You’re listening to The Hour of the Time; I’m William Cooper, the man that President Clinton wrote in a White House memo is “the most dangerous radio host in America” and Rush Limbaugh read it on the air – in order to take the heat off of himself. Even though, to this day, he still bills himself as the most dangerous man in America, that proved him to be a liar. Why am I the most dangerous radio host in America, ladies and gentlemen? Because I tell the truth; simply because I tell the truth. I document it, I back it up with sources so that you can go out and obtain the exact same documentation.
Why did he call me the most dangerous radio host in America? Because I know that Bill Clinton is a communist, his wife is a communist, and they are destroying this country with their fellow travelers placed in key strategic locations throughout the bureaucracy of the United States of America and the individual states. How else could all this be happening to us? How else could this nation be coming apart at the seams? Why… has all this been happening? Used to blame it on the Soviet Union and you were right, because the leadership always came from there; the funding always came from there. But you might say, even if there are a few quixotic communists inside this country still trying to fight the revolution with psychopolitics, how can they pose a threat as communism itself has been dead since the end of the cold war? Well, you could ask that if you haven’t been paying attention and you really don’t understand what’s happening and you really haven’t done any research other than tuning in to the 6 o’clock news and listening to the lies from Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Ted Koppel, Connie Chung, and all the others.
You see, unfortunately, as crazy as it sounds, communism was never dead. If you read Mikhail Gorbachev’s “Perestroika,” he told you in there, he told you the truth, that it is a scam to force the west to lower its guard. Communism is in the process of being resurrected right this moment, ladies and gentlemen. Without rehashing all of our evidence, we refer you to the December 1995 issue of Relevant Magazine, “Planning for the Soviet reunion”; the January 1996 issue, “The changing of the guard”; and the exhaustively documented fall 1994 special report, “The new lies strategy” (see also Relevant, March 1995). And hours and hours and hours of broadcasts of The Hour of the Time where I sat here and documented and read you the documents and the sources where you could get them over and over and over again…
…for, going onto, five years now. The planning for a Soviet reunion continues a pace with another big step in the left direction. On the Ides of March, 1996, the Russian parliament voted for a resolution denouncing the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union as illegal. This is viewed, ladies and gentlemen, inside Russia as being the prelude to the quickening process of reconsolidating the old Soviet Union. The press may banter about that it is fractured into independent states and ethnic territories that have all become democratic and are being led by great democratic leaders. A quick review of the background of those so-called democratic leaders reveals them to be lifelong, staunch communists. There has been no changing of the guard. This process was almost matter-of-factly predicted by Anatoliy Golitsyn in his 1984 book entitled “New lies for old” before old Gorby or his Glasnost scam (also predicted by Golitsyn) had even appeared in the west! Of course, the reconstitution of the Soviet Union could never occur without the orchestrated sham breakup of the Soviet Union in the first place. Now that vast concessions have been extracted from the gullible west and we are disarming and chopping our B-52 bombers into 3 parts in the Arizona desert, dismantling our Minuteman missiles and intercontinental ballistic missiles and destroying these missile sites.
Oh yes. Vast concessions have been extracted from the gullible west, billions of dollars. We’re beginning to see further evidence that Golitsyn was right all along. You see, the New York Times of March 22nd, 1996 revealed “General Varennikov, who helped the aborted coup against Mikhail S. Gorbachev in 1991, warned an audience of Russian army officers last Saturday not to worry, that communist party chief, Mr. Zyuganov is ‘sliding towards social democratic values.’ The General said the party still had a clear but unpublished plan,” – A clear but unpublished plan – “a maximum program for restoring a socialist state which would be put into action after the elections.”
“Maximum plan” was the Bolshevik’s term for the long-term goals of creating a socialist world order. “Maximum plan” was the Bolshevik’s term for the long-term goals of creating a socialist world order and the General’s use of the phrase has stirred waves of shock speculation among intellectuals and journalists. Why was Zyuganov’s response to the General’s comments, what was it? He said, “It was a slip of the tongue.” Mr. Zyuganov said on Tuesday, insisting there is no secret plan. And, of course, I believe him, don’t you? Naturally, the vast majority of well-educated readers of the New York Times were instantly reassured by Comrade Zyuganov’s clarifying statements. These trusting souls know beyond any doubt that the cold war is over and the Russians are all Democrats, even the communists. After all, after all, ladies and gentlemen, they read it in the New York Times.
Any doubt that the KGB psychopoliticians have a sense of humour was dispelled by the hilarious coup in August of 1991 in which the stone-faced plotters came down with bouts of flu and gave in to mighty democrat Boris Yeltsin, appearing as himself in the unforgettable tank-mounting scene. There is no denying their gift for satire, not to mention showmanship. The only question is: how do they keep a straight face when delivering lines like Zyuganov’s quote, “It was a slip of the tongue.” Or when their brilliant young comic actor Vladimir Zhirinovski voiced his support for Pat Buchanan. Oh man, I rolled on the ground, I almost died with laughter over that one! And when he did it, he granted his distracters one final embarrassing coup de grace with which to finish his candidacy, and he did it on purpose!
Yes folks, the KGB’s Moscow troupe has been turning in Oscar-calibre performances for 5 years, but remains largely undiscovered – not only by Hollywood talent scouts but also by western journalists. Or maybe the humour’s just too dry for American tastes or perceptions. Or maybe Americans have grown stupid. Even if the psychopolitics technique are being used by resurgent Russian communists, ‘we won’t be affected by it’ is the strain I often hear. Not so fast there, buddy. The Philadelphia Inquirer’s August 20th, 1995 Sunday magazine carried a cover story cheerfully titled “Paranoid politics: The blurry line between extremism and madness.” In it, we were introduced to Jerrold Post, a professor of political psychiatry at George Washington University and the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency’s psychological unit.
I’ve read this directly out of his biography. The professor tells us that “paranoia is part of the human condition. It exists in some measure in all of us.” Yes, and it will exist in quite a few more of us when the full implications of political psychiatry sink in. Although the Inquirer doesn’t admit it, the concept of a psychiatrist treating one’s political views raises the spectre of Soviet psychiatrists treating dissidents. In fact, ladies and gentlemen, doesn’t it sound an awful lot like the above quotes from that outdated, psychopolitical manual from the 30s? But oddly enough, the Inquirer article provides the following little curio: Post is “near completion of a book called ‘The Psychopolitics of hatred.’” And I’ll be the first one to let you know, ladies and gentlemen, when that book comes out.
Ex-CIA man Post – and I’ve got to tell you right now, there is no such thing as an ex-CIA man, never was, is not now and never can or will be; there is no “ex”-CIA man – Post is not the only doctor dabbling in political psychiatry. You see, the March 5th, 1996 edition of the Detroit News carried a column by psychiatrist-turned neoconservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, which appeared under the heading, “The paranoid fantasies of Pat Buchanan.” And after a long list of half-truths in which he attempts to show how simply crazy it is to think of the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization as threats to United States sovereignty. He closes the piece with the following line, “When I was a psychiatrist, I had patients with similar fantasies. Some even thought they were president. Not one, however, actually ran for the office.” So Dr. Krauthammer has apparently turned to clinical practice as a psychopolitician and he has diagnosed patient-candidate Buchanan as ‘suffering from paranoia.’ Only now, he is sharing his patients’ diagnosis with his readers across the country.
But his disregard for doctor-patient confidentiality is surpassed by an even more reckless disregard for the facts, ladies and gentlemen. For instance, Krauthammer states, “the notion that the United Nations, a moribund, bankrupt, entirely dependent organization threatens American sovereignty and independence is simply crazy.” And he should know; he is, after all, a psychiatrist. Still, the notion that an organization, which has gone from an international joke to the recognized arbiter of world peace and security in the space of less than 6 years is entitled to, at least, a little respect. And whether the good doctor realizes it or not, the world body has gained more than a little respect from our own military brass. The April 1995 edition of Special Warfare – the official quarterly of the United States army, John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and school in Fort Bragg, North Carolina – exposes the prevailing view of the United Nations within our military establishment. Listen carefully: the cover story is entitled “Ambushing the future” and is written by James J. Schneider, a professor of military theory at the school of Advanced Military Studies, United States Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Schneider predicts that “the future will be dominated by a resurgent force that will change the nature of both the nation state and the national security system.”
Do you have any guess as to what that ‘resurgent force’ might be? Well folks, Schneider continues; he says, “In other words, to learn from the past, we must anticipate the future, and the future will be dominated by a single, overwhelming presence: the United Nations. The resurgence and the growing influence of the United Nations will not only affect our soldiers, but may change the very structure of the nation state.” Krauthammer laughs at the notion of a United Nations threat against United States sovereignty, while this army expert accepts our domination as a done deal. In addition, the United States army even court-martialed a young medic named Michael New for refusing to wear the uniform of Krauthammer’s “moribund, entirely dependent” organization.
You see, the problem with articles like Schneider’s and the case of MichaelNew is that they tend to undermine Dr. Krauthammer’s diagnosis of Pat Buchanan’s paranoia. Could it be that the good doctor is spending more time reading Psychology Today than he is reading Special Warfare and other journals that might better assist him and what his fellow psychiatrists call “reality testing”?
He snidely notes that “the United Nations has become a pliable, occasionally useful creature of American foreign policy; we send it into brier patches we wish to stay out of, Bosnia, for example.” This boob forgets that we weren’t able to stay out of the Bosnian brier patch. Right now, this moment, as I speak, there are over 20,000 United States troops and 17,000 support personnel over there in Bosnia right now working for NATO. Krauthammer, a foreign policy professional and member of the Council on Foreign Relations, then makes a misleading distinction between NATO and the hopelessly ineffective United Nations. Presumably, he is unaware that the former NATO operates within the framework of, and is subservient, to the latter as a regional arm of the United Nations. As I have emphasized to you repeatedly, as I have documented on the air, reading to you from the law, from the treaties, from the United Nations charter, from the NATO charter, from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization charter, the regional security agency known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was formed pursuant to chapter 7, article 52 of the United Nations charter. In addition, article 53 states, “The security councils shall, where appropriate, utilize such regional arrangements or agencies for enforcement action under its authority, but no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the United Nations Security Council.”
That’s why article 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement stipulates that “the United Nations security council will establish IFOR, the NATO force in Bosnia, acting under chapter 7 of the United Nations charter.” So behind Charles Krauthammer’s back, the United Nations Security Council gets to decide if and when it wishes to use regional agencies like NATO and its American troops and if it so chooses, it will use them under its authority.”
You see, you’ve been taken for a ride. When Bill Clinton lied to the American people and said, “We were sending troops under NATO, not under the United Nations and that they would only be there for 1 year,” he blatantly lied. He lied, he knew that he lied, he did it intentionally. They are under United Nations command and the Dayton Agreement specified 5 years, not 1. Goodnight, ladies and gentlemen. Please, pull the wool out from over your eyes; stop being sheeple and become real people. Good night and God bless each and every single one of you.