortunately, one of these scientists saw what was about to befall him and others involved with Germany's space efforts, and he led 129 of them from Germany where he surrendered to the American forces rather than to the Russians. This space scientist, Dr. Werner von Braun, became the head of America's space program, when he and the other scientists reached America.

Dr. von Braun was later unsuccessful in convincing the Eisenhower administration to orbit America's first satellite: "Long before the Soviet Union launched the first satellite. . . von Braun said his team had the capability to orbit a payload by putting an upper stage on the Redstone [rocket]. But President Dwight D. Eisenhower turned him down . . ."

The same gentlemen who arranged for Russia to orbit the first satellite by turning over to the Russians nearly the entire German rocket capacity, now was in a position to insure that the Russians were able to orbit the first satellite before the Americans.

The Russians were now able to use the successful orbiting of this satellite to boast that Communism was obviously superior to Capitalism. "The old jesting about socialist inefficiency came to an end when the first Soviet Sputnik circled the earth."

President Eisenhower turned this Russian "victory" into two major defeats for the United States:

1. It was now apparent, according to the Administration, that America lagged behind the Russians in the field of education or in the ability to engineer such a scientific feat

It was imperative that the American government enter the field of education to narrow the gap between the two competing economic systems. So the Eisenhower Administration quickly pushed the federal government into the funding of education on a nationwide basis, completely in violation of the Constitution of the United States, which gave no such authority to the federal government

2. Since the American government was now behind in the "space race," it was imperative that the American government compete with the Russians, first by orbiting a satellite, and then by reaching out into distant space.

In other words, the American government was taken out of the space race by President Eisenhower, and then put back in, at great cost to the American taxpayers. And the only way the planners felt that they could get the taxpayer to support the tax increase, was to convince them that there was a "space race" with the Communists.

A Russian writer on the subject of space research, Leonid Vladimirov, who defected to the West, has written in his book The Russian Space Bluff: "It is possible that, without having the fear of Soviet competition, the Americans would not have been in such a hurry to land on the Moon and would thus have saved themselves thousands of millions of dollars."

Vladimirov discussed the state of the Russian missile industry after the orbiting of Sputnik. He informed his readers that the Russians, as late as 1959, had " . . . proposed making a 'cluster of clusters'—combining together five four-chamber engines to make one giant engine."

The combining of a series of individual rockets, each no larger than a captured German V-2, indicated that the Russian missile industry had not matured much since the days when Eisenhower provided them with the V2 rocket. It also meant that these rockets were cumbersome and extremely inaccurate, because of the difficulty in getting so many rockets to fire at the same time.

The state of the Russian missile industry was known to the American government, according to an article in 1980 in Time magazine:

"Three years later [1959], the overhead view (from the U-2 spyplane overflights) of the Tyuratam site [where all Soviet missiles were then tested] gave the U.S. some needed reassurance. Determining that the rocket booster aperture at the base of the launch pad was 15 meters [50 ft.] in diameter, photo interpreters concluded that the Soviets were still using missiles boosted by auxiliary rockets strapped around the circumference of the main rocket. Because they were so cumbersome that they could not be practically deployed, the U.S. strategic planners concluded that the missile gap did not exist either."

This statement of fact is extremely revealing, looking backwards from this 1980 article, because the "missile gap" that became one of the main debating issues on the Kennedy-Nixon debates during the 1960 Presidential election campaign, was not a "missile gap" at all. It will be recalled that John Kennedy contended that the Eisenhower Administration, which Richard Nixon had to defend because he was Eisenhower's Vice-President, had allowed the Russians to far exceed the then meager American rocket efforts, to the point where there was an enormous "missile gap," threatening the very safety of the American people. Nixon, it will be remembered, did not defend the position very well, and Kennedy was elected.

And all the time, Nixon knew (or should have known) that the "missile gap" did not exist. Russia did not have the technology it claimed it had.

America knew that the Russians had not perfected the single stage rocket but were, in essence, "gluing" a series of V-2 rockets to a central cluster. This clustering together of a series of rockets can be seen in the August 14, 1978 Time Magazine, on page 48, and in the Santa Ana Register of September 17, 1976. These pictures reveal a tall, slender, central rocket, with a series of four clusters along side the main engine, each with four internal rocket engines.

This means that, as recently as 1978, the Russians were not advanced enough to have developed the technology to construct a single-stage rocket capable of placing large payloads into space.

In fact, the Russians had been experimenting with such technology before, without success, according to Vladimirov: "Friends of mine among the rocket engineers used to tell me how copies of all the American rocket engines then known were built in Soviet factories on an experimental basis. The engines . . . all burnt out while they were being tested."

Other rocketry-related efforts of the Russians have come under question. The "Lunik" moon landing in 1959, for instance, has been called a "hoax" by an American writer, Lloyd Malian, who has written:

"The Lunik, in short, was a cooly insolent, magnificent, international hoax. I found no hint . . . of any tracking station in the Free World having heard with scientific certainty the radio signals from Russia's moon-or-sun rocket."

In another book on the same subject, Mr. Malian reported that Cosmonaut Alexie Leonov's "walk in space" on March 18, 1965 " . . . was faked. Four months of solid research interviewing top experts in the fields of photo-optics, photo-chemistry and electro-optics, all of whom carefully studied the motion picture film and still photographs officially released by the Soviet government, convinced me."

Malian's conclusions were that the film showing Leonov in space:

". . . was double-printed. The foreground (Leonov) was superimposed on the background (the Earth below.) The Russian film showed reflections from the glass plate under which a double print is made.

"Leonov was suspended from wire or cables in several episodes of the Russian film, light was reflected from a small portion of the wire (or cable) attached to Leonov's space suit.

"One camera angle was impossible of achievement. This showed Leonov crawling out of his hatch into space. It was a head-on shot, so the camera would have had to have been located out in space beyond the space ship.

"One still photo (the clearest one) shows Leonov emerging from his hatch standing straight up, his body still half-way inside the space ship. This contradicts the motion picture film which shows him squirming out of the hatch on his belly.

"If one very carefully observes the motions of Leonov as he laboriously wiggles through the extraordinarily long tunnel, it is obvious that he is under one 'g' (the force of normal, earth gravity) and exerts most of his muscular force against only one side of the duct, rather than bumping from side to side and moving forward with the ease one would expect in the absence of gravity."

The question of who tracked Russian space efforts in the early stages of the "space race," is still a mystery.

It was thought that the U.S. North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) did, but since 1961, they have "had a Presidential order never to divulge any information about the tracking of foreign space vehicles."

And a spokesman for the Smithsonian Institute's world-wide network of tracking cameras commented: "We don't track Russian satellites."

What that meant was that the American government, in the early stages of Russia's space efforts, had to believe whatever the Russians said.

Additional examples of the phoniness of Russia's space efforts are ample to illustrate the charge that the truth is less than what has passed as the evidence.

The February, 1962, Scientific American magazine carried an advertisement on page 91 placed there by the Sperry Gyroscope Company. This ad showed a drawing of a space station in orbit and individuals working on it in space suits.

This same drawing, with the addition of certain descriptive phrases attached to identify certain parts of the space station, appeared in the October 13, 1969 New York Times, on page 32, over seven years later.

But the New York Times used the drawing to illustrate: "One concept of a future Soviet space station in which the crewmen in a mother ship transfer through a transit chute to help assemble another ship is depicted here."

One would wonder why the New York Times had to resort to the use of a 1962 Sperry advertisement to illustrate a Russian space effort The only conclusion one can draw from these facts is that the Russians did not have a space effort It seems logical that, if they did, they would make it known to the world in large, easily identifiable pictures or drawings.

But that hasn't happened

Whatever space successes the Russians have achieved have been made all the easier by American technology. It is commonly known that ball-bearings are absolutely essential to rocket and missile guidance systems. Dr. Antony Sutton's research into this vital industry has discovered that: "The entire ball-bearing production capability of the Soviet Union is of Western origin. All Soviet missiles and related systems including guidance systems have bearings manufactured on western equipment or Soviet duplicates of this equipment."

Part of this technology came from a Chicago-based company, which helped the Russians build a complete automotive bearing factory in March of 1975. This factory was capable of producing 60 million engine bearings a year.

And the ability to produce miniature ball-bearings, vital to the missile and rocketry industries, came from an order filled by the Bryant Grinder Company of Springfield, Vermont

The machines, capable of producing ball-bearings accurate to twenty-five millionths of an inch, were sold to Russia in 1972, and were approved as "non-strategic trade" by President Richard Nixon. Their immediate use is in guidance systems for missiles, but one Congressman, William L. Dickinson, reported that these machines have another important function:

"These machines sold for $20 million. They were capable of producing high quality precision, miniature ball bearings of the type used in Intercontinental Ballistic Missile multiple warheads. As a consequence, Soviet missile accuracy improved dramatically to the point where 90 percent of our land-based ICBM force can now be destroyed in a first strike. This was a technology the Soviets did not have, which they bought for a cheap price and which endangers the lives of millions of Americans."

How the Russians acquired these machines is an illustration of how such sales are made.

In 1960, the Soviets ordered 45 of these machines, but the export license needed for their sale to Russia was denied by President John Kennedy. Twelve years later, the Soviets ordered 164 of these same machines, and this time, the export license was approved by President Nixon. The Soviet Minister of Machine Tool Industry was quoted at the time as saying: "We had waited twelve years to get these machines."

Whatever the Soviets have achieved in their space program has been with the assistance of the American government Whatever programs they faked or didn't have, the American government or media has certified as valid.

Another area that the United States has assisted the Russians is in the field of military hardware. During the Korean war, the Soviets were supplying the North Koreans and the Red Chinese with jet aircraft, including the MIG-15. This airplane was similar in configuration to the F-86, being flown by the South Korean and American pilots, and supplied by the American government

Both of these planes were designed by the same man, a German who was captured at Nordhausen at the end of World War II. As discussed before, the scientist went to one nation, and his plans went to the other. But there is more to this story than this.

The MIG-15 was powered by reproductions of fifty-five Rolls-Royce jet engines sold to Russia by this English company in 1947. These engines were immediately reproduced and supplied to the manufacturers of the MIG-15 in Russia.

Rolls-Royce later tried to sell larger jet engines to Russia in 1977. These engines, the largest produced at that time, provided 50,000 pounds of thrust to the jumbo jets envisioned by the master planners in the aircraft industry in Russia. These engines were not sold to the Russians, apparently because of the pressure from the American government which wanted General Electric to sell its CF6 nearly identical engine to the Soviets.

The CF6 engine is currently being used in the American airplane industry in the 747, the DC-10 and the world's largest cargo plane, the Air Force's C-5A.

Rolls-Royce was successful, however, in 1977, in selling the Red Chinese the necessary jet engines to power their newly developed F-12 jet airplane.

Perhaps the most extraordinary example of America's military assistance to the Russian government occurred during the Vietnamese war.

Dr. Sutton has concluded that ". . . the guns, the ammunition, the weapons, the transportation systems, that killed Americans in Vietnam came from the American subsidized economy of the Soviet Union."

America's assistance to the cause of the North Vietnamese government had an early beginning.

In an article entitled "When Ho Chi Minh was an Intelligence Agent for the U.S.," author Lloyd Shearer details how the American government assisted the early efforts of the founder of the revolution against the South Vietnamese government. Ho Chi Minh was recruited into the American intelligence apparatus. The article states: "We had a trusted agent whom we regularly supplied with weapons, radio equipment, operators and medicine. All of it served to reinforce his position and status."

So even before the Vietnamese war started, the Americans were supplying the guerilla army of the man who would ultimately lead the Viet Cong in a war against the Americans.

The American people, who were beginning to sense that something was wrong with the conduct of America's efforts in the war, started showing that concern at the polls. The aid and trade being sent to Russia during the war became a campaign issue in the 1968 Presidential campaign.

The Republicans at their convention that year included the following plank in their party platform:

"Nations hostile to this country will receive no assistance from the U.S. We will not provide aid of any kind to countries which aid and abet the war efforts of North Vietnam."

Republican Presidential candidate Richard Nixon also addressed himself to this plank when he told the American Legion Convention in September, 1968:

"There should be no aid or credits of any kind with any country, including the Soviet Union, that aids the enemy in Viet Nam."

Candidate Nixon's campaign literature repeated the Republican Party's concern in this matter. One of his campaign flyers covered this issue:

"The United States should not provide anything that could be treated as, or classified as, aid to those [Communist bloc] nations if they persist in trading or aiding the enemy in North Vietnam."

The reason that the Republican Party and their Presidential candidate Richard Nixon could make these statements is that the President of the United States has the power to control exports of commodities behind the Iron Curtain.

The 1917 U.S. Trading With the Enemies Act forbids U.S. firms or their foreign subsidiaries from trading with enemies of the United States except under license. The ability to grant the necessary licenses has been given by the Congress of the United States to the President with the option to delegate this authority to such departments as he deems appropriate. In the past, Presidents have delegated this authority to the Department of Commerce. This means that the President has the authority to assume the direct responsibility should he (or she) choose to do so. This means that President Nixon, after his election, had the authority to prevent the sale of any commodity he deemed to be against the nation's security interests. President Nixon could have honored both his party's platform and his campaign promises should he have chosen to do so after his election.

The Department of Commerce publishes a listing of the commodities licensed for export to Eastern European destinations each quarter, and this report is made available to the public. A quick review of these reports will enable the skeptic to see if President Nixon delivered as he promised.

For instance, the Third Quarter report for 1971 is typical of the reports and reveals that our government, in that quarter alone, shipped a series of commodities to the Russian government while Russia was supplying eighty percent of the goods and war materials to North Vietnam.

Some of the commodities listed in that report are: Synthetic rubber; lubricating grease and oil; parts for automotive vehicles; electronic computers; foundry and metalworking equipment; parts for rolling mills; ball and roller bearings; oil and gas field production equipment; airborne navigation equipment and parts; and nearly $11 million of trucks and parts.

In addition to the actual commodity sold to the Russians, the American government authorized the export of "technical data relating to the commodities and the processes indicated: Iron and steel foundry; foundry for producing engine components; lube oil additives; and distillation of petroleum.

It becomes obvious that President Nixon did not deliver on the promises Candidate Nixon made. But the President is not the only one assisting the Communist governments. Others are involved as well.

For instance, in 1969, during the middle of the Vietnamese war when Americans were being killed by the Russian-supplied North Vietnamese, Congressman Earl Landgrebe of Indiana introduced an amendment to the Export Control Act, the act authorizing the licensing of exports to the Communist Bloc nations. The amendment read in part: "No commodities, military or otherwise, shall be authorized for shipment to any foreign nation which sells or furnishes to North Vietnam or which permits ships or aircraft under its registry to transport to or from [North Vietnam], any equipment, materials or commodities or gives any form of assistance to North Vietnam."

It would be expected that the Congress of the United States, the agency responsible for protecting the American fighting man that they had sent there, would have overwhelmingly supported the amendment

The Landgrebe amendment was defeated.

One of the reasons that the Landgrebe amendment failed, it appears, is because our government was actively encouraging American businessmen to sell to Russia during the Vietnamese war.

In August of 1966, the State Department issued a pamphlet entitled Private Boycotts Vs. The National Interest, which stated:

"All American citizens should know that any American businessman who chooses to engage in peaceful trade with the Soviet Union or Eastern European countries and to sell the goods he buys is acting within his rights and is following the policy of his government. But any organization, however patriotic in intention, that undertakes to boycott, blacklist, or otherwise penalize or attack any American business for engaging in peaceful trade with Eastern European countries or the Soviet Union, is acting against the interests of the United States."

This is incredible when it is assumed that government should protect the American fighting man by supporting such restrictions on those who were trading with those nations supplying the enemy.

In addition to the support of this trade by the American Congress, the Republican administration, led by the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces, assisted by failing to block shipments of Russian commodities and equipment into the main North Vietnamese port of Haiphong.

This neglect was pointed out by Admiral U.S. Grant Sharp, Commander-in-Chief of Naval Operations in the Pacific during most of the Vietnamese War. He spoke about this issue: "From the beginning, we should have closed the harbor of Haiphong and prevented all of the vital imports from reaching that area. Instead, we permitted them to import all of the necessities of war without any difficulty whatsoever, despite the fact that we controlled the seas. This was a great mistake, of course, and immeasurably increased the casualties that our side incurred."

This oversight was finally corrected by President Nixon when, on May 8, 1972, he announced to the nation:

"There is only one way to stop the killing, and that is to keep the weapons of war out of . . . North Vietnam. I have ordered the following All entrances to North Vietnamese ports will be mined. Countries with ships presently in North Vietnamese ports have been notified that ships will have . . . to leave."

These directives were, in many instances, to nations supposedly friendly to the United States. The ships of Great Britain, Japan, Greece, Norway, Lebanon, Italy, West Germany, and Panama were among those delivering Russian goods to North Vietnamese ports.

"(Note: Dr. Sutton, in his research, discovered one strange anomaly. Four of the Russian ships being used to haul goods to North Vietnamese ports still legally belonged to the United States. These four were "Liberty Ships" sent to Russia during the Lend Lease program of World War II. President Nixon should have notified President Nixon to remove American ships from the North Vietnamese harbors)

One of the more tragic sales to the Russian government occurred in 1966 when the U.S. government: ". . . sent the Soviet Union the entire technical specifications which they needed to build a glycerol plant. Glycerol is used in the manufacture of explosives. Specifically, in Vietnam, glycerol is used as a detonator in booby traps. Over 50% of all American casualties suffered in Vietnam have come from booby traps. "26

One of those who suffered from such a booby trap was Sgt. Peter Stark, a young and courageous Vietnam veteran who went on a nationwide speaking tour attempting to alert the American people to the dangers of such aid and trade . . . from his wheelchair. Sgt Stark had had his legs blown off because of a booby trap.

One of the most recent examples of American technology coming back to haunt the American people has come from their experience in building the Kama River truck factory in Russia in 1969. This plant, capable of producing 100,000 heavy-duty trucks and 150,000 diesel engines per year, more than all U.S. manufacturers put together, cost the Russians over $1.4 billion. Nearly $1 billion of that total came from the United States in the form of computers, heavy equipment, and foundry equipment

These efforts to assist the Russian government paid off in 1979 when the American government was notified that these trucks, in addition to engines being installed in armored personnel carriers and assualt vehicles constructed in the plant, began showing up in Russian military units in Eastern Europe. But even more incredible was the fact that these engines and trucks were being utilized by the Russians in their military assaults in Afghanistan.

In addition to the direct assistance in the building of the vehicles used in Russia's attempt to conquer the freedom fighters in Afghanistan, the American government constructed the highways, or at least a portion of them, that the Russians used to travel to that country. Congressman Ron Paul in 1980 released a reproduction of a photograph of the invasion route over which the Russian Army travelled. He further reported that the American government constructed three hundred miles of double-lane highway through Afghanistan, being careful to: "connect our road to the one that [the] Soviet Army engineers were building."

"(Note: The June 4, 1968 New York Times, on page seventeen printed a picture of one of these highways in Afghanistan with this caption: "New highways thread through Afghanistan, some, like this one, built with Soviet aid, and others with United States aid.")

But some of the trade has even far more damaging importance to America's future security: "According to Dr. William Perry, Under-Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the U.S.S.R. will be able to detect and monitor the location of all U.S. submarines by the year 2000. The reason? We export as 'oil exploration equipment' the most advanced American seismological and related high technology."

The purchase of American (and Western) technology is expensive, and the American government has provided assistance to the Communist bloc nations in an effort to increase their purchases.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt, on February 2, 1934, created the Export-Import Bank by an executive order (critics point out, quite correctly, that the President does not have any such authority, according to the Constitution) for the purpose of guaranteeing commercial loans made to foreign, including Communist, nations to increase international trade. Not only does the Bank guarantee loans made, but actually makes loans itself.

But American banking interests also participate in the making of loans to assist Communist nations in purchasing American goods. One of the first banks involved was the Chase Manhattan Bank, controlled by the Rockefeller interests, which opened a banking office in Moscow, Russia, in 1972, at #1 Karl Marx Square. They later opened an office in Communist China in 1973.

Chase's interest in trade with Russia goes back to at least 1933, when Congressman Louis McFadden, then the Chairman of the House Banking Committee, posed the problem: "Find out what business has been transacted for the State Bank of Soviet Russia by its correspondent, the Chase Bank of New York."

(Individuals also align themselves in support of this foreign trade. In 1977, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger joined the international advisory committee of Chase Manhattan Bank.)

Other Banks are active as well. The Bank of America in 1975 offered the Soviet Government $500 million to finance imports from the United States. 81

And on October 20, 1969, Rodman Rockefeller, the son of Nelson Rockefeller, and the London firm of N.M. Rothschild entered into a partnership to form a company known as the International Basic Economy Corporation, (IBEC,) to further Soviet-American trade. 82

One of the most startling examples of this trade occurred in 1977 when the American government sold Russia the world's largest electro-magnet, capable of generating a magnetic field 250,000 times greater than that of the Earth itself. It was being utilized to: "continue the study of electromagnetic radiation and its application in the spheres of weather modification." Russia began research into the modification of the Earth's weather in 1974, and by 1976, they had four ground-based transmitters in Russia. That winter there was snow in Miami, Florida, for the first time in recorded history.

One can hasten to remember the comment about weather modification made by Zbigniew Brzezinski:

"I think we accept the idea of a vast expansion in social regulation. It may take such forms as legislation for the number of children, perhaps even legislation determining the sex of children, once we have choice, the regulation of weather, [emphasis added], the regulation of leisure, and so forth."

Brzezinski went on to amplify his thoughts about the "regulation of weather" in his book Between Two Ages:

"Not only have new weapons been developed but some of the basic concepts of geography and strategy have been fundamentally altered: space and weather control have replaced Suez or Gibraltar as key elements of strategy.

"In addition to improved rocketry, multi-missiles, and more powerful and more accurate bombs, future developments may well include automated or manned space warships, deep-sea installations, chemical and biological weapons, death rays, and still other forms of warfare—even the weather may be tampered with . . . .

"Techniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm, thereby weakening a nation's capacity and forcing it to accept the demands of the competitor."

(It is interesting to speculate as to which industries might be interested in the ability to produce severely cold, or prolonged periods of winter. The first one that comes to mind is the oil industry, which would sell more heating oil than in a normal winter.)

But Russia and the other eastern European Communist nations are not the only Communist countries to receive technological assistance from the American government China is quickly being added to the list of countries.

For instance, in 1974, David Rockefeller formed the National Council for U.S.-(Red) China Trade. This was prior to the recognition of Red China as a most favored nation by the government on May 15, 1977, meaning that China would be eligible for U.S. Export-Import Bank credits. These agreements were made in spite of the fact that the American government recognized that at least ten percent of the Chinese people live in forced labor camps. Once again, the cheapest laborers are those who are not paid anything for their efforts.

But such aid and trade to China continues. On May 29, 1980, Secretary of Defense Harold Brown announced that the Carter Administration would allow Red China to purchase air defense radar, helicopters, and transport planes, and that they would authorize American companies to build electronics and helicopter factories in Red China.

But perhaps the true purpose for the recognition of Red China's need for America's latest technology came in an article that reported why America was interested in opening up the China door. A New York TImes release on July 20, 1978, reported: "Four American oil companies are negotiating with China over the establishment of off shore drilling operations."

The article identified the four companies: Pennzoil, Exxon Corp., Union Oil of California, and Phillips Petroleum.

But once again, the question must be asked as to how the Red Chinese plan on paying for these imports of American technology. China had an additional supply of goods to sell the Americans that other countries, especially Russia, do not have. Senator Barry Goldwater identified this commodity in 1977, when he stated:

"Reports from [Chinese] refugees. . . prove beyond any doubt that Red China is the major source of the world's hard drugs. These reports indicate that, at a minimum, Communist China's annual income from drug smuggling is $500 million annually."

The American dollars received in exchange for Chinese drugs are being used to purchase American technology. This is in accordance with a plan set in motion by Chou-En-Lai, the Chinese premier, who described his plan to an Egyptian publisher, Mohammed Heikal, in an interview. Chou said: "We are planting the best kinds of opium especially for Americans."

This activity was confirmed by Ed Reid, a Pulitzer Prize winning author and crime researcher, who said:

"There is no question but that the youth of this country are the victims of a conspiracy. The object is to get the kids on drugs and effectively destroy the next generation of adults."

Congressman John Schmitz became aware of the program and intended to expose the evil intent of China's drug traffic:

". . . I intend to cry foul when an American President . . . protects the massive drug trade of an enemy nation in order to assure it the dollars necessary to buy products from a few favored U.S. corporations."

The drug traffic also had another side-effect. It was preparing young people to quietly acquiesce when the government destroyed their rights and freedoms. This conclusion was graphically illustrated in an article that appeared in 1972. It quoted a young student, called a "hippie" in the article, who was a university graduate and who explained what the drug culture had done to him: "No, drugs are not the answer, but I've at least blown my mind so I don't have to ask any questions."

The Chinese also have a purpose in expanding their trade with the United States. This was illustrated by Huang Hua, Foreign Minister of the Red Chinese government, in 1978. He said: "We are discussing trade with the U.S. with a view to expanding it and opening the door wider to take full advantage of the opportunities it presents to build socialism at home and abroad. By opening the door of China-U.S. relations, we are opening wide the door which leads to revolution in the U.S."

The significance of selling equipment and technology to both the Red Chinese and the Russian governments who have both indicated that it is their intention to destroy the American capitalistic system, has not gone unnoticed.

The founding fathers of the United States were concerned about such trade, as they wrote the following into the Constitution of the United States, as Article III, Section 3:

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or

"in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

The definition of treason includes two separate and distinct actions. Not only was treason an act of war against the United States, but it was also giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Notice that it was not imperative that the United States be at war with the "enemy" in the formal sense, at the time the act of treason was committed.

This is why businessmen and members of the armed forces face prison sentences when they sell military secrets to the Russians. For instance, four people in September, 1981, were indicted for selling microwave tuners and receivers used for electronic surveillance, computer systems and components to Communist East Germany.

Another seller of strategic goods or knowledge to the Russian government, in this case some "missile secrets," received a life sentence and was called a "traitor" by the judge who sentenced him.

Observers notice that the employees of the Department of Commerce approve the sale of similar items to the Russian government and it is not treason.

It is interesting to ask those who justify such programs as selling materials to the Communist countries for their reasons. One Congressman wrote a letter in 1977 to one who asked about why he had supported American trade with Russia. The Congressman replied: "As you probably know, this has always been the case since the United States leads the way in such technology. This is because democracy encourages innovative thinking which others emulate. However, I'm not sure this is bad. The more the Soviet Union adopts to western technology, the more their society opens up and thus the more susceptible to change they become."

The Congressman does not completely support his theory that governments become more open when they trade with the United States. When, in 1975, Congress was asked to vote to prohibit the importation of chrome from Rhodesia, the Congressman voted in favor of the bill.

It is a fair question to ask whether or not the American government knows whether the products that this nation sells to Russia are used in ways that kill people. Commerce Department official Lawrence J. Brady explained: "It is virtually impossible to insure that the advanced technology equipment shipped to the Soviet Union is not diverted to military uses."

The reason that the American government sells strategic technology to the Communist nations around the world was made clear in a 1964 Senate Internal Security Subcommittee report entitled The Many Crises of the Soviet Economy. The report said:

"On the Communist side, however, east-west trade, despite its apparently limited dollar volume, is not merely of critical importance: it may well be a matter of survival. The Communist bloc must have Western assistance . . . to cope with the chronic deficiencies of its industries."

This position has been confirmed by various Soviet dissidents who have defected to the West and have brought out the truth about the importance of this strategic aid and trade to the Russian government

One, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, informed the American people on July 5, 1975: "Our whole slave system depends on your economic assistance. When they bury us alive, please do not send them shovels and the most up to date earth-moving equipment." He reiterated this view in another speech to the American people when he said: "Why do we hand over to Communist totalitarianism more and more technology—complex, delicate, developed technology which it needs for armaments and for crushing its own citizens."

But in spite of his warnings, the aid and trade continues.

And the Russian government keeps "crushing its own citizens."

With America's help.