But what the power elite do to stay in control once they take control is to eliminate the very competition that makes for excellence in all areas of life and prepares our children for the real world. They can’t beat the competition of the common people so they use government money and regulation to protect themselves from it. That’s what monopolies do! [9-second applause]…only the light at the nucleus of a body, cell or atom can hold together the components of life. And only those who love the light and serve the light can truly possess the light….
As we examine world conditions today we see that our nation is indeed vulnerable to a Soviet first strike and to foreign invasion. The Soviets don’t think like us. They believe it’s possible to fight a nuclear war using relatively small weapons that destroy the enemy’s weapons, and to win. They believe they can surgically remove most of our weapons in a surprise first strike, leaving our cities largely intact.
You might not think that’s sane. You might think no one would ever do anything like that. Well, what you think doesn’t make any difference. It’s what the Soviets think that makes all the difference. If we want to keep a nuclear war from ever happening, we must keep the Soviets from ever pushing the button. [11-second applause]
America spends $300 billion a year on defense. So how did we get into a position of zero defense against nuclear weapons? Well, I’ll tell you, it wasn’t easy. It’s not for a lack of money or technology. We have no defense against nuclear weapons today because of the logic of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) that prevails in our defense community.
The nuclear strategy of the United States is deterrence–“Let’s avoid nuclear war by making the consequences of an attack by either nation too great.” We live under MAD which says that neither side will start a nuclear war because after a first strike both sides would retain the capacity to destroy large segments of the other’s population. According to MAD, weapons that kill people are good, weapons that kill weapons are bad and defenses which stop nuclear warheads are “destabilizing.” That is, they are likely to cause war since the side that has them can attack without fear of being annihilated in retaliation. So defenses are not inherently threatening but they have become so in the context of our nuclear strategy.
For MAD to work both sides must abide by it. But they haven’t. The Soviets are building a defense for their country and people and the United States is not. …this national suicide has everything to do with the five villains that have invaded the temple of the mind and the spirit of a once great nation. It has everything to do with drugs, alcohol, nicotine, sugar and rock music, all of which drive the life-force down the spine.
These abuses of our bodies and our souls we passively suffer do not allow the sacred fire of the Divine Mother to rise naturally from the base-of-the-spine chakra to meet the light of the Universal Christ in the thousand-petaled lotus of the crown chakra. And so the spinelessness, the absence of will to be and to live and therefore to defend one’s integral reason for being–one’s integrity, or integration in God–is at the root of the malaise of our time.
Rock music is the greatest single factor that brought about the changing of the national consciousness toward the psychology of the nondefense of self and society. But it alone would have had no power over the minds and souls of our people. Flanked by the demons of drugs–marijuana, hashish, cocaine, crack, heroin, PCP–escorted by the multibillion dollar sugar, alcohol and cigarette industries and guaranteed safe passage by the pharmaceuticals drugging the nation to death, the false hierarchy of rock music and its hellions has in three decades made America the pushover and the patsy for this conspiracy of the Dark Forces against the lightbearers of the world!…
If we had the spine and the inner strength to resist these drugs, we would not be in the danger we are in today. But, America, we have lost our equilibrium–the internal balance of the yin and yang forces of life. General Sejna was present in Prague when the Czechs, acting on behalf of the Soviets, made a deal with Raul Castro to integrate Cuba into the Soviet Union’s drug-smuggling network. In 1968 the Soviets were selling drugs to U.S. servicemen in Europe through KINTEX, a Bulgarian corporation. Since then Cuban and East European intelligence services have smuggled huge quantities of heroin, cocaine, marijuana, hashish and other drugs into the United States.
The United States government refuses to acknowledge that the Soviet Union has an official policy of drug smuggling to undermine and destroy the United States. Perhaps that’s because if they admitted the realpolitik of Soviet strategy and the drug war the Soviets are winning against the U.S. hands down, they would have to take a stand and engage in a spiritual and physical warfare to save the soul of a nation–something the U.S. has never had the nerve to do since the Bolshevik revolution, always crying “Peace, peace...” when there was and is and can be no peace with the Soviet system or leadership….There is no way the Soviet Union could have carried on this war against our youth since the days of Khrushchev without full cooperation of agents in the West. There is no way they could have been carrying out this operation without our intelligence community and our military establishment being fully aware of it as a strategy. Therefore I say it is an International Capitalist/Communist Conspiracy of the power elite in every nation on earth moving against the lightbearers of the world who are our sons and daughters.
General Sejna also says the Soviets plan a first strike against the United States. And believe me, this man knows what he’s talking about! I interviewed him on Summit University Forum and this is what he said:
Until 1963 everything was prepared for defense because they thought they were not strong enough for offense. They were behind in nuclear weapons and these things.
Marshal Malinovsky, who was at that time minister of defense, visited Czechoslovakia and other satellites. And he said “Comrades, we have to change our preparation. We have to change our tactic from defense to offense. For the next war we have three possibilities. First, the NATO missiles will be first in the air. Second, our missiles and NATO’s will meet in the air. And third, our missiles will be first in the air. The first two possibilities are not acceptable for us.”
General Sejna says that after a Soviet nuclear first strike on the United States, Western Europe would either surrender or be overrun by conventional, chemical, and biological forces.
It’s not chic to talk about a surprise attack in the era of glasnost. Military officials assure us it’s not possible. They say we would have adequate warning based on satellite detection of increased troop movements, mobile missile movements and bombers being put on alert. Therefore they do not even consider the possibility.
The fact is, the United States and NATO assume they will receive adequate warning of a Soviet attack allowing them time to prepare. NATO is counting on at least several days of warning during which they would disperse their forces, man their defense positions,and receive reinforcements from the United States. The United States believes it will have at least several hours’ warning during which bombers could be loaded and alerted and submarines in port could put to sea. This is folly for four reasons:
1) Surprise attack is an integral part of Soviet strategy.
History shows that Soviet military strategy is characterized by preemptive, surprise attacks, often in peacetime and often accompanied by deception (such as military exercises or ongoing negotiations) to disguise their activities. They achieved surprise in their invasions of Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Afghanistan.
Military strategist William R. Van Cleave has researched surprise in Soviet strategy which he discusses in an article, “Surprise Nuclear Attack,” published in an anthology entitled Soviet Strategic Deception….
Harvey DeWeerd’s study, quoted by Van Cleave in his article on surprise attack, concludes:
We were surprised twice in Korea in spite of multiple indications of coming events and an abundance of intelligence data....It was not the absence of intelligence which led us into trouble, but our unwillingness to draw unpleasant conclusions from it. We refused to believe what our intelligence told us was in fact happening, because it was at variance with the prevailing climate of opinion in Washington and Tokyo. We also refused to believe our intelligence because it would have been very inconvenient if we had; we would have had to do something about it.
A Soviet surprise attack would doubtless contain as many ambiguities as or more than the Japanese and Chinese attacks on Pearl Harbor and Korea. It doesn’t take much imagination to see American decision-makers of the 1990s engaging in the same kind of wishful thinking as American officers did at Pearl Harbor.
In order for the United States to successfully launch its ICBMs and bombers on warning of a Soviet attack, the president would need to receive that warning, correctly interpret it, and act on it in less than 20 minutes.
In reality, Van Cleave argues,
the information available...would probably be partial and questionable. It could well be obscured in a fog of Soviet disinformation and deception; it could come after a period of Soviet conditioning and political deception and during acts of Soviet operational and technical deception....
Warning is apt to be inherently ambiguous until too late. Signals indicating the possibility (perhaps even the fact) of a surprise nuclear attack would be those most resisted by U.S. leadership. The realization that an attack is imminent, or underway, would come slowly and reluctantly. The strong disbelief in a surprise nuclear attack makes it likely that warning signals of such an attack would also be disbelieved as long as possible. For NATO, all of these encumbrances would be multiplied.
3) The Soviets have a big incentive to pull off a surprise attack.
U.S. nuclear forces are based in such a way that a surprise attack would be highly advantageous to the Soviets. In 1987 Van Cleave did a study which showed that in a surprise attack the Soviets could destroy 7,500 U.S. warheads and 3,140 equivalent megatons by catching U.S. ICBMs and bombers on the ground and our submarines in port. In an attack following a period of generated alert they could only destroy 3,700 warheads and 1,250 equivalent megatons since more of our submarines would be at sea and decision- makers would be ready to launch our ICBMs and bombers. The incentive for surprise is 3,800 warheads and 1,890 equivalent megatons.
Concerning the argument that Soviet preparations would warn us of a surprise attack, Van Cleave says “The Soviets probably would forego attack preparations that might improve their military strength if those preparations would also deny them the element of surprise. At the very least the Soviets should be expected to conceal or obscure such preparations by a combination of political and military deception.”
4) The United States is not prepared for a surprise attack.
Our military leaders think that a surprise attack would be too complicated for the Soviets. A report by the Scowcroft Commission, headed by Brent Scowcroft [today President Bush’s national security adviser], argued that a coordinated Soviet surprise attack on U.S. bombers and ICBMs would be too difficult due to timing problems. Former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, a member of the Scowcroft Commission, later said “It is equally important to acknowledge, however that the coordination of a successful attack is not impossible, and that the ‘rubbish heap of history’ is filled with authorities who said something reckless could not or would not be done.”
Nevertheless we do operate on the assumption that it cannot be done. As Van Cleave reported in an article in Global Affairs:
Throughout most of the strategic ballistic missile era, and certainly after the Soviet strategic nuclear forces had grown, the adequacy of U.S. strategic nuclear forces was judged on the basis of their ability to survive a “well-executed surprise attack” and still accomplish all of their missions. Yet as Soviet capabilities have improved to the point that a well-executed, highly disarming surprise attack is feasible, the tendency to discount its possibility has grown....The assumptions that we would receive, recognize and react effectively to strategic warning [a warning that an attack was imminent] and be able to launch ICBMs as well as bombers on timely tactical warning [a warning that an attack has begun] now dominate most evaluations of U.S. strategic nuclear forces.”
Since Reagan’s two-trillion-dollar defense buildup, many Americans think we’re in good shape. Unfortunately nothing could be farther from the truth. We spent a lot of money but we didn’t spend it on what we really needed to solve our defense problems: (1) making our ICBMs mobile so they could not be destroyed in their silos, (2) storing our bombers and submarines in hardened hangars and berths, (3) improving early warning radar and command, control and communications, and (4) defending our weapons with anti-ballistic missiles.
John Collins, a noted defense expert with the Library of Congress who is quoted by liberals and conservatives, commented on our state of nuclear preparedness in a recent telephone interview: “In many respects we’re no better off than we were when we started [in 1979] and in some additional respects we’re worse off than we were when we started. And the reason is that the Soviets had had a modernization program going since 1962; we began to think about turning trends around in the last year of the Carter administration.”…
While tanks and ships and aircraft carriers and troops are important, what will make the difference in the next war are nuclear forces. If the Soviets could get rid of our strategic forces or render them largely ineffective by a defense network, our conventional forces could not stop them from invading our country.
As I have demonstrated, a surprise attack is far more likely than an attack preceded by a period of escalation. Therefore we have no right to gamble our lives and our children’s lives on the slim chance that when the Soviets decide to attack, it will not be a surprise….
The Soviets think they can win a nuclear war for three reasons. First: in a surprise first strike they can destroy almost two-thirds of our warheads. Second: they are rapidly completing a defense network to stop the rest of our missiles from hitting them. Third: they already have civil defense for their leadership as well as for the majority of their urban population. …
Since most of our warheads are vulnerable to a surprise first strike because of the way they are deployed, they aren’t really a deterrent. In short a weapon that cannot survive cannot deter….
Soviet warheads launched from submarines off our coasts could reach most bomber bases in six to eight minutes. It is debatable whether these 30 percent could get off the ground before they were destroyed, especially if our command, control and communications network were destroyed first. The other 70 percent certainly would be destroyed. Assuming that the bombers on alert did escape, after the first strike the United States would have the capability of delivering 1,331 warheads via 87 bombers.
Our 35 SSBNs carry 5,504 warheads. This includes 9 new Ohio-class submarines carrying Trident missiles and 26 Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Lafayette-class subs–12 carrying Trident missiles and 14 carrying Poseidon missiles. About 40 percent (or 14) of our SSBNs are in port at any given time. These could be destroyed by a surprise attack since it would take them several hours to put to sea. The Soviets, using attack subs and anti-submarine warfare techniques, could destroy at least 2 to 4 additional submarines at sea.
Approximately 5 Ohio and 13 Franklin, Madison and Lafayette SSBNs would be left. Assuming they were destroyed in equal proportions, 2,848 warheads would survive.
Therefore a total of 4,424 warheads would survive a first strike. That is a 64 percent reduction–about two-thirds. In addition according to Van Cleave’s study a surprise attack would reduce our total equivalent megatonnage (EMT) from 3,600 EMT to 460 EMT–that’s 87 percent. This is because most of the surviving warheads would be on Trident and Poseidon missiles based on submarines. These yield 100 kilotons and 40 kilotons respectively as opposed to 1 to 2 megatons on Minuteman II missiles.
After such an attack what would our options be? The 87 surviving U.S. bombers would still have to outmaneuver the Soviet air defense. Defense experts William C. Martel and Paul L. Savage estimate that only 30 percent of the bombers that escape a Soviet first strike would be able to deliver their weapons to targets in the Soviet Union. Therefore 26 bombers would survive with the capability of delivering about 413 warheads. The weapons on the 18 surviving submarines would not be useful to attack Soviet military targets such as hardened ICBM silos. This is because they are smaller and less accurate than land-based ICBMs. They could only be used against Soviet cities. Furthermore an undetermined number of IBM warheads could be stopped by Soviet SA-X-12 SAMs expected to be widely deployed around the Soviet Union in the next few years.
What do all these figures boil down to? Quite simply, following a first strike the president of the United States would have the choice either of surrendering or of retaliating by destroying innocent Soviet civilians and submitting to Soviet retaliation on U.S. cities. If we attacked Soviet cities, the Soviets would still have over 5,000 warheads in reserve with which to annihilate undefended U.S. cities. The country would be worse off if he retaliated than if we did nothing. If the President surrendered, the Soviets could invade and rule these United States. In addition Soviet defenses may soon be able to shoot down our missiles and a second strike by the United States would be virtually worthless.
Because of the twisted nature of MAD and the reality of Soviet nuclear strategy, the closer the Soviets get to completing their defenses, the closer they are to launching their first strike. And that may not be too far in the future. The Pentagon concluded in its publication Soviet Military Power 1988 that the Soviets’ strategic defense efforts “suggest that the USSR may be preparing an ABM defense of its national territory.” This would consist of anti-ballistic missiles, surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) which are capable of shooting down tactical ballistic and cruise missiles, and a vast radar system.
The Soviets already have the world’s only ABM system; it consists of 100 nuclear-tipped missiles that can shoot down warheads before they reach Moscow. It is currently being modernized and will be fully operational by 1989. As I mentioned, the Soviets also have a huge civil defense network which they could count on to defend their leadership against any missiles that leak through their defense.
U.S. citizens have no civil defense. After a first strike such as that described above, between 10 million and 40 million Americans would die. But fallout shelters could reduce the death toll to 1 million. …
But as we know, they are doing far more than we are. The Soviets are spending $20 billion a year on their strategic defense system while this year we are spending $3.9 billion on ours.
Furthermore it is now generally known that they are winning the race for space. But most people don’t know that 90 percent of Soviet space operations are for military purposes and that a number of Soviet space achievements are necessary components to a space-based defense.
Thomas Krebs, who worked as the Pentagon’s expert on Soviet space warfare capabilities, says that their immediate goal is to put up a space-based missile defense system. And they are rapidly developing the prerequisites. The new Soviet Energia rocket is capable of carrying large numbers of satellites, a key component of a Star Wars system.
Not only do the Soviets have the world’s only operational space-based anti-satellite weapon, capable of destroying our early-warning and reconnaissance satellites in orbit, but they also have a ground-based laser at Sary Shagan in south central Russia that may be able to damage U.S. satellites. The Soviets have another laser weapons site at a base on a mountaintop in the remote Nurek region of the Soviet Union near their border with Afghanistan.
The Soviet ground-based defense system is moving forward as well. On February 25, 1988, the Wall Street Journal said in an editorial, “We hear that Air Force Intelligence has officially concluded the Soviets have rolled production lines to break out of the ABM treaty and deploy a nationwide anti-missile system, which possibly could be in place by next year. That Maj. Gen. Schuyler Bissell, head of Air Force Intelligence, briefed the CIA on this conclusion late last week.”
The Journal said the Air Force based its finding on two new pieces of evidence:
First, the Soviets are “internetting” their early-warning radars....They have conducted “hand-off exercises” in which the large phased-array radars, like the controversial one at Krasnoyarsk, pick up targets and alert the Flat Twin and Pawn Shop mobile radars that guide their [ABMs]. This is the key “battle management” function of an anti-missile system.
Second, the Soviets are mass producing the Flat Twin and Pawn Shop radars, though the ABM treaty limits them to two locations. Similarly they are mass producing the SH-08, a relatively new supersonic [anti-ballistic] missile that intercepts warheads within the atmosphere, with 500 such missiles already produced and 3,000 ultimately projected.
It is difficult to determine if the Soviets are mass producing ABMs. A well-placed source in the intelligence community says that if they were, the United States would know but probably not immediately. One piece of evidence, which comes from another intelligence source, is that they have recently doubled the floor space at their plant at Gomel, which produces ABM components. Since they already have the 100 ABMs that the treaty allows in place around Moscow, the only reason they would need more floor space is if they were going to start mass production. …
On February 26 Archangel Gabriel, dictating through me in Lisbon, Portugal, said: The movement is accelerated on the part of the Soviets to move against Europe and to take the United States as well by a first-strike attack. This is what is on the drawingboard and this is the only reason negotiations are continuing....
Blessed ones, the acceleration is at hand and El Morya has declared it and it has not changed: unless the United States change her course and defend the peace of the world, you will see an encounter as early as twenty-four months from October last.
…MAD depends upon both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. being undefended. Since the Soviets are defending their country and people and we are not defending ours, we are the ones who are vulnerable….
If the Soviets would kill untold millions of souls of their countrymen to get control of the heart and lifeblood of Mother Russia, how many would they sacrifice to get control of America and then the world? For the Soviet leadership (not the Russian people), a first strike against the United States, while highly dangerous, is undoubtably preferable to watching their empire disintegrate when they are at the pinnacle of military power….
Today Western loans are keeping the Soviet economy afloat. The U.S. and Western banks lend the U.S.S.R. and Eastern bloc $1 billion dollars a month. It’s outrageous! And, as I’ve discussed in my prophecy and astrology lectures, if the Western economies collapse, the Soviets will have to either face disintegration or go to war….
When the Soviet defense system is complete it will mean they are more likely to launch a nuclear attack against us since they will be able to stop most of our retaliatory missiles. In combination with their countrywide civil defense already in place it will give them a decisive advantage. … Mark you well, their karma shall be upon them for their neglect to be their brothers’ keepers!…
this is the effect that the Communist system has upon all of its subjects, the sense of the worthlessness of the human soul. They are masterminds at breaking the will and spirit of men and nations. I say it’s time for the United States to link arms control agreements to human rights reform in and out of the Soviet Union! [12-second applause]…
Americans don’t even know the threat of Soviet defenses or the sorry state of our defense. A 1982 poll showed that 65 percent of Americans were not “aware that the U.S now has no means of defending itself from incoming ballistic missiles.” 86% said “if the U.S. had the capability of changing this situation by deploying an anti-ballistic missile defense,” they would favor it.
Many Americans think that Ronald Reagan’s SDI program is taking care of our defense problem. In fact, it hasn’t even put a dent in it. All Reagan did is to start a research program…. And when the START treaty is made public we may find that any future president’s right to deploy anything has been bargained away….
Who is left who will raise his voice and put his political reputation or his job on the line by coming out for a strategic defense now? What elected representative is going to risk his seat to stand for a comprehensive defense program and budget that the experts and taxpayers don’t think is necessary?
…the United States government hasn’t moved forward to implement a single plan or program that Saint Germain or our Summit University Forum guests have put forward. In fact we may have even retrogressed, if what I hear is true, in promising the Soviets not to deploy SDI as a part of the INF or START agreements….
Except for the vision of the hosts of the Lord, the outlook day by day is indeed discouraging.
In his July 5 address in the Heart of the Inner Retreat last year, Alpha made a proposal to the Cosmic Council to lend himself to us and “upon seeing the victory of the deployment of the defense of freedom, to press on for other dispensations. Whether or not this is accomplished, together with the turning back and diminishing day by day of the power of World Communism, will determine the future of planet Earth. There is no question about it.” -Pearl 32:27
Well, freedom isn’t any more defended today and it is certainly less defended than it was when Alpha made that statement one year ago….Strategic defense is, my friends, to put it bluntly, dead in the water. If any systems are put up, they will most likely be too little too late….We need to examine this situation in greater detail. We need to know the facts in order to give our daily decrees–even when we would rather not be decreeing but we know that we absolutely must….
Well, the budget for SDI has been cut and testing for HEDI and other near-term systems has been scaled back. The Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board placed a restriction on the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization which said that they could develop low-tech systems such as ABMs only if they continued to develop high-tech systems such as particle beam weapons at the same rate. This has had the effect of cutting in half the amount of money available for near-term systems….
If the politicians had more guts, they could galvanize the country to support defense. 7 out of 10 Americans favor continuing research and development on SDI and 58% think we should deploy it once it has been developed….Lack of support by our “leadership” class has frozen strategic defense….
At what position of full operation in defense, et cetera, et cetera will it become advantageous for the Soviets to blackmail the West? They have just about everything they need right now. They just need to be sure. They just need to fasten it down. They just need to play their cards right….
If current trends continue, we can say good-bye to a space-based defense system. Last year Congress issued a directive to the SDIO which prohibited funds for either full-scale engineering development or deployment of kinetic kill vehicles….
To understand the beast (the genetically engineered beast of the International Capitalist/Communist Conspiracy), we have to consider Reagan’s other arms control achievement, the INF Treaty ratified by our Senate on May 27. Not only is the treaty conceptually and strategically flawed, but it has more holes in it than a fishnet. And it would be a bad idea even if it were leakproof….
Furthermore in giving up the SS-20 the Soviets were only giving up an outdated missile they couldn’t use since its warheads were so large that fallout would drift back onto Soviet territory if they launched a strike on Europe. But the missiles we are removing threaten military targets in the Soviet Union. They were the only weapons we possessed that could take out Soviet command centers in 10 to 12 minutes. They directly threatened Soviet territory….The Pershings IIs and IAs and the GLCMs were all that prevented the Soviet conventional forces from concentrating along the border to invade Europe. The Warsaw Pact outnumbers NATO three to one in tanks and artillery and they can take Europe in a matter of days or weeks. Rather than spend the money to match the Soviet armies, since 1945 NATO has chosen to rely on nuclear weapons. Therefore once U.S. intermediate-range nuclear forces are removed, there will be nothing to deter a Soviet invasion of Europe. My conclusion is that the INF Treaty will make Europe safe for conventional war–and for the Soviets that war is also a chemical/biological war.
The Pershing IIs accomplished a mission that would take hundreds of billions of dollars to replace….
The retired French general Pierre Gallois said that no amount of spending can match the 200 Soviet divisions facing Europe: “If we eliminate nuclear weapons [in Europe], as Reagan wants, we will be contributing to elevating the Soviet Union to the rank of the world’s strongest military power.”…The INF Treaty does nothing about chemical and biological (C/B) weapons that the Soviets are prepared to use in Europe….By 1963 the Soviets had concluded that these weapons are the best means to seize Western Europe since nuclear weapons would destroy the prize. The Soviets have made extensive preparations for chemical warfare. There are 45,000 to 60,000 chemical troops in the Soviet ground forces. They have acknowledged that they have up to 50,000 tons of poisonous substances which the Pentagon calls “the world’s largest known chemical warfare agent stockpile.”…
There is virtually no way we can tell if they violate the treaty because the SS-25, supposedly a long-range missile, was not banned under the treaty and looks virtually identical to the SS-20….
Our leaders seem to have an attitude that we are invulnerable and can afford a little Soviet cheating….as defense expert Frank Gaffney points out, these involve the “right to visit only those places where Soviet cheating is unlikely….A final, fatal flaw in this ridiculous treaty is that it allows continued production of the modern, mobile SS-25. National security expert James Hackett asks “Why ban SS-20s when Moscow is building SS-25s that can strike the same targets? The small mobile missiles covered by this agreement can be hidden or camouflaged and not be seen by satellites.”
The entire United States Senate acted like the blind men and the elephant when they ratified the INF Treaty. Each saw in it exactly what they wanted to see and ignored everything else….What makes Reagan and the Senate think that a piece of paper will solve our problems with the Soviets? Not only have the Soviets broken every arms control agreement that they have ever signed with us, but they have also had a peace agreement with nearly every country they have ever invaded. …Watching this happen year in, year out we see that every succeeding nation has fallen for it. And now the government of the United States of America has fallen for it.
The next agreement in line is START, the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks. A 50 percent across-the-board cut in nuclear weapons. Sounds like a good deal, doesn’t it? …START will have an even worse effect on our submarine and bomber forces. It cuts them in half but does nothing about the Soviet defensive forces designed to defeat them. START will cut the American force of ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) from 37 to about 18. Only 10 or 11 will be at sea at any one time. But the Soviets will still have 270 attack submarines with which to destroy the SSBN force.
START will cut the American bomber force of 290 planes in half but will do nothing about 2,000 dedicated strategic defense interceptor aircraft, 7,000 strategic air defense radars, and 9,000 Soviet SAMs deployed to stop them. Furthermore the Soviet civil defense system and ABM system will instantaneously become twice as effective because they will need to defend against only half as many U.S. weapons.
START is a bad idea from start to finish. It will make a Soviet first strike more likely….On February 13, 1988 Saint Germain said: One does not rest one’s case on a hope that enough souls of Light on a planet will deliver the mandate of the violet flame that can be received by the Karmic Board to turn the tide of world history. There is more than violet flame involved, beloved. There is freewill.
And there are many in positions of power this day who have amassed power and wealth and armaments and technology whose free will is committed to world destruction. I should not trust my fate to their hands nor should you. Therefore the wise will remove themselves to that point in time and space which they discover by meditation and unerring guidance of my angels is the correct place for them to be.
Do not consider then that you who have not attained to the levels of an Ascended Master may turn the world around merely by the raising of the right hand. If it were so, beloved, we should long ago have done this through you. What you ultimately can do and must do, in all of the promises you have heard, is to invoke that violet flame and to continue to invoke it and use Archangel Michael’s Rosary for Armageddon.
For much will change, much will be set aside. Entire kingdoms may come to their judgment. Yet you must be found out of the way. For this very process to occur, world chemicalization is in order!...
Blessed hearts, I trust that I make myself clear. The preparedness at a personal and national level has never been more paramount. Your preparedness in your life can be complete in a matter of months. When you are fully prepared and determined to survive physically in the earth, come what may in all of these predictions and those you have heard elsewhere, you are then a free agent of Saint Germain and you may give your life and heart to this very cause of stopping those conditions in their tracks before they are outpictured, therefore rendering your preparations only a safety valve, a security net, a lifeboat, if you will.
On November 29, 1987, Saint Germain stood in Washington, D.C. and said,
When all the world has gone mad or asleep around you, beloved, you do not despair, you come into awareness, truly the direct apprehension of your Godhood. You kindle a Sun in a dying world! That is your mission! You kindle a Sun and you adore Helios and Vesta, Alpha and Omega, the one true God manifest in all the beauty and glory of His Light emanations! You become a Sun! You are the Sun, and you will let no Darkness defeat it, put it out or cast a shadow.
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment