Soviets Taking Nuclear Lead………………………………..Los Angeles Times
Study Says Soviet Cuts Missile Gap ………………….The New York Times
Soviet Nuclear Lead Seen…………………………………… Indianapolis Star
‘Megaton Gap’ Starts This Year………………………….Topeka Daily capital
U.S. Warned It Will Lose Nuclear Punch To Russia…….st Louis Globe-Democrat
U.S. Faces Nuclear Weapons Gap………San Antonio Express
Russia Seen Forcing Ahead In Missile Race…………San Diego Union
These and similar front-page headlines on July 12 announced a sensational new report entitled The Changing Strategic Military Balance: U.S.A. vs. U.S.S.R., published by the American Security Council. Prepared at the request of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee, this document was immediately issued also as a Committee report, published by the Government Printing Office, dated July 1967. Here are the important points of this report:
1. “The Soviet Union is succeeding in its massive drive toward strategic military superiority, and the United States is cooperating in this effort by slowing down its side of the arms race.”
2. The year 1967 is “a crossover period” when the U.S.S.R. will “equal or exceed the U.S. estimated range.”
3. By 1971, “a massive megatonnage gap will have developed” and “the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. will have reversed their roles in a ten-year period.”
4. The United States no longer has “a superior position in deliverable strategic weapons. There is still time to regain superiority, but time is on the side of the one which uses it. Because of long lead times for weapon development and production, however, the decision to do so must be made in the year 1967.”
The Committee which released this report was headed by General Bernard A. Schriever, USAF (Ret.), who was head of our missile command for many years. Other distinguished officers who signed the report include General Albert C. Wedemeyer, USA (Ret.), General Thomas S. Power, USAF (Ret.) (long-time Commander of SAC), General Curtis E. LeMay, USAF (Ret.), Admiral Ben Moreell, CEC, USN (Ret.), Rear Admiral Chester Ward, USN (Ret.), Dr. Edward Teller (father of the H-bomb), and Professor Ste- fan T. Possony.
What About the Chart?
Now turn back to page one and look hard at the Big X chart. “Megatonnage” is the way we measure the power of nuclear weapons. “Delivery capability” means now much we can hit the enemy with.
In 1962, the U.S. had overwhelming superiority over the Soviet Union. In the succeeding years, U.S. nuclear strength has gone steadily downward until it is about one-half what it was at the time McNamara became Secretary of Defense. By 1971, under McNamara’s announced plans, we will have lost about 90 percent of our deliverable megatonnage.
Meanwhile, Soviet strength, starting from very little in 1962, has climbed steadily upwards. In 1967, the Soviets crossed over and passed t h e U.S. in megatonnage delivery capability. In 1971, the Soviets will have an overwhelming lead.
Most graphs which show activity over a period of years will zig and zag, show curves and fluctuations. When you see a graph like the Big X — where one line goes consistently down, the other line goes consistently up — you know it wasn’t any accident. It was planned that way.
The red part of the X is the Kremlin’s plan for the conquest of the world with nuclear weapons. The blue part of the X is the McNamara- Nitze-Gilpatric-Brown-Rostow plan for the nuclear disarmament of the United States. For the U.S. to abandon its nuclear superiority, in the face of the Communist enemy which plans to “bury” us, is truly to dig our own graves so that the Kremlin slave-masters can easily push us in. That is why we call the McNamara clique the “gravediggers.”
When the sensational Schriever re- port hit the news on July 12, reporters immediately rushed over to the Pentagon to secure the official reply.
The Pentagon issued a short, care-fully-worded statement which —
1. Did not dispute the accuracy of anything in the Schriever report;
2. Did not deny that the Soviets are now ahead of the U.S. in megatonnage delivery capability;
3. Did not deny that by 1971 the Soviets will have a ten-to-one nuclear lead over the U.S.; but
4. Merely claimed that we have “enough” weapons to “convince” the Soviets they would be foolish to attack.
What if the Soviets are not convinced?
Thus, your life is no longer protected by the overwhelming nuclear strength that America had when McNamara took office. It is protected only by McNamara’s opinion about what the Soviets will do. McNamara is the same Secretary of Defense who was —
* wrong about the Bay of Pigs in 1961;
* wrong about Khrushchev sending his missiles into Cuba in 1962;
* wrong in every major decision about the war in Vietnam;
* wrong in awarding the TFX contract to the highest bidder in order to provide favors for Texas and Chicago Democrats.
What to Do
Write, phone or wire your Senators and Congressmen and tell them you want —
* Immediate production of the Nike X anti-missile in order to save Americans from a nuclear attack.
* Immediate reversal of the McNamara-Nitze policies — so that the U.S. line on chart will take a sharp turn upwards.
For further information, read Strike from Space, the original book on this subject, for which the Schriever report provides terrifying confirmation.
Shelving of Panama Canal Treaty Great Victory For America
The presidential signing of t h e new Panama Canal treaties has been postponed indefinitely. The White House first indicated the ceremony of the signing of the treaties would be July 24. Later it mentioned August 1, and finally mid-August. Now, U.S. officials concede that all hope of early action is dead.
This is a tremendous victory for Americans who wrote, wired and phoned their Senators and Congressmen protesting the LBJ giveaway of the Panama Canal via three secret treaties. This is a tremendous victory for the H o u s e of Representatives, 150 of whose members signed resolutions opposing a change in U.S. jurisdiction over the Canal Zone. This is a stunning example of how the LBJ Administration can be forced to back down when patriots take prompt and forceful action.
The Administration had planned to rush ratification through the Senate by having a big ceremony with President Johnson and Panama President Robles signing the treaty — before they were ever made public! Then the Senate would be told that delicate international relations would be upset if the treaties were not ratified. This plan was foiled when the Chicago Tribune exclusively obtained and published the full texts of the three treaties.
The Administration still planned to rush the treaties through the Senate, where there are more members of the let’s-give-America-away club, But the State Department forgot that, since the treaties call for the transfer of American property, they could only be implemented by action of the House. The State Departments legal counsel now admits this. With 150 Congressmen openly opposing the Panama Canal giveaway, the Administration had no stomach for the test.
To save face, the Administration blamed the delay on opposition to the treaties in Panama. This is a smokescreen to make the uninformed think we are not giving enough to Panama. The three Panama Canal treaties represent the most brazen U.S. giveaway of all time — yet Panama still is not satisfied. It is time we learned that we can never satisfy the Communists or the radical agitators at any price.
Before the Administration backed up on the Panama Canal treaties, we interviewed some Republican Senators. To our shock and amazement, we discovered that several did not intend to oppose the treaties. Why? Because, they confided in a hushed whisper, the treaties had been “negotiated” by a “Republican”, Robert B. Anderson, who served as Secretary of the Treasury in the Eisenhower Administration.
Robert B. Anderson is the same man who was first revealed on page 109 of A Choice Not An Echo as one of “the most trusted agents of the kingmakers because they . . . move with ease in and out of both parties.” Back in 1964, A Choice Not An Echo said: “For highly placed Republicans to accept appointments from Democrats is destructive of the two-party system. . . . Trading in and out of b o t h parties confuses the issues and especially the responsibility — which is indeed the motive of the kingmakers who direct this traffic as easily as an expert playing chess. This is also a technique which has been used by Democrats to undercut Republican opposition to Democrat Policies.”
It is high time we repudiate those pseudo-Republicans who, having enjoyed patronage under a Republican Administration, t h e n turncoat and serve the Democrat Administration, pulling LBJ’s chestnuts out of the fire. We elect our Senators to represent us and to protect American interests. We do not expect them to take orders from the New York kingmakers or financiers, such as Robert B. Anderson (partner of Carl M. Loeb, Rhoades & Co., New York financial firm), who do not represent the best interests either of America or of the Republican Party.
On August 9 The New York Times published a large story about Phyllis Schlafly headlined “Defeated Leader Sets Up a Rival Group for Republican Women.” The story led off by saying that Mrs. Schlafly “has written to some leaders of the 500,000-member women’s organization, urging that clubs divert some of their national dues from the Federation to a new conservative war chest.”
These charges are false. Phyllis has not set up a rival group, and she has not written even one letter urging that clubs divert any Federation dues to a new conservative war chest.
Where did the story come from? Obviously, it was “planted” by the liberals who are afraid that conservatives will hit them where it hurts — in the pocketbook.
For at least six months, the National Federation has been diverting Federation dues money to campaign against the unanimously-elected First Vice President (Phyllis Schlafly) — and now some people with a guilty conscience are worried that conservatives might say “what is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander.”
The New York Times story has had an effect completely contrary to what the liberals intended. Instead of intimidating conservatives, this story has brought a flood of letters which say, in substance, “this is a great idea — enclosed is my contribution to the Eagle Trust Fund.”
You can be sure, when you donate to the Eagle Trust Fund, that your money will never be used against conservative Republicans. It is un- fortunate that you cannot be sure of this when you send your dues money to the National Federation.
WHEN THE GRAVEDIGGERS WERE LADS
Robert Strange McNamara
When Mac was a lad, he served a term As Whiz Kid in Ford’s auto firm.
He supported the left like A.C.L.U.,
And promoted the Edsel which wouldn’t do;
He promoted the Edsel which wouldn’t do. He promoted the Edsel that’s failed and gone, So now he is the ruler of the Pentagon*
He promoted the Edsel that’s failed and gone, So now he is the ruler of the Pentagon.
Roswell Leavitt Gilpatric
When Gilpatric was a lad he served a term Aa junior clerk in an attorney’s firm.
He acquired three wives and a partnership, But of military strategy he had no grip;
Of military strategy he had no grip.
Of military knowledge he lacked all pretense,
So they made him Deputy Secretary of Defense.
Of military knowledge he lacked all pretense. So they made him Deputy Secretary
When Nitze was a lad he served a term
As apprentice in a Wall Street brokers’ firm.
He said the Soviets meant us no harm,
And told all the churches that we should disarm;
He told all churches that we should disarm. He talked disarmament so constantly,
That now he is the ruler of our whole Navy.
He talked disarmament so constantly,
That now he is the ruler of our whole Navy.
Since Harold was a lad, he’s never flown
An aeroplane, or worked on his own.
He stayed at a desk and avoided every war, And scrapped new weapons for men fighting
And scrapped new weapons for men fighting
He cancelled the B-70 and big missiles, of course, So now he is the ruler of our Air Force.
He cancelled the B-70 and big missiles, of course, So now he is the ruler of our Air Force.
One of the most famous of all the Gilbert and Sullivan songs is the political satire from H.M.S. Pinafore which recites the tale of the lad who “polished up the handle of the big front door,” stayed “close to a desk and never went to sea,” and now “is the ruler of the Queen’s Navee.”
This song, entitled “When I was A Lad,” forcefully reminds us of Secretary Robert McNamara and the civilians who are directing the defense of America today. Like the object of Gilbert and Sullivan’s classic ridicule, McNamara and his Pentagon civilians have no qualifications whatsoever for their posts in the Defense Department. They are all political appointees, many of whom do not even believe in defense. They are scrapping the nuclear superiority of our country as rapidly as they can think up egghead verbiage to conceal their actions.
On August 16, 1967, Congressman John Ashbrook put into the Congressional Record the Gilbert and Sullivan parodies about McNamara and his crew which Phyllis Schlafly first introduced on her long-playing record called What Are The Gravediggers Doing Now? We invite you to sing along.
(Since these lyrics were originally written, Paul Nitze has been promoted to Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Roswell Gilpatric has moved into a special presidential committee to draft nuclear strategy via secret report.)