Log in

Want to Smack Down the Criminal Global Banking Cartel? Here’s How to Use Gold & Silver to Do It

August 19th, 2011 by


Want to participate in smacking down the criminal global banking cartel? Here’s how to do it. Sell the likely fraudulent SLV and GLD ETFs, cease participating in the fraudulent gold/silver futures markets, buy physical gold and silver, and buy gold/silver mining stocks. The good news is (1) This is a simple strategy; and (2) Buy wisely, and you will likely build significant wealth while participating in this strategy.

The fraudulent immoral monetary system that bankers have imposed upon the world that steals money from savers and creditors and transfers wealth to governments, debtors and bankers can only be perpetuated by the price control mechanisms bankers have instituted for gold and silver.  Destroy these price control mechanisms and the fiat currency system will fail. And what happens if the fiat currency system fails? We all have a chance to institute an honest and equitable monetary system that promotes price stability and sustainable growth instead of struggling under a dishonest one that destroys these desirable socio-economic qualities.

The ability of bankers to suppress the price of gold and silver (yes, even the price of $1,800 gold and $40 silver is severely suppressed) is based upon their ability to sell the perception that a much greater supply of silver and gold exists than actually does. Over the past six years, I have publicly blogged dozens of times regarding the mechanisms bankers use to accomplish the suppression of gold and silver prices, including most recently in my article, “Why Gold and Silver Prices Will More than Double Again Even from Current Prices.

A key weapon in the Central Bankers’ war to suppress gold and silver prices over the past decade has been the creation of paper gold and silver ounces that has little to no real physical backing. Current data provided by the CME regarding gold and silver futures contracts that trade on the COMEX reveal that about 100 times more paper gold ounces trade on this exchange every year than all the physical gold that exists in the world and somewhere around 160 times paper silver ounces trade every year than all the physical silver that exists in this world. By expanding the supply of paper ounces of gold and paper ounces of silver at the same time that real physical supply of gold and silver are shrinking, the bankers have been able to suppress the price of gold and silver from reaching its true free market prices for decades. The GLD and SLV very likely participate in thisfraudulent scheme in helping to creating massive illusory supply of gold and silver that simply does not exist.

Thus if gold and silver are freed from the criminal global banking cartel’s scheme to suppress their prices, this will help all people in the world, even the Doubting Thomases, to recognize the fraud of our current fiat currency system. Under our current monetary system, a businessman will never be able to receive the same value for the money he receives for any goods and services rendered unless he immediately spends all of said money. The fact is, it is impossible for a businessman that holds fiat currency for services rendered for a duration of time any longer than a few months to then receive the equivalent value of that fiat currency when it was first received. This fact about our current monetary system is a massive disincentive for any businessman anywhere in the world to work harder as the reward of additional nominal amounts of money can never be equivalent to the effort put forth. Thus, our “modern” fiat currency system literally destroys any chance to achieve sustainable economic efficiency. If a businessman works harder to earn 17.65% more money than last year, but that 17.65% boost in the nominal amount of money only enables him to purchase the exact same goods and services as last year due to an annual 15% inflation rate ($117,647 * 85% = $100,000), at some point and time, the destruction of efficiency that our fiat currency system imposes upon all businesses will inevitably lead to business contraction instead of sustainable business growth.

So how do we fight back against this unjust and immoral fiat monetary system created by Central Bankers? Below are three simple steps we all can take.

(1) Stop enabling banker fraud and realign your interests with the interests of humanity. Yes that means if you are long the GLD and SLV, or rollover long gold and silver futures contracts without ever taking physical delivery, you are silently facilitating the banker war against humanity as you aid and abet them in creating an illusory supply of gold and silver that simply does not exist.

(2) Sell GLD and SLV shares and re-invest the proceeds of these sales into physical gold and physical silver and/or gold and silver mining shares.*

(3) Settle all long gold/silver futures contracts with physical delivery only and not in cash.

*Gold stocks are a great value right now as you can see in the below chart. So are silver stocks as well. (Even though my Crisis Investment Opportunities newsletter has returned roughly a cumulative +220% over the past four years, since I believe gold/silver mining stocks to be the most highly undervalued asset class in the entire stock market now, I honestly believe that we will shatter those returns in the next four years.) However, ever since introducing the GLD and SLV, bankers have successfully been able to steer money away from fundamentally solid gold and silver stocks into these likely fraudulent ETFs.

If just some of the $66 billion currently invested in the GLD and just some of the $12.6 billion currently invested in the SLV was liquidated and re-invested back into gold and silver stocks, bankers would lose much of their ability to manipulate gold/silver stocks. From now until the end of the year, I believe that gold/silver stocks are likely to significantly outperform the GLD and SLV. Thus, redirecting money out of the GLD and SLV and into stalwart gold and silver stocks is not only a moral decision, but likely a very smart investment decision as well.

Finally, if you are not long GLD, SLV, or gold/silver futures contracts, and are sick of bankers silently destroying your wealth with their insane monetary policies, do not fret. You can still help to smack down the criminal global banking cartel if you have any savings in dollars, Euros, Yen, Pounds, etc.  Convert a small part of your savings every single week into physical silver and/or physical gold if you can afford it. The physical markets for gold and silver are very tight right now even though the bankers are trying to sell everyone the notion that physical supplies are abundant through their massive creation of fake amounts of paper gold and paper silver ounces. If enough people buy physical gold and physical silver, even very small amounts, eventually the spread between the prices of gold and silver in the real physical market and the spot prices set in the futures markets will become so huge that the price of gold and silver set in the futures markets will be rendered irrelevant.

So if you have ever wondered how we can fight back against the financial insanity that Central Bankers are attempting to impose upon us, implement the three steps above, and we’ll be off to a solid start.


About the author: In 2005, JS Kim walked away from the immorality of Wall Street to form his own fiercely independent investment research & consulting firm, SmartKnowledgeU. Freed from the deceit and massive restrictions of the commercial investment industry, JS has been guiding clients towards significant profitability ever since. Visit us at http://www.smartknowledgeu.com to learn more about how we can help you build wealth through troubling financial times and click here toFollow us on Twitter.

Republishing Rights: This article may be reprinted as long as the author acknowledgment and all text and links remain intact above.

More on this topic (What's this?)

Horrible Arguments Against Gold (Learn Mining News, 8/18/11)

Is Silver Ready to Ratchet Up Gains? (Investment Guide|Precious Metal …, 8/15/11)

The Value of Junk Silver Coins (Wealth Daily, 7/29/11)

The Gold Bugs Are Wrong (Learn Mining News, 8/1/11)

Read more on GoldSilverBanking at Wikinvest

Entry Filed under: Gold Investments,Silver investments


The Bilderberg Plan for 2009 Remaking the Global Political Economy

August 18th, 2011 by


Andrew G. Marshall

Global Research
May 27, 2009




From May 14-17, [2009], the global elite met in secret in Greece for the yearly Bilderberg conference, amid scattered and limited global media attention. Roughly 130 of the world’s most powerful individuals came together to discuss the pressing issues of today, and to chart a course for the next year. The main topic of discussion at this years meeting was the global financial crisis, which is no surprise, considering the list of conference attendees includes many of the primary architects of the crisis, as well as those poised to “solve” it.

The Agenda: The Restructuring of the Global Political Economy

Before the meeting began, Bilderberg investigative journalist Daniel Estulin reported on the main item of the agenda, which was leaked to him by his sources inside. Though such reports cannot be verified, his sources, along with those of veteran Bilderberg tracker, Jim Tucker, have proven to be shockingly accurate in the past. Apparently, the main topic of discussion at this year’s meeting was to address the economic crisis, in terms of undertaking, “Either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty … or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”

Other items on the agenda included a plan to “continue to deceive millions of savers and investors who believe the hype about the supposed up-turn in the economy. They are about to be set up for massive losses and searing financial pain in the months ahead,” and “There will be a final push for the enactment of Lisbon Treaty, pending on Irish voting YES on the treaty in Sept or October,”[1] which would give the European Union massive powers over its member nations, essentially making it a supranational regional government, with each country relegated to more of a provincial status. 

Shortly after the meetings began, Bilderberg tracker Jim Tucker reported that his inside sources revealed that the group has on its agenda, “the plan for a global department of health, a global treasury and a shortened depression rather than a longer economic downturn.” Tucker reported that Swedish Foreign Minister and former Prime Minister, Carl Bildt, “Made a speech advocating turning the World Health Organization into a world department of health, advocating turning the IMF into a world department of treasury, both of course under the auspices of the United Nations.” Further, Tucker reported that, “Treasury Secretary Geithner and Carl Bildt touted a shorter recession not a 10-year recession … partly because a 10 year recession would damage Bilderberg industrialists themselves, as much as they want to have a global department of labor and a global department of treasury, they still like making money and such a long recession would cost them big bucks industrially because nobody is buying their toys…..the tilt is towards keeping it short.”[2]

After the meetings finished, Daniel Estulin reported that, “One of Bilderberg’s primary concerns according to Estulin is the danger that their zeal to reshape the world by engineering chaos in order to implement their long term agenda could cause the situation to spiral out of control and eventually lead to a scenario where Bilderberg and the global elite in general are overwhelmed by events and end up losing their control over the planet.”[3]

On May 21, the Macedonian International News Agency reported that, “A new Kremlin report on the shadowy Bilderberg Group, who this past week held their annual meeting in Greece, states that the West’s financial, political and corporate elite emerged from their conclave after coming to an agreement that in order to continue their drive towards a New World Order dominated by the Western Powers, the US Dollar has to be ‘totally’ destroyed.” Further, the same Kremlin report apparently stated that, “most of the West’s wealthiest elite convened at an unprecedented secret meeting in New York called for and led by” David Rockefeller, “to plot the demise of the US Dollar.”[4]

The Secret Meeting of Billionaires

The meeting being referred to was a secret meeting where, “A dozen of the richest people in the world met for an unprecedented private gathering at the invitation of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to talk about giving away money,” held at Rockefeller University, and included notable philanthropists such as Gates, Buffett, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, Eli Broad, Oprah Winfrey, David Rockefeller Sr. and Ted Turner. One attendee stated that, “It wasn’t secret,” but that, “It was meant to be a gathering among friends and colleagues. It was something folks have been discussing for a long time. Bill and Warren hoped to do this occasionally. They sent out an invite and people came.” Chronicle of Philanthropy editor Stacy Palmer said, “Given how serious these economic times are, I don’t think it’s surprising these philanthropists came together,” and that, “They don’t typically get together and ask each other for advice.” The three hosts of the meeting were Buffet, Gates and David Rockefeller.[5] [See: Appendix 2: Bilderberg Connections to the Billionaire’s Meeting].

Bilderberg founding member David Rockefeller, Honourary Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, Honourary Chairman and Founder of the Trilateral Commission, Chairman of the Council of the Americas and the Americas Society, former Chairman and CEO of Chase Manhattan.

At the meeting, “participants steadfastly refused to reveal the content of the discussion. Some cited an agreement to keep the meeting confidential. Spokesmen for Mr. Buffett, Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Gates, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Soros and Ms. Winfrey and others dutifully declined comment, though some confirmed attendance.”[6] Reports indicate that, “They discussed how to address the global slump and expand their charitable activities in the downturn.”[7]

The UK newspaper The Times reported that these “leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population,” and that they “discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.” Interestingly, “The informal afternoon session was so discreet that some of the billionaires’ aides were told they were at ‘security briefings’.” Further, “The billionaires were each given 15 minutes to present their favourite cause. Over dinner they discussed how they might settle on an ‘umbrella cause’ that could harness their interests,” and what was decided upon was that, “they agreed that overpopulation was a priority.” Ultimately, “a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat,” and that, “They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming.” One guest at the meeting said that, “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government.”[8]

The Leaked Report

Bilderberg investigative reporter Daniel Estulin reportedly received from his inside sources a 73-page Bilderberg Group meeting wrap-up for participants, which revealed that there were some serious disagreements among the participants. “The hardliners are for dramatic decline and a severe, short-term depression, but there are those who think that things have gone too far and that the fallout from the global economic cataclysm cannot be accurately calculated if Henry Kissinger’s model is chosen. Among them is Richard Holbrooke. What is unknown at this point: if Holbrooke’s point of view is, in fact, Obama’s.” The consensus view was that the recession would get worse, and that recovery would be “relatively slow and protracted,” and to look for these terms in the press over the next weeks and months.

Estulin reported, “that some leading European bankers faced with the specter of their own financial mortality are extremely concerned, calling this high wire act "unsustainable," and saying that US budget and trade deficits could result in the demise of the dollar.” One Bilderberger said that, “the banks themselves don’t know the answer to when (the bottom will be hit).” Everyone appeared to agree, “that the level of capital needed for the American banks may be considerably higher than the US government suggested through their recent stress tests.” Further, “someone from the IMF pointed out that its own study on historical recessions suggests that the US is only a third of the way through this current one; therefore economies expecting to recover with resurgence in demand from the US will have a long wait.” One attendee stated that, “Equity losses in 2008 were worse than those of 1929,” and that, “The next phase of the economic decline will also be worse than the ’30s, mostly because the US economy carries about $20 trillion of excess debt. Until that debt is eliminated, the idea of a healthy boom is a mirage.”[9]

According to Jim Tucker, Bilderberg is working on setting up a summit in Israel from June 8-11, where “the world’s leading regulatory experts” can “address the current economic situation in one forum.” In regards to the proposals put forward by Carl Bildt to create a world treasury department and world department of health under the United Nations, the IMF is said to become the World Treasury, while the World Health Organization is to become the world department of health. Bildt also reaffirmed using “climate change” as a key challenge to pursue Bilderberg goals, referring to the economic crisis as a “once-in-a-generation crisis while global warming is a once-in-a-millennium challenge.” Bildt also advocated expanding NAFTA through the Western hemisphere to create an American Union, using the EU as a “model of integration.”

The IMF reportedly sent a report to Bilderberg advocating its rise to becoming the World Treasury Department, and “U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner enthusiastically endorsed the plan for a World Treasury Department, although he received no assurance that he would become its leader.” Geithner further said, “Our hope is that we can work with Europe on a global framework, a global infrastructure which has appropriate global oversight.”[10]

Bilderberg’s Plan in Action?

Reorganizing the Federal Reserve

Following the Bilderberg meeting, there were several interesting announcements made by key participants, specifically in regards to reorganizing the Federal Reserve. On May 21, it was reported that US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner “is believed to be leaning heavily towards giving the Federal Reserve a central role in future regulation,” and “it is understood that the Fed would take on some of the work currently undertaken by the US Securities and Exchange Commission.”[11]

On Wednesday, May 20, Geithner spoke before the Senate Banking Committee, at which he stated that, “there are important indications that our financial system is starting to heal.” In regards to regulating the financial system, Geithner stated that, “we must ensure that international rules for financial regulation are consistent with the high standards we will be implementing in the United States.”[12]

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Bloomberg reported that, “The Obama administration may call for stripping the Securities and Exchange Commission of some of its powers under a regulatory reorganization,” and that, “The proposal, still being drafted, is likely to give the Federal Reserve more authority to supervise financial firms deemed too big to fail. The Fed may inherit some SEC functions, with others going to other agencies.” Interestingly, “SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro’s agency has been mostly absent from negotiations within the administration on the regulatory overhaul, and she has expressed frustration about not being consulted.”

It was reported that “Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was set to discuss proposals to change financial regulations last night at a dinner with National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers [who was also present at Bilderberg], former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker [also at Bilderberg], ex-SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt and Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard University law professor who heads the congressional watchdog group for the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program.”[13] The Federal Reserve is a privately owned central bank, owned by its shareholders, consisting of the major banks the make up each regional Fed bank (the largest of which is JP Morgan Chase and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York). This plan would essentially give a privately owned bank, which has governmental authority, the ability to regulate the banks that own it. It’s the equivalent of getting a Colonel to guard a General to whom he is directly answerable. Talk about the fox guarding the hen house. It is literally granting ownership over the financial regulator to the banks being regulated.

As Market Watch, an online publication of the Wall Street Journal, reported, “The Federal Reserve, created nearly 100 years ago in the aftermath of a financial panic, could be transformed into a different agency as the Obama administration reinvents the way government interacts with the financial system.” Referring to Geithner’s Senate appearance, it was reported that, “Geithner was also grilled on the cozy relationships that exist between the big banks and the regional Federal Reserve banks. Before Geithner joined the administration, he was president of the New York Fed, which is a strange public-private hybrid institution that is actually owned and run by the banks.” In response, “Geithner insisted that the private banks have no say over the policies of the New York Fed, but he acknowledged that the banks do have a say in hiring the president, who does make policy. The chairman of the New York Fed, Stephen Friedman, was forced to resign earlier this month because of perceived conflicts of interest due to his large holdings in Goldman Sachs.”[14]

The IMF as a Global Treasury

The Bilderberg agenda of creating a global treasury has already been started prior to the Bilderberg meeting, with decisions made during the G20 financial summit in April. Although the G20 seemed to frame it more in context of being formed into a global central bank, although it is likely the IMF could fill both roles. 

Following the G20 meeting at the beginning of April, 2009, it was reported that, “The world is a step closer to a global currency, backed by a global central bank, running monetary policy for all humanity,” as the Communiqué released by the G20 leaders stated that, “We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250bn (£170bn) into the world economy and increase global liquidity,” and that, “SDRs are Special Drawing Rights, a synthetic paper currency issued by the International Monetary Fund that has lain dormant for half a century.” Essentially, “they are putting a de facto world currency into play. It is outside the control of any sovereign body.”[15] [See Appendix 2: Creating a Central Bank of the World]

Following the Bilderberg meeting, “President Obama has asked Congress to authorize $100 billion in loans to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to help create a $500 billion global bailout fund,” which would give the IMF the essential prerogative of a global treasury, providing bailouts for countries in need around the world. Further, “the bill would allow the IMF to borrow up to $100 billion from the U.S. and increase the U.S. fiscal contribution to the IMF by $8 billion.” Elaborating on the program, it was reported that, “World leaders began on the global bailout initiative, called the New Arrangement for Borrowing (NAB), at the G-20 summit in early April. The president agreed at that time to make the additional funds available.” Obama wrote that, “Treasury Secretary Geithner concluded that the size of the NAB is woefully inadequate to deal with the type of severe economic and financial crisis we are experiencing, and I agree with him.”[16]

With the G20 decision to increase the usage of IMF Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), forming a de facto world currency, it was recently reported that, “Sub-Saharan Africa will receive around $10 billion from the IMF in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) to help its economies weather the global financial crisis,” and that, “As part of a $1.1 trillion deal to combat the world economic downturn agreed at April’s G20 summit, the IMF will issue $250 billion worth of SDRs, which can be used to boost foreign currency reserves.”[17]

Recent reports have also indicated that the IMF’s role in issuing SDRs goes hand in hand with the Bilderberg discussion on the potential collapse of the US dollar, and, “Transforming the dollar standard into an SDR-based system would be a major break with a policy that has lasted more than 60 years.” It was reported that, “There are two ways in which the dollar’s role in the international monetary system can be reduced. One possibility is a gradual, market-determined erosion of the dollar as a reserve currency in favor of the euro. But, while the euro’s international role – especially its use in financial markets – has increased since its inception, it is hard to envisage it overtaking the dollar as the dominant reserve currency in the foreseeable future.” However, “With the dollar’s hegemony unlikely to be seriously undermined by market forces, at least in the short and medium-term, the only way to bring about a major reduction in its role as a reserve currency is by international agreement.” This is where the SDRs come into play, as “One way to make the SDR the major reserve currency relatively soon would be to create and allocate a massive amount of new SDRs to the IMF’s members.”[18] This is, interestingly, exactly what is happening with Africa and the IMF now.

Former IMF Managing Director Jacques de Larosière recently stated that the current financial crisis, “given its scope, presents a unique opening to improve institutions, and there is already a danger that the chance might be missed if the different actors cannot agree to changes by the time economic growth resumes.” He is now an adviser with BNP Paribas, a corporation highly represented at Bilderberg meetings, and he was head of the Treasury of France when Valéry Giscard d’Estaing was President of France, who is a regular of the Bilderberg Group.[19]

The Guardian Covers Bilderberg

The British paper, the Guardian, was the only major mainstream news publication to provide ongoing coverage of the Bilderberg meeting over the weekend. His first columns were satirical and slightly mocking, referring to it as, “A long weekend at a luxury hotel, where the world’s elite get to shake hands, clink glasses, fine-tune their global agenda and squabble over who gets the best sun loungers. I’m guessing that Henry Kissinger brings his own, has it helicoptered in and guarded 24/7 by a CIA special ops team.”[20] However, as the weekend dragged on, his reporting took a change of tone. He reported on the Saturday that, “I know that I’m being followed. I know because I’ve just been chatting to the plainclothes policemen I caught following me,” and he was arrested twice in the first day of the meetings for attempting to take photographs as the limousines entered the hotel.[21]

He later reported that he wasn’t sure what they were discussing inside the hotel, but that he has “a sense of something rotten in the state of Greece,” and he further stated, “Three days and I’ve been turned into a suspect, a troublemaker, unwanted, ill at ease, tired and a bit afraid.” He then went on to write that, “Bilderberg is all about control. It’s about "what shall we do next?" We run lots of stuff already, how about we run some more? How about we make it easier to run stuff? More efficient. Efficiency is good. It would be so much easier with a single bank, a single currency, a single market, a single government. How about a single army? That would be pretty cool. We wouldn’t have any wars then. This prawn cocktail is GOOD. How about a single way of thinking? How about a controlled internet?,” and then, “How about not.”

He makes a very astute point, countering the often postulated argument that Bilderberg is simply a forum where people can speak freely, writing: “I am so unbelievably backteeth sick of power being flexed by the few. I’ve had it flexed in my face for three days, and it’s up my nose like a wasp. I don’t care whether the Bilderberg Group is planning to save the world or shove it in a blender and drink the juice, I don’t think politics should be done like this,” and the author, Charlie Skelton, eloquently stated, “If they were trying to cure cancer they could do it with the lights on.” He further explained that, “Bilderberg is about positions of control. I get within half a mile of it, and suddenly I’m one of the controlled. I’m followed, watched, logged, detained, detained again. I’d been put in that position by the "power" that was up the road.”[22]

On Sunday, May 17, Skelton reported that when he asked the police chief why he was being followed, the chief responded asking, “Why you here?” to which Skelton said he was there to cover the Bilderberg conference, after which the chief stated, “Well, that is the reason! That is why! We are finished!”[23] Do reporters get followed around and stalked by police officers when they cover the World Economic Forum? No. So why does it happen with Bilderberg if all it is, is a conference to discuss ideas freely?

On the Monday following the conference, Skelton wrote that, “It isn’t just me who’s been hauled into police custody for daring to hang around half a mile from the hotel gates. The few journalists who’ve made the trip to Vouliagmeni this year have all been harassed and harried and felt the business end of a Greek walkie-talkie. Many have been arrested. Bernie, from the American Free Press, and Gerhard the documentarian (sounds like a Dungeons and Dragons character) chartered a boat from a nearby marina to try to get photos from the sea. They were stopped three miles from the resort. By the Greek navy.” As Skelton said himself, “My dispatches on the 2009 conference, if they mean anything at all, represent nothing more acutely than the absence of thorough mainstream reporting.”[24]

Skelton’s final report on Bilderberg from May 19, showed how far he had gone in his several days of reporting on the meeting. From writing jokingly about the meeting, to discovering that he was followed by the Greek State Security force. Skelton mused, “So who is the paranoid one? Me, hiding in stairwells, watching the pavement behind me in shop windows, staying in the open for safety? Or Bilderberg, with its two F-16s, circling helicopters, machine guns, navy commandos and policy of repeatedly detaining and harassing a handful of journalists? Who’s the nutter? Me or Baron Mandelson? Me or Paul Volker, the head of Obama’s economic advisory board? Me or the president of Coca-Cola?”

Skelton stated that, “Publicity is pure salt to the giant slug of Bilderberg. So I suggest next year we turn up with a few more tubs. If the mainstream press refuses to give proper coverage to this massive annual event, then interested citizens will have to: a people’s media.”

Amazingly, Skelton made the pronouncement that what he learned after the Bilderberg conference, was that, “we must fight, fight, fight, now – right now, this second, with every cubic inch of our souls – to stop identity cards,” as, “It’s all about the power to ask, the obligation to show, the justification of one’s existence, the power of the asker over the subservience of the asked.” He stated that he “learned this from the random searches, detentions, angry security goon proddings and thumped police desks without number that I’ve had to suffer on account of Bilderberg: I have spent the week living in a nightmare possible future and many different terrible pasts. I have had the very tiniest glimpse into a world of spot checks and unchecked security powers. And it has left me shaken. It has left me, literally, bruised.” Pointedly, he explains that, “The identity card turns you from a free citizen into a suspect.”[25]

Who was there?


Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, the largest shareholder in Royal Dutch Shell

Among the members of the Bilderberg Group are various European monarchs. At this years meeting, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands was present, who happens to be the largest single shareholder in Royal Dutch Shell, one of the world’s largest corporations. She was joined by one of her three sons, Prince Constantijn, who also attended the meeting. Prince Constantijn has worked with the Dutch European Commissioner for the EU, as well as having been a strategic policy consultant with Booz Allen & Hamilton in London, a major strategy and technology consulting firm with expertise in Economic and Business Analysis, Intelligence and Operations Analysis and Information Technology, among many others. Prince Constantijn has also been a policy researcher for RAND Corporation in Europe. RAND was initially founded as a global policy think tank that was formed to offer research and analysis to the US Armed Forces, however, it now works with governments, foundations, international organizations and commercial organizations.[26] Also present among European Royalty was Prince Philippe of Belgium, and Queen Sofia of Spain.

Private Bankers

As usual, the list of attendees was also replete with names representing the largest banks in the world. Among them, David Rockefeller, former CEO and Chairman of Chase Manhattan, now JP Morgan Chase, of which he was, until recently, Chairman of the International Advisory Board; and still sits as Honourary Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, Chairman of the Board of the Americas Society and Council of the Americas, Honourary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, which he founded alongside Zbigniew Brzezinski; also a founding member of the Bilderberg Group, prominent philanthropist and is the current patriarch of one of the world’s richest and most powerful banking dynasties.

Also present was Josef Ackermann, a Swiss banker who is CEO of Deutsche Bank, also a non-executive director of Royal Dutch Shell; Deputy Chairman of Siemens AG, Europe’s largest engineering corporation; he is also a member of the International Advisory Council of Zurich Financial Services Group; Chairman of the Board of the Institute International of Finance, the world’s only global association of financial institutions; and Vice Chairman of the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum.[27]

Roger Altman was also present at the Bilderberg meeting, an investment banker, private equity investor and former Deputy Treasury Secretary in the Clinton Administration. Other bankers at this years meeting include Ana Patricia Botin, Chairman of the Spanish bank, Banco Español de Crédito, formerly having worked with JP Morgan; Frederic Oudea, CEO and newly appointed Chairman of the Board of French bank Societe Generale; Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, an Italian banker and economist, formerly Italy’s Minister of Economy and Finance; Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman of Investor AB; Marcus Wallenberg, CEO of Investor AB; and George David, CEO of United Technologies Corporation, who also sits on the board of Citigroup, member of the Business Council, the Business Roundtable, and is Vice Chairman of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. [For more on the Peterson Institute, see: Appendix 1]

[efoods]Canadian bankers include W. Edmund Clark, President and CEO of TD Bank Financial Group, also a member of the board of directors of the C.D. Howe Institute, a prominent Canadian think tank; Frank McKenna, Deputy Chairman of TD Bank Financial Group, former Canadian Ambassador to the United States, former Premier of New Brunswick; and Indira Samarasekera, President of the University of Alberta, who is also on the board of Scotiabank, one of Canada’s largest banks.

Central Bankers

Of course, among the notable members of the Bilderberg Group, are the world’s major central bankers. Among this years members are the Governor of the National Bank of Greece, Governor of the Bank of Italy, President of the European Investment Bank, James Wolfensohn, former President of the World Bank, and Nout Wellink, on the board of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).[28] Jean-Claude Trichet, the President of the European Central Bank was also present.[29] There is no indication that the Governor of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke was present, which would be an odd turn of events, considering that the Federal Reserve Governor is always present at Bilderberg meetings, alongside the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, William C. Dudley. I have contacted the New York Fed inquiring if Dudley visited Greece or went to any meetings in Greece between May 14-17, or if another senior representative from the New York Fed went in his stead. I have yet to get a response.    

The Obama Administration at Bilderberg

National Security Adviser General James Jones

The Obama administration was heavily represented at this years Bilderberg meeting. Among the attendees were Keith B. Alexander, a Lieutenant General of U.S. Army and Director of the National Security Agency, the massive spying agency of the United States; Timothy Geithner, US Treasury Secretary and former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan; General James Jones, United States National Security Advisor; Henry Kissinger, Obama’s special envoy to Russia, longtime Bilderberg member and former Secretary of State and National Security Advisor; Dennis Ross, special advisor for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; David Patraeus, Commander of CENTCOM, (U.S. Central Command, in the Middle East), Lawrence Summers, Director of the White House’s National Economic Council, former Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration, former President of Harvard University, former Chief Economist of the World Bank; Paul Volcker, former Governor of the Federal Reserve System and Chair of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board; Robert Zoellick, former Chairman of Goldman Sachs and current President of the World Bank;[30] and Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg.[31]

Other Notable Names

Among many others present at the meeting are Viscount Étienne Davignon, former Vice President of the European Commission, and Honourary Chairman of the Bilderberg Group; Francisco Pinto Balsemão, former Prime Minister of Portugal; Franco Bernabè, CEO of Telecom Italia and Vice Chairman of Rothschild Europe; Carl Bildt, former Prime Minister of Sweden; Kenneth Clarke, Shadow Business Secretary in the UK; Richard Dearlove, former head of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Services (MI6); Donald Graham, CEO of the Washington Post Company; Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, Secretary-General of NATO; John Kerr, member of the British House of Lords and Deputy Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell; Jessica Matthews, President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Richard Perle of the American Enterprise Institute; Romano Prodi, former Italian Prime Minister; J. Robert S. Prichard, CEO of Torstar Corporation and President Emeritus of the University of Toronto; Peter Sutherland, former Director General of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), first Director General of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and is currently Chairman of British Petroleum (BP) and Goldman Sachs International as well as being a board member of the Royal Bank of Scotland, Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, Vice Chairman of the European Roundtable of Industrialists, and longtime Bilderberg member; Peter Thiel, on the board of directors of Facebook; Jeroen van der Veer, CEO of Royal Dutch Shell; Martin Wolf, Associate Editor and Chief Economics Commentator of the Financial Times newspaper; and Fareed Zakaria, US journalist and board member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[32] There were also some reports that this years meeting would include Google CEO Eric Schmidt, as well as Wall Street Journal Editor Paul Gigot,[33] both of whom attended last years meeting.[34]


Clearly, it was the prerogative of this year’s Bilderberg meeting to exploit the global financial crisis as much as possible to reach goals they have been striving toward for many years. These include the creation of a Global Treasury Department, likely in conjunction with or embodied in the same institution as a Global Central Bank, both of which seem to be in the process of being incorporated into the IMF.

Naturally, Bilderberg meetings serve the interests of the people and organizations that are represented there. Due to the large amount of representatives from the Obama administration that were present, US policies revolving around the financial crisis are likely to have emerged from and serve the interests of the Bilderberg Group. Given the heavy representation of Obama’s foreign policy establishment at the Bilderberg meeting, it seemed surprising to not have received any more information regarding US foreign policy from this year’s meeting, perhaps having to do with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

However, the US recently decided to fire the general who oversaw the Afghan war, being replaced with “Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, a former Green Beret who recently commanded the military’s secretive special operations forces in Iraq.”[35] From 2003 to 2008, McChrystal “led the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), which oversees the military’s most sensitive forces, including the Army’s Delta Force,” and who Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh singled out as the head of VP Cheney’s “executive assassination wing.”[36]

So, given these recent changes, as well as the high degree of representation Obama’s foreign policy establishment held at Bildebrerg this year, there were likely to have been some decisions or at least discussion of the escalation of the Afghan war and expansion into Pakistan. However, it is not surprising that the main item on the agenda was the global financial crisis. Without a doubt, the next year will be an interesting one, and the elite are surely hoping to make it a productive one.

APPENDIX 1: Bilderberg Connections to the Billionaire’s Meeting

Peter G. Peterson, one of the guests in attendance at the secret billionaires meeting, was the former United States Secretary of Commerce in the Nixon administration, Chairman and CEO of Lehman Brothers, Kuhn, Loeb Inc., from 1977 to 1984, he co-founded the prominent private equity and investment management firm, the Blackstone Group, of which he is currently Senior Chairman, and in 1985, he became Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, taking over when David Rockefeller stepped down from that position. He founded the Peterson Institute for International Economics and was Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank from 2000-2004. The Peterson Institute for International Economics is a major world economic think tank, which seeks to “inform and shape public debate,” from which, “Institute studies have helped provide the intellectual foundation for many of the major international financial initiatives of the past two decades: reform of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), adoption of international banking standards, exchange rate systems in the G-7 and emerging-market economies, policies toward the dollar, the euro, and other important currencies, and responses to debt and currency crises (including the current crisis of 2008–09).” It has also “made important contributions to key trade policy decisions” such as the development of the World Trade Organization, NAFTA, APEC, and East Asian regionalism.[37]

It has a prominent list of names on its board of directors. Peter G. Peterson is Chairman of the board; George David, Chairman of United Technologies is Vice Chairman, as well as being a board member of Citigroup, and was a guest at this year’s Bilderberg meeting; Chen Yuan, Governor of the China Development Bank and former Deputy Governor of the People’s Bank of China (China’s central bank); Jessica Einhorn, Dean of Washington’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of the Johns Hopkins University, former Visiting Fellow of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), former Managing Director of the World Bank, and currently on the board of Time Warner and the Council on Foreign Relations; Stanley Fischer, Governor of the Central Bank of Israel, former Vice President at the World Bank, former Managing Director at the IMF, former Vice Chairman of Citigroup, and has also been a regular participant in Bilderberg meetings; Carla A. Hills, former US Trade Representative, and was the prime negotiator of NAFTA, she sits on the International Advisory Boards of American International Group, the Coca-Cola Company, Gilead Sciences, J.P. Morgan Chase,  member of the Executive Committee of the Trilateral Commission, Co-Chair of the Council on Foreign Relations, and played a key part in the CFR document, “Building a North American Community,” which seeks to remodel North America following along the lines of the European Union, and she has also been a prominent Bilderberg member; David Rockefeller also sits on the Peterson Institute’s board, as well as Lynn Forester de Rothschild; Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank, who is at every Bilderberg meeting; Paul A. Volcker, former Governor of the Federal Reserve System, regular participant of Bilderberg meetings, and current Chair of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

Honourary Directors of the Peterson Institute include Bilderbergers Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, a prime architect of the current crisis; Frank E. Loy, former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs, and is on the boards of Environmental Defense, the Pew Center for Global Climate Change, Resources for the Future, and Population Services International; George P. Shultz, former US Secretary of State in the Reagan administration, President and Director of Bechtel Group and former Secretary of the Treasury.[38]

APPENDIX 2: Creating a Central Bank of the World

Jeffrey Garten, Undersecretary of Commerce for International Trade in the Clinton administration, former Dean of the Yale School of Management, previously served on the White House Council on International Economic Policy under the Nixon administration and on the policy planning staffs of Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance of the Ford and Carter administrations. He also was a managing director of Lehman Brothers and the Blackstone Group, is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. As early as 1998, Garten wrote an article for the New York Times in which he advocated the creation of a global central bank.[39]

Amid the current financial crisis, Garten wrote an article for the Financial Times in which he advocated for “the establishment of a Global Monetary Authority to oversee markets that have become borderless,” acting as a global central bank.[40] In late October, Garten wrote an article for Newsweek in which he said that world “leaders should begin laying the groundwork for establishing a global central bank.”[41]

Three days after the publication of Garten’s Newsweek article, it was reported that, “The International Monetary Fund may soon lack the money to bail out an ever growing list of countries crumbling across Eastern Europe, Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia, raising concerns that it will have to tap taxpayers in Western countries for a capital infusion or resort to the nuclear option of printing its own money.” Further, “The nuclear option is to print money by issuing Special Drawing Rights, in effect acting as if it were the world’s central bank.”[42]

[For a detailed look at the moves to create a global central bank, regional currencies, a global reserve currency and a world governing body, see: Andrew G. Marshall, The Financial New World Order: Towards a Global Currency and World Government: Global Research, April 6, 2009]


Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/the-bilderberg-plan-for-2009-remaking-the-global-political-economy/


August 18th, 2011 by

NOBODY mentions the FACT the Federal Reserve was only charted for 100 years.

The year 2000 was an addional LEAP YEAR.

The Federal Reserve has been a corporation for 99 years and 8 months. Now this does NOT include "Leap years"! I've not done the math! But I can say this its BEFORE the end of 2012.

None the less people listen to me. All DEBTS owed are fake papers made up by a soon defunct corporation (the Federal Reserve) – and do you think for one second that Congress could successfully renew it’s charter? It requires 2/3's of the Congress to do that – NO DAMNED WAY! OLDDOG SAY’S, BULLSHIT TO THAT, CONGRESS WORKS FOR THE BANKSTERS.

Who is the BATF? The IRS? The FBI? The CIA? The FDA? The xxx? – you name it? They are ALL subordinate collectors and agents for the FEDERAL RESERVE!

My point is this: Why do you think they all trumpeted the "end of the world in 2012" so loudly? And who do they trumpet this crap to? THE MASSES – THE SHEEPLE!

Its the end of THEIR WORLD! AS THEY KNOW IT! And they are attempting to SCARE US ALL TO SLEEP WITH THE SHEEP!

Expose this simple fact. Let everyone know that their "debt" is ZERO in about 1 year. They owe NOTHING! There will be NO FEDERAL RESERVE CORPORTATION – Its Charter will be EXPIRED!



 The authors name was absent.


 As a Texan, I would rather We Secede Than Be Ruled by a Super Congress and a Dictator.

Hearing about the new Super Congress being imposed on us sounds like the Supreme Soviet under the communist system in Russia. We do not need a super congress. This new creation outside the Constitution does not exist and violates the separation of powers since the President sits on a new committee that will circumvent our republican form of government. So what solution do the people of Texas have? A Very simple solution sets us free from the chains of Washington DC.

That is secession from the union. Texas is the only state that exists only by treaty compared to other states. We are the 10th largest economy in the world and have every characteristic of being our own republic that can sustain itself. Since the war of northern aggression, Abe Lincoln was President waging a confrontation against the south. Texas has been subjugated to every tyrannical law from Washington DC after reconstruction that has eroded the rights of Texans to self-government.

We are not using this as an excuse to secede. It has been a long time coming since 1913 when the Federal Reserve act, the 16th and 17th amendments illegally were ratified. No laws ever since that year have been good for Texas. Texas has been forced under the heavy hand of an out of control Federal government. The 16th amendment has been robbing Texas through taxes. The 17th Amendment has taken away from the state legislators any form of representation in the US government by appointing our U. S. Senators.

With the Federal Reserve Act, we have become slaves to a debt-based currency that will subject our children and grandchildren to a lifetime of involuntary servitude.

Now with the new debt deal that will create massive hyperinflation as long we use this Federal Reserve Note as our means of exchange for goods and services. The U. S. Government will go into further debt 2.4 trillion dollars, and that brings our total national debt to over 16 trillion; that exceeds the GDP. What is worse is the creation of a super congress that I see as a Star Chamber committee that will over ride the will of the people. This is more of a threat to the sovereignty of Texas than any other law on the books. We can see worse laws coming out of this committee. We can see tax increases and paying carbon taxes. Our right to keep and bear arms and the abolition of private property ownership is in peril too by this unaccountable committee. Do not forget small family farms and ranches are under attack by the USDA and the FDA. The FBI and the BATF harass gun Shops. We cannot build new coal powered plants, drill for our own oil and build new refineries because the EPA stands in the way. Small Businesses are bearing the burden with draconian regulations by every alphabet soup agency out of Washington DC. Why do we Texans put up with this?

When I seen the US Justice Department twist the arms of state senators threatening a siege over Texas air space because we would have forbidden the TSA from groping people at the airports. That means it is time to leave the union. It is time we have a fresh start free from the heavy hand of Washington DC. The day we declare our independence is a new beginning. It is the day we are free from Federal tyranny and our right to self govern is restored. Texas will lead the world once we are free. When the TSA is gone from Texas, I can see Texas become a major transcontinental travel hub between the Atlantic and the Pacific continents when the federal goons committing legalized sexual assault are no more. Many international travelers will love it. We can have an interest free currency backed by a tangible commodity with no usury. We can start over with a clean slate. Secession will be a day of jubilee

State rights and state sovereignty will not work. It will take well over 100 years to repeal all the bad laws on the books until our government is back in the confines of the Constitution. That would be one hell of a fight not worth our time. The other choice is Texas secession and start over. Do you agree? Independence or a Dictatorship we will live under either way. The choice is which one will govern us or will we self govern.


What the author should be complaining about is the rise of their globalist governor to the oval office, because he has an abundance of attributes the masses will fall in love with, and sure as hell, he will follow in Bush/Obamas footsteps. He will have every halfwit apostate Christian in America wetting their pants for his ascendency to dictator. Keep your eye on this goat and see if he even comes close to berating the International banksters, U.N. Agenda 21, or the division of America into ten regions as a precursor to eliminating the States, and subjecting all Americans to these ten regional dictators, who only answer to the Bankers controlled United Nations. It is incredible that so many educated American’s are stupid enough to be ignorant of the REAL problems in America. The scumbags will now concentrate on promoting false hope in massive job creation, and the rank and file dumbass masses will fall for it. Get this through your head folks, the lack of jobs in America is NOT the problem. The real problem is the S.o.B.s that control the migration of industry out of the country. GET EDUCATED! Do the research, and discover how easy it is to substantiate the claims of the articles I post on A NATION BEGUILED.COM

As for the Texas secession movement, you can bet your fanny Texans are not going to risk their lively hood, until someone starts up a State Bank with a gold backed currency, and starts setting up the internet currency transfer system. Next, comes the problem of stabilizing the price of gold and stopping the Banksters from manipulating gold and silver. They could absolutely tank the price of gold and silver in minutes, and there is no one to stop them. Our best bet is to wait until their charter is about to expire and be prepared to shut this Nation down, issue a new Declaration of Independence and start over as Sovereign States. Between now and then, you can bet your ass there is going to be an all out assault on our freedom. 2012 is going to be a bitch.


August 13th, 2011 by


By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
August 13, 2011


The more I peruse the current public discourse about the application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the present quandary of public debt that confronts this country, the more I am convinced of the wisdom of the observation of the ancients that “Against human stupidity even the immortal gods contend in vain!”

The gist of the argument in favor of the Fourteenth Amendment’s positive application rests on the first sentence of Section 4 of the Amendment: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” Supposedly, this sentence grants a power to the President to borrow money in order to pay outstanding “public debt of the United States” as it comes due, even though Congress has not authorized such additional borrowing. Apparently the theory is that, if the President could not exercise this power, some of the debt would be unpaid at maturity, and therefore its “validity” would “be questioned”, in violation of the Amendment.

Now, the first suspicious peculiarity of this theory is its open-endedness. For public debt can be paid in ways other than by borrowing money (that is, Ponzi finance). It can also be paid through the collection and expenditure of taxes (real public finance). The Constitution delegates to Congress two relevant powers here: One is the power “[t]o borrow Money on the credit of the United States”. Article I, Section 8, Clause 2. Another is the power “[t]o lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States”. Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. The Constitution delegates no power “[t]o borrow Money” or “[t]o lay and collect Taxes” to the President. So, if Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment implicitly empowers the President to borrow so that “[t]he validity of the public debt of the United States * * * shall not be questioned”, it also implicitly empowers him to tax for that purpose! And, with a greater degree of apparent constitutional approval, too—because, unlike the power “[t]o borrow”, which says nothing about the use of borrowed funds to pay public debts, the power “[t]o lay and collect taxes” is explicitly tied “to pay[ing] the Debts * * * of the United States”.

The Supreme Court has also invented a third power for Congress that can be used to pay public debts: the power to emit irredeemable, legal-tender paper currency (fiat currency). See Knox v. Lee, 79 U.S. (12 Wallace) 457 (1871), and Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884). Indeed, armed with this power, it is impossible for the United States ever to default on their debts, because every debt can be paid “dollar for dollar” with newly issued fiat currency at essentially no cost to the Treasury, and without the economic and political inconveniences associated with borrowing money or laying and collecting taxes. Yet (to my knowledge) no one up to now has ever claimed that this imaginary power can be exercised by the President on his own initiative. But if Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment empowers the President to pay public debts by borrowing money without the specific authorization of Congress—and, by logical extension, to tax in order “to pay the Debts * * * of the United States”—then why does it not also license him to emit whatever amount of fiat currency he deems necessary for that purpose? One could accompany Alice even farther into the depths of the Washington Wonderland and posit a license for the President to exercise the power of eminent domain, in conjunction with the power to emit fiat currency, for the purpose of paying pubic debts. Under this addendum to the basic theory, the President would simply seize valuable private property, turn it over to the holders of the public debt (say, the Red Chinese government) in payment thereof, and compensate the dispossessed former owners with rapidly depreciating fiat currency.

Those who pooh-pooh these possibilities should ponder on what reasoning Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment could be held to grant to the President the power “[t]o borrow Money” in order to pay public debts, without the prior authorization of Congress, but also held not to grant him whatever other powers might possibly be used to pay public debts, also without the prior authorization of Congress? Surely, if the sentence “[t]he validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, * * * shall not be questioned” is a grant of power, on its face it is a grant without limitations, exceptions, or qualifications. Ergo, under this (mis)reading of the Fourteenth Amendment, the national motto should be amended to read: Hail, Caesar! We who are about to be fleeced salute you!

The deficiency from which the proponents of the foregoing theory of Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment suffer is that they cannot read. Section 4 does not grant anyone a power. It imposes what lawyers call a disability, an absence of power. The sentence “[t]he validity of the public debt * * * shall not be questioned” strips the United States and the States (and every official thereof) of any right, privilege, or power to “question[ ]” any portion of “the public debt” through the exercise of any power that otherwise could “[in]valid[ate]” that portion—that is, that would legally nullify it. Section 4 says nothing at all, however, about what could or should be done, by whom, and under what circumstances in the event that some public official actually attempted to “question[ ]” “[t]he validity of the public debt”.

A power to deal with a violation of Section 4 does exist. But it appears in Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment: “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” Observe: The Fourteenth Amendment, which so many deep thinkers among the legal intelligentsiia assert implicitly empowers the President to enforce Section 4, explicitly empowers Congress, and only Congress, to do so! Congress. C-O-N-G-R-E-S-S. Congress. See Dick! See Jane! See Section 5! See whom it empowers! See Congress! Not the President!

To be sure, under the aegis of Section 5 Congress could enact “appropriate legislation” that directed and authorized the President to take certain strictly executive actions to secure “[t]he validity of the public debt”. It could authorize the Treasury, under the supervision of the President, “[t]o borrow Money”, “[t]o lay and collect Taxes”, even to emit fiat currency in particular amounts. It has done all of these things in the past (the last of them, of course, without constitutional authorization). And under the injunction in Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 that “[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law”, Congress could even decree that the particular moneys borrowed, collected in taxes, or emitted as fiat currency should be “drawn from the Treasury” exclusively for the purpose of paying specific public debts. But, absent such legislation, the President or any of his minions in the Administration is powerless to engage in any of those activities on his own. Inasmuch as Article II, Section 3 the Constitution commands the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”—and inasmuch as one of those “Laws” is the Constitution itself—and inasmuch as Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly empowers Congress alone “to enforce” Section 4—it follows that any attempt by the President to usurp any or all of the powers “[t]o borrow Money”, “[t]o lay and collect Taxes”, or to emit fiat currency in order purportedly to enforce Section 4 would constitute a “high Crime[ ] and Misdemeanor[ ]” for which “Impeachment” and “Conviction” would be appropriate, followed by criminal prosecution of both himself and his accomplices. Compare U.S. Const. Article II, Section 4 with Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 and with 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242.

One other point should be clarified, too. “The validity of the public debt of the United States” is not “questioned” simply because that debt is not paid on time (or perhaps is never actually paid at all). “The validity” of a debt is a matter of its legality. Payment is a matter of actual compliance with the obligation’s contractual provisions. A debt may not be paid on time, without anyone’s questioning its validity. The debtor may agree that he owes the money as a matter of law, but may deny that he is able to pay as a matter of fact. In that event, he may be sued for damages, or he may seek the protection of a bankruptcy court—but the validity of the debt is never at issue. The peculiar problem for holders of public debt is whether they have a satisfactory remedy if the Treasury takes the position that it simply cannot pay some debt the validity of which it does not question.

In Perry v. United States, 294 U.S. 330 (1935), which applied Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to invalidate in part the infamous House Joint Resolution No. 192 of 1933, the Court adverted to this problem as follows:

[T]he right to make binding obligations is a competence attaching to sovereignty. * * * The Constitution gives to the Congress the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. * * * The binding quality of the promise of the United States is of the essence of the credit which is so pledged. Having this power to authorize the issue of definite obligations for the payment of money borrowed, the Congress has not been vested with the authority to alter or destroy those obligations. The fact that the United States may not be sued without its consent is a matter of procedure which does not affect the legal and binding character of its contracts. While the Congress is under no duty to provide remedies through the courts, the contractual obligation still exists and, despite infirmities of procedure, remains binding upon the conscience of the sovereign.

294 U.S. at 353-354 (emphasis supplied). So there one has it, directly from the horse’s mouth. Without a remedy—which “matter of procedure * * * Congress is under no duty to provide”—the debt cannot be collected; nonetheless, “the contractual obligation still exists and * * * remains binding upon the conscience of the sovereign”, so that its “validity” has not “been questioned”.

Now, I am the first to condemn the decision in Perry v. United States (indeed, the decisions in all of the so-called Gold Clause Cases), And I have done so in excruciating detail in print, on pages 1127-1240 of Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (Chicago, Illinois: R R Donnelley & Sons, Inc., 2011 GoldMoney Foundation Special Edition of the 2002 Second Revised Edition)—which I commend to those who have advanced, or want to advance, beyond the “Dick and Jane” level of constitutional law and political economics. The point is, however, that this matter of Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment has been settled, not only by Section 4 and especially Section 5 themselves at a matter of self-evident legal principle, but also by Perry as a matter of convoluted legal practice (for those who accept decisions of the Supreme Court as somehow the last word on the meaning of the Constitution).

One need not be an electrical engineer, therefore, to realize that the legal “bright bulbs” in the White House are running at far below their self-rated wattage.

© 2011 Edwin Vieira, Jr. – All Rights Reserved


The Covert Origins of World War III US Special Operations Forces To Be Deployed In 120 Countries

August 11th, 2011 by

Ampedstatus.org  ) ) ) 


August 4th, 2011 | Filed under FeatureWar . Follow comments through RSS 2.0 feed. Click here to comment, or trackback.


By Nick Turse

Somewhere on this planet an American commando is carrying out a mission.  Now, say that 70 times and you’re done… for the day.  Without the knowledge of the American public, a secret force within the U.S. military is undertaking operations in a majority of the world’s countries.  This new Pentagon power elite is waging a global war whose size and scope has never been revealed, until now.

After a U.S. Navy SEAL put a bullet in Osama bin Laden’s chest and another in his head, one of the most secretive black-ops units in the American military suddenly found its mission in the public spotlight.  It was atypical.  While it’s well known that U.S. Special Operations forces are deployed in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it’s increasingly apparent that such units operate in murkier conflict zones like Yemen and Somalia, the full extent of their worldwide war has remained deeply in the shadows.

Last year, Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post reported that U.S. Special Operations forces were deployed in 75 countries, up from 60 at the end of the Bush presidency.  By the end of this year, U.S. Special Operations Command spokesman Colonel Tim Nye told me, that number will likely reach 120.  “We do a lot of traveling — a lot more than Afghanistan or Iraq,” he said recently.  This global presence — in about 60% of the world’s nations and far larger than previously acknowledged — provides striking new evidence of a rising clandestine Pentagon power elite waging a secret war in all corners of the world.

The Rise of the Military’s Secret Military

Born of a failed 1980 raid to rescue American hostages in Iran, in which eight U.S. service members died, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) was established in 1987.  Having spent the post-Vietnam years distrusted and starved for money by the regular military, special operations forces suddenly had a single home, a stable budget, and a four-star commander as their advocate.  Since then, SOCOM has grown into a combined force of startling proportions.  Made up of units from all the service branches, including the Army’s “Green Berets” and Rangers, Navy SEALs, Air Force Air Commandos, and Marine Corps Special Operations teams, in addition to specialized helicopter crews, boat teams, civil affairs personnel, para-rescuemen, and even battlefield air-traffic controllers and special operations weathermen, SOCOM carries out the United States’ most specialized and secret missions.  These include assassinations, counterterrorist raids, long-range reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, foreign troop training, and weapons of mass destruction counter-proliferation operations.

One of its key components is the Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, a clandestine sub-command whose primary mission is tracking and killing suspected terrorists.  Reporting to the president and acting under his authority, JSOC maintains a global hit list that includes American citizens.  It has been operating an extra-legal “kill/capture” campaign that John Nagl, a past counterinsurgency adviser to four-star general and soon-to-be CIA Director David Petraeus, calls “an almost industrial-scale counterterrorism killing machine.”

This assassination program has been carried out by commando units like the Navy SEALs and the Army’s Delta Force as well as via drone strikes as part of covert wars in which the CIA is also involved in countries like SomaliaPakistan, and Yemen.  In addition, the command operates a network of secret prisons, perhaps as many as 20 black sites in Afghanistan alone, used for interrogating high-value targets

Growth Industry

From a force of about 37,000 in the early 1990s, Special Operations Command personnel have grown to almost 60,000, about a third of whom are career members of SOCOM; the rest have other military occupational specialties, but periodically cycle through the command.  Growth has been exponential since September 11, 2001, as SOCOM’s baseline budget almost tripled from $2.3 billion to $6.3 billion.  If you add in funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it has actually more than quadrupled to $9.8 billion in these years.  Not surprisingly, the number of its personnel deployed abroad has also jumped four-fold.  Further increases, and expanded operations, are on the horizon.

Lieutenant General Dennis Hejlik, the former head of the Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command — the last of the service branches to be incorporated into SOCOM in 2006 — indicated, for instance, that he foresees a doubling of his former unit of 2,600.  “I see them as a force someday of about 5,000, like equivalent to the number of SEALs that we have on the battlefield. Between [5,000] and 6,000,” he said at a June breakfast with defense reporters in Washington.  Long-term plans already call for the force to increase by 1,000.     

During his recent Senate confirmation hearings, Navy Vice Admiral William McRaven, the incoming SOCOM chief and outgoing head of JSOC (which he commanded during the bin Laden raid) endorsed a steady manpower growth rate of 3% to 5% a year, while also making a pitch for even more resources, including additional drones and the construction of new special operations facilities.

A former SEAL who still sometimes accompanies troops into the field, McRaven expressed a belief that, as conventional forces are drawn down in Afghanistan, special ops troops will take on an ever greater role.  Iraq, he added, would benefit if elite U.S forces continued to conduct missions there past the December 2011 deadline for a total American troop withdrawal.  He also assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that “as a former JSOC commander, I can tell you we were looking very hard at Yemen and at Somalia.”

During a speech at the National Defense Industrial Association’s annual Special Operations and Low-intensity Conflict Symposium earlier this year, Navy Admiral Eric Olson, the outgoing chief of Special Operations Command, pointed to a composite satellite image of the world at night.  Before September 11, 2001, the lit portions of the planet — mostly the industrialized nations of the global north — were considered the key areas. “But the world changed over the last decade,” he said.  “Our strategic focus has shifted largely to the south… certainly within the special operations community, as we deal with the emerging threats from the places where the lights aren’t.” 

To that end, Olson launched “Project Lawrence,” an effort to increase cultural proficiencies — like advanced language training and better knowledge of local history and customs — for overseas operations.  The program is, of course, named after the British officer, Thomas Edward Lawrence (better known as “Lawrence of Arabia”), who teamed up with Arab fighters to wage a guerrilla war in the Middle East during World War I.  Mentioning Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali, and Indonesia, Olson added that SOCOM now needed “Lawrences of Wherever.”

While Olson made reference to only 51 countries of top concern to SOCOM, Col. Nye told me that on any given day, Special Operations forces are deployed in approximately 70 nations around the world.  All of them, he hastened to add, at the request of the host government.  According to testimony by Olson before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year, approximately 85% of special operations troops deployed overseas are in 20 countries in the CENTCOM area of operations in the Greater Middle East: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.  The others are scattered across the globe from South America to Southeast Asia, some in small numbers, others as larger contingents. 

Special Operations Command won’t disclose exactly which countries its forces operate in.  “We’re obviously going to have some places where it’s not advantageous for us to list where we’re at,” says Nye.  “Not all host nations want it known, for whatever reasons they have — it may be internal, it may be regional.” 

But it’s no secret (or at least a poorly kept one) that so-called black special operations troops, like the SEALs and Delta Force, are conducting kill/capture missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen, while “white” forces like the Green Berets and Rangers are training indigenous partners as part of a worldwide secret war against al-Qaeda and other militant groups. In the Philippines, for instance, the U.S. spends $50 million a year on a 600-person contingent of Army Special Operations forces, Navy Seals, Air Force special operators, and others that carries out counterterrorist operations with Filipino allies against insurgent groups like Jemaah Islamiyah and Abu Sayyaf.

Last year, as an analysis of SOCOM documents, open-source Pentagon information, and adatabase of Special Operations missions compiled by investigative journalist Tara McKelvey (for the Medill School of Journalism’s National Security Journalism Initiative) reveals, America’s most elite troops carried out joint-training exercises in Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Germany, Indonesia, Mali, Norway, Panama, and Poland.  So far in 2011, similar training missions have been conducted in the Dominican Republic, Jordan, Romania, Senegal, South Korea, and Thailand, among other nations.  In reality, Nye told me, training actually went on in almost every nation where Special Operations forces are deployed.  “Of the 120 countries we visit by the end of the year, I would say the vast majority are training exercises in one fashion or another.  They would be classified as training exercises.”

The Pentagon’s Power Elite

Once the neglected stepchildren of the military establishment, Special Operations forces have been growing exponentially not just in size and budget, but also in power and influence.  Since 2002, SOCOM has been authorized to create its own Joint Task Forces — like Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines — a prerogative normally limited to larger combatant commands like CENTCOM.  This year, without much fanfare, SOCOM also established its own Joint Acquisition Task Force, a cadre of equipment designers and acquisition specialists. 

With control over budgeting, training, and equipping its force, powers usually reserved for departments (like the Department of the Army or the Department of the Navy), dedicated dollars in every Defense Department budget, and influential advocates in Congress, SOCOM is by now an exceptionally powerful player at the Pentagon.  With real clout, it can win bureaucratic battles, purchase cutting-edge technology, and pursue fringe research likeelectronically beaming messages into people’s heads or developing stealth-like cloaking technologies for ground troops.  Since 2001, SOCOM’s prime contracts awarded to small businesses — those that generally produce specialty equipment and weapons — have jumped six-fold.

Headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, but operating out of theater commands spread out around the globe, including Hawaii, Germany, and South Korea, and active in the majority of countries on the planet, Special Operations Command is now a force unto itself.  As outgoing SOCOM chief Olson put it earlier this year, SOCOM “is a microcosm of the Department of Defense, with ground, air, and maritime components, a global presence, and authorities and responsibilities that mirror the Military Departments, Military Services, and Defense Agencies.” 

Tasked to coordinate all Pentagon planning against global terrorism networks and, as a result, closely connected to other government agencies, foreign militaries, and intelligence services, and armed with a vast inventory of stealthy helicopters, manned fixed-wing aircraft, heavily-armed drones, high-tech guns-a-go-go speedboats, specialized Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, as well as other state-of-the-art gear (with more on the way), SOCOM represents something new in the military.  Whereas the late scholar of militarism Chalmers Johnson used to refer to the CIA as “the president’s private army,” today JSOC performs that role, acting as the chief executive’s private assassination squad, and its parent, SOCOM, functions as a new Pentagon power-elite, a secret military within the military possessing domestic power and global reach. 

In 120 countries across the globe, troops from Special Operations Command carry out their secret war of high-profile assassinationslow-level targeted killingscapture/kidnap operations, kick-down-the-door night raidsjoint operations with foreign forces, and training missions with indigenous partners as part of a shadowy conflict unknown to most Americans.  Once “special” for being small, lean, outsider outfits, today they are special for their power, access, influence, and aura.

That aura now benefits from a well-honed public relations campaign which helps them project a superhuman image at home and abroad, even while many of their actual activities remain in the ever-widening shadows.  Typical of the vision they are pushing was this statement from Admiral Olson: “I am convinced that the forces… are the most culturally attuned partners, the most lethal hunter-killers, and most responsive, agile, innovative, and efficiently effective advisors, trainers, problem-solvers, and warriors that any nation has to offer.”

Recently at the Aspen Institute’s Security Forum, Olson offered up similarly gilded comments and some misleading information, too, claiming that U.S. Special Operations forces were operating in just 65 countries and engaged in combat in only two of them.  When asked about drone strikes in Pakistan, he reportedly replied, “Are you talking about unattributed explosions?” 

What he did let slip, however, was telling.  He noted, for instance, that black operations like the bin Laden mission, with commandos conducting heliborne night raids, were now exceptionally common.  A dozen or so are conducted every night, he said.  Perhaps most illuminating, however, was an offhand remark about the size of SOCOM.  Right now, he emphasized, U.S. Special Operations forces were approximately as large as Canada’s entire active duty military.  In fact, the force is larger than the active duty militaries of many of the nations where America’s elite troops now operate each year, and it’s only set to grow larger. 

Americans have yet to grapple with what it means to have a “special” force this large, this active, and this secret — and they are unlikely to begin to do so until more information is available.  It just won’t be coming from Olson or his troops.  “Our access [to foreign countries] depends on our ability to not talk about it,” he said in response to questions about SOCOM’s secrecy.  When missions are subject to scrutiny like the bin Laden raid, he said, the elite troops object.  The military’s secret military, said Olson, wants “to get back into the shadows and do what they came in to do.”

Nick Turse is a historian, essayist, and investigative journalist. The associate editor ofTomDispatch.com and a new senior editor at Alternet.org, his latest book is The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan (Verso Books). This article was a collaboration between Alternet.org and TomDispatch.com.


What makes me sick to my stomach is the sheer number of our most courageous young men that are brain washed into becoming murders of anyone their despotic commanders send them to kill without question, and you and I know damn well the day will come when they will be sent to kill those of us who object to their atrocious tyranny.

This is not the kind of military our past soldiers were who fought and died to save their country and preserve freedom. This is a gang of psychopaths that beat their chest like a tribe of apes, and make jokes about murdering people. Where is their pride now? Is it in their contribution to the preservation of freedom, or is it in their personal reputation as killers.

So what do you do with men like this to profit from their killer instinct without letting them go wild in society when Uncle Sam is finished with them? May I humbly suggest we turn them loose on the international bankers and all of their assistant’s world wide, and let them strike fear in the hearts of our federal government when they return. America, we can do better than this. All it takes is to study long enough to learn the truth about the banker’s infiltration of our government, and you will wake up from your stupid brain washed emotional patriotism and face the truth like a man. There is nothing left of America to be proud of except your newfound commitment to admit the truth, and be among those of us who will NOT support these scumbags in D.C. and wall street. When America is once more an industrial giant capable of producing everything known to man, and return our farm land to private farmers growing wholesome food for the world, and we are sending battalions of young doctors around the world to relieve the agony of the masses, then you can raise your head again in pride, and ONLY THEN. Don’t give me any shit about us being the land of the free, and the home of the brave until you get your lazy asses and minds educated.



The Moral Defense of Capitalism-DEBUNKED

August 9th, 2011 by




Joel F. Wadee


One reason that our founding principles are in such deep trouble today is that many years ago, our parents and grandparents… and great grandparents, conceded to the enemies of freedom the moral high ground.

Those advocating socialismcommunism, and fascism were given credibility by the progressive movement, and the progressive movement was given credibility by generations of clueless Americans.

These ideas, brought to America by scholars who had studied in Germany during the 1800s, claimed to advocate compassion and enlightenment. These zealous scholars had a vision of transforming America from her founding principles, to the more "modern" and forward thinking principles of commanding and directing government power to change people, to make them better.

Of course, what they were doing was replacing the most radical and benevolent system that the world has ever seen with the most evil and destructive ideals – to be realized with the most ancient of tools: brute force.

If we are to reclaim the political high ground in the fight for liberty, we must also hold, clearly and unequivocally, the moral high ground as well. Here, therefore is part of what I see as the moral case for capitalism, and the free market principles that allow the full creative and productive forces of capitalism to flourish.

Why don’t the libertarians elucidate the full story, and tell how the German educated scholars had the financing to buy the political power needed to make the move and take over education in America? Who else but the capitalist Investment Bankers had the money to finance such and expensive National socialist movement? At that time, America already had a free market philosophy in higher education and private enterprise was doing great. Such well-organized events do not just happen; they are planned right down to the last dollar.

1) Capitalism creates value.

The entire purpose and function of capitalism is to facilitate the creation and production of value – goods and services that add to a person's life, and quality of life. Capitalism encourages creative, productive efforts toward fulfilling the needs and desires of others.

We take completely for granted the incredible foundation of value, which has been our inheritance from previous generations through the free exchange of goods and services. We get used to whatever our conditions are to such a degree, that most people never bother to consider what it would be like if there were no capitalism.

Very simply, we would be living and working with a single stone tool that mankind's ancestors used for a million years. And our fundamental means for acquiring wealth would be warfare more brutal than most of us can imagine.

2) Capitalism encourages long-term planning, discourages impulsiveness and self-indulgence, and therefore facilitates the development of civilization, peace, and prosperity.

If you want to create something of value, you have to think. You have to take the time to learn and practice skills and connect long threads of cause and effect in order to bring into the world something that did not exist before. And this something has to be useful or desirable for other people.

Because you have to consider the needs and desires of others, this requires you to develop empathy. You have to be able to think about and understand what other people's internal experience is; which means that you have to develop the skills that allow you to get a glimpse of what other people think, feel, and desire.

You have to be able to make contact with other people in a peaceful manner – which means that you have to develop manners and other social skills. Capitalism encourages more extraverted behavior, and more vigilance regarding how your own behavior affects others.

Capitalism also encourages the transmission of hard won intellectual, emotional, and social skills across generations. What you have learned you want to pass on to your children and grandchildren, students and peers, so that they continue to develop what you have learned indefinitely into the future.

This is what civilization is built upon, and it is the definition of culture. Man-kind is unique in the world in that we have culture. Wolves are social, a herd of buffalo is social, a pod of dolphins is social; but we transfer knowledge and tangible expressions of that knowledge across generations.

We do this because we have the mental capacity to do so, but it is capitalism that encourages us to use that mental capacity, and to use it in such a way that we create improvements upon what has been created before.

I admit that the libertarian’s are among the most gifted of all political writers, but their surreptitious pass-over of depraved human nature, greed, and lust for the controlling power needed to accomplish the Capitalist dreams of riches is hardly ever mentioned. Instead, what they do elucidate is how wonderful these Capitalist characteristics are, and how they benefit society. I would be grateful if they would admit that Capitalism has never really existed except in free enterprise, and what they are really presenting is Monopolistic Capitalism, because without strict control, the Bankers would control (OWN)  everything, just as they do now. The problem is not in commerce, the problem is in how to keep the politicians honest and free from the Bankers corrupting power. After all, their both depraved human beings.

3) Capitalism facilitates the development of long-term individual personal satisfaction and happiness in life. This in turn encourages people to engage in personal virtue – the virtue of happiness. For the Bankers and their henchmen.

We have within us the impulses and desires that can lead us toward short-term pleasures and actions which can do great harm to ourselves and others. We can be violent, we can be abusive, we can be self-absorbed, and we can be totally oblivious to the effect that we have on others.

To indulge these impulses and desires personally on a regular basis is to create a life that is destructive, dangerous, painful, and short. To encourage such a lifestyle as a culture is to create a living hell on earth.

Capitalism makes it supremely worthwhile for us to do something completely different.

We also have within us the capacity to think, to plan, to envision the potential consequences of our actions; to learn from our mistakes, and from the responses of others. Not without God’s direct intervention.

The more we use this capacity, the more we develop an appreciation for the great personal satisfaction and happiness that can follow from paying close attention to what we do; and we learn, in continually greater depth, how what we do affects ourselves and others.

Capitalism creates the external circumstances whereby using this capacity is a benefit. It is these long-term, self-reflective, empathic and externally focused qualities that make possible the great array of personal virtues – gratitude, courage, empathy, productivity, creativity, forgiveness, integrity, compassion, and perseverance, to name just a few. Capitalistic coercion is just plain wonderfull! Right?

4) Capitalism encourages us to co-operate.

"Dog eat dog competition" is an enduring image created by capitalism's enemies. But it is the kind of brute force employed by statism that fuels such violence. I am no supporter of unbridled statism, but Monopolistic Capitalism has provided the most brute  force the world has ever seen. They destroy entire nations, and murder hundreds of millions of people with their money power to buy governments. Let us not forget that CAPITALISM INCLUDE’S DEPRAVED MONOPLISTIC BANKERS WHOSE’S MONEY POWER PRODUCES STATISM.

The competition of capitalism can be intense and difficult, and failure is an integral part of it. But in order to be successful at anything in business, you have to cooperate with other people, work together with other people, and learn from your mistakes and failures. The better you are at this, the more possibilities you will create in the future.

It is your competitors in business who force you to hone your skills, keep up on the best practices, and provide the best products and services for your customers. In this sense, your competitors are your allies – they are not out to destroy you personally, they are in competition with you, engaged in an active relationship that keeps each of you on your growing edge.

Our forefathers and mothers made the mistake of accepting socialism's moral claims. They accepted the progressive's claims of virtue in the form of compassion, and they were seduced by their vision of a better world, with better people. We can forgive them for this, as they did not have the past one hundred-plus years of witnessing the contrast and the results of such idealistic visions that we have.

I vividly remember my (conservative) grandmother saying that, "Socialism may be a good idea in theory, but that it just doesn't work." What she – and millions of others – did not understand is that the theory stinks as well.

What they did not understand is that the progressives, the socialists, the communists, the fascists… the statists of all stripes – those advocating the use of government power to mold and shape human beings into the image of the wielders of that power – had nothing to compare with the benevolent power of voluntary exchange.

The contrast between capitalism and all forms of statism is as stark as the difference between what happens when a lumber company owns their own land, versus when they have a short term lease on government owned land.

When a company owns their own land, they have an incentive to take great care of that land. Their concern is with long-term productivity, and so they harvest just enough trees so that they can replace those trees over time, and still have more for next year's harvest.

When a lumber company has a short-term lease, their incentive is to get as many trees cut down as quickly as possible before their lease runs out.

Capitalism leads to civilization, long term planning, empathy, and the continual creation of greater value.

Statism leads to the personal and cultural equivalent of clear cutting.

Capitalism encourages the ambitious man to think: "What can I create and/or produce that would be of value and benefit to others; enough so that they would willingly and gladly exchange their hard earned money for it? How could I communicate with them and persuade them of this value? How could they best put it to use?"


Statism encourages an ambitious man to think, "how can I get more power to do my will, by using force to compel my ideals – well intentioned or evil – upon others?"

In the honest contest for the moral high ground between capitalism and any form of statism, there is no contest. It is capitalism that has made us human.

It is capitalism that encourages us to bring out the best in our nature, to consider the experience of others, and to work together peacefully to make good things happen.

It is the Founding Principles of the United States of America, as envisioned in the Declaration of Independence, and as set forth with crystal clarity in our supreme law of the land, the Constitution, that have brought those qualities to bear with more energy and effectiveness than the world has ever seen. THIS AUTHOR SHOULD HAVE BEEN A PREACHER! He is wonderful at working around the fact’s, which are and always have been in modern commerce, the centralization of power through buying government’s and then blaming them for carrying out the Bankers orders. STATISM DOES NOT EXIST ON IT’S OWN, IT IS THE RESULT OF BANKER’S POWER TO COERCE GOVERNMENT.

The moral defense of capitalism is not ambiguous, and it is not a matter of opinion. It is as clear and bold as war versus peace, freedom versus slavery, human sacrifice versus empathy and love.

Let's learn from the mistakes of our elders, and boldly affirm the goodness of our inheritance, a free, vibrant, and ingenious country, based upon the greatest social force for good: the relationships of exchange made possible through capitalism. When this guy grows up and see’s the light, he is going to make one hell of a used car salesman. He use’s words like a horney teenager makes promises it won’t hurt, and that’s just what his girlfriend  wants to hear!


I am going to take a leap of faith, and assume the reader has read my underlined notes above, and concluded that I have little respect for gifted people who use their gift to confuse the masses, and that is the sum-total of libertarianism.

Just a bunch of surreptitious word-smithing to confuse all but the person with eyes wide open, and cognizant of human depravity. Yes, I am a misanthropic curmudgeon, and it is entirely because my wide-open eyes have observed human depravity, including my own, and my mind is cognizant of the historical record of human atrocities too awful to describe with any acceptable vernacular. Only the crudest explication, full of the foulest language can do it justice. And, the most surreptitious libertarian statement ever made is in our Declaration of Independence as follows. “All men are created equal.”

That proposition contains more bullshit than a garbage barge can transport. Even all men deserve equal treatment under the law is bullshit, when you are aware of human depravity. In the first place, men and women have an infinite variety of attributes, and their use of them disqualifies them from equal treatment. You are not gong to treat me the same as a pedophile and get away with it, and you are not going to give a convicted pedophile the same respect and advantages as you give me, and get away with it. The same goes for fagot fudge-packers, and a host of other scumbags. AND, the Bible confirms that God feels the same way!

That surreptitious libertarian proposition is strictly for the dull and ignorant do-gooder who believes all we have to do is love one another and everything will be hunky-dory. I do not, and never will, love fudge-packers and or pedophiles, and many other scumbags.

BUT, that does not mean I will impose my own justice on them. That is supposed to be what the law is for in a sane world, which we do not enjoy at this time. Hurt my loved ones, and that does not apply. Which means: you had better turn yourself in to the law before I get you. See now, how widely varied and obnoxious humans can be? Which of you are intelligent enough to write laws for all humanity? God only needed ten, so you may have to work pretty hard to beat that and still cover everything.

Libertarian theory is like an exceptionally beautiful, intelligent, and sensual woman that intentionally transmits a social disease. A person is over-come with false promises, and their own depraved nature, by her attributes, and the results are damn hard to live with.

In the beginning of my studies on libertarianism, I admit to being just as excited as the victim I just outlined above, and remained that way for several years, as I am not very smart. I do have great and reliable instincts though, and eventually understood that the common person would never be capable of financially defending their self against the rich man or corporation, with the exception of the little person finding an attorney slick enough to convince them into giving up an unfair amount of the judgment if he/she wins, and that is the big hole in libertarianism. In everyday practice, libertarianism is a surreptitious false promise because humanities depraved nature will prevail every time.

Now, what kind of person would discredit such good-hearted men as the libertarian writers if they did not have a better plan? First, let me state that free-market commerce, and free-enterprise is not the same as libertarian theory, with (FREE) meaning you don’t have to pay someone or government to own your own business to sell something, and the buyer does not have to pay a fee to make a purchase, or for making a purchase, or both, and the two are not the same thing!

Second, since an excess of money power gives a person an unfair advantage over the buyer, who probably cannot defend their self, some form of control, or power, has to equalize the risk in the transaction. This requires a force of greater power than the seller to counter the money power advantage. Where else can this come from than government? Remember God did justify commerce and governments.

He also gave government’s greater power than the buyer and seller! A fair transaction was a requirement, and the government is to mediate. If this sounds like do-gooder democracy, you have a cognition problem. To make a long story a little shorter, men of high intelligence are going to have to design a republican form of government that has a way to control those who govern, since our great heroic founders fell down on the job and allowed the Investment Bankers to design our government to their advantage.

So, I propose we find men who have the ability, experience, have proven that fact by their past writings, and are willing to submit their self to a committee of elected judges, who can fire them on notice and verification of departure from their own words. The same power over all government bodies and persons therein is to apply, and any man, regardless of his station in life, and without cost, can institute an investigation by an elected grand jury of the people if his claim has merit with that same jury. The committees of judges then carry out the law, remove the guilty man from office, and determine what if any other restitution is required. A republican form of government can only work if the power is in the people’s hands to light the fuse of the impeachment procedure. If the grand jury should become corrupt then the people can approach another. There is also a requirement on the people, and that would be having the intelligence to articulate his claim in an intelligent dictation that is in conformity with the laws prevailing.

If a man cannot conduct a convincing argument, then he must hold his peace and find another who can. But to have men govern us who are untouchable by the people is stupidity of the highest order. All of the nuts and bolts of our judiciary require a complete overhaul, and there are people within the internet revolution community who are knowledgeable and capable of redesigning American government so that peace and prosperity can return to our lives and our posterity.

At this time, all that is needed is to form a coalition of people willing to protect these new founders of freedom from the reach of our present tyrannical government. This is where talk and courage is separated.

I have just laid my life on the line by publishing this notice, so who will do the same to protect our new founders? OldDog at wethepeople@anationbeguiled.com




Who will put the gold questions to central banks?

August 7th, 2011 by


How is the gold price rigged, and by whom?


 Le Metropole Members,

Chris Powell: Who will put the gold questions to central banks? 

Submitted by cpowell on 04:32PM ET Friday, August 5, 2011. Section: Daily Dispatches
Remarks by Chris Powell, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.
GATA Gold Rush 2011
Savoy Hotel, London
Friday, August 5, 2011

Those of you who have been following GATA for a long time are owed a bit of an apology from me today. For I will say some things you have heard before, as they may be new to others here, as I'm reminded of the advice given to me some years ago by a friend who was twice elected to Connecticut's state legislature, three times to the U.S. House of
Representatives, and three times as governor of Connecticut. He told me that repetition is crucial in politics, and that, tedious as it may seem, just when you think you're going to have to kill yourself if you say something over again, that's when people are just starting to listen.

Of course that was before he disgraced the state, was caught taking gifts from government contractors, resigned under threat of impeachment, pleaded guilty to a federal corruption charge, and was sent to prison for a year. But I guess he didn't get everything wrong.

GATA is still about what it was about when it was founded in January 1999 — exposing and opposing the rigging of the gold market and related markets.

Why is the gold market rigged?

It's rigged because, despite Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's insistence the other day that gold is not money, just "tradition," gold is indeed a currency that competes brutally with government-issued currencies and helps determine not only the value of those currencies but also the level of interest rates and the value of government bonds. This was all documented in an academic study published in June 1988 in the Journal of Political Economy written by Harvard economics professor Lawrence Summers and University of Michigan economics professor Robert Barsky. This Summers-Barsky study was unearthed and interpreted by another speaker at this conference, gold price suppression litigator Reg Howe. The study implied that if governments could get control of the gold price, they could also get control of interest rates.

Of course Summers went on to become U.S. treasury secretary, an office in which expertise in controlling the gold price is highly desirable.

How is the gold price rigged, and by whom?

It is rigged openly through outright sales of gold by central banks, as it was rigged openly in the 1960s by the association of Western central banks known as the London gold pool, and, since the gold pool's collapse in 1968, rigged both openly and surreptitiously through central bank sales and leases and by bullion bank short positions and derivatives that are backstopped by access to Western central bank gold.

GATA has established this extensively from official sources whose admissions are compiled in the "Documentation" section of our Internet site:


That is, the gold price suppression scheme is not what it is disparaged as being, "conspiracy theory." Rather it is a matter of public record — at least for those who want to look at the record. I would welcome an opportunity to examine and discuss this record in detail, document by document, with any doubters in a public forum. Some of the most incriminating material remains posted at Federal Reserve Internet sites.

But the official record of gold price suppression is not merely historical. Thanks to GATA's work, it is very contemporary as well. That's what I'd like to update you about today.

Two years ago, using the federal Freedom of Information Act, GATA asked the Federal Reserve to provide access to its gold records, particularly its records involving gold swaps. Gold swaps are trades of gold between central banks, enabling one central bank to intervene in the gold market at the behest of another, keeping the other's fingerprints off the intervention. Gold swaps are a primary mechanism of the gold price suppression scheme.

While the Fed refused to give us access to its gold records, in adjudicating our request internally the Fed did make, perhaps inadvertently, a sensational disclosure. On September 17, 2009, the member of the Fed's Board of Governors who was acting as the judge of our request, Kevin M. Warsh, wrote a letter to GATA's lawyer, William Olson of Vienna, Virginia, confirming the Fed's denial of access. Among the records being withheld from us, Warsh disclosed, were records about the Fed's gold swap arrangements with foreign banks, which, he wrote, "is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public":


This admission of gold swap arrangements plainly contradicted previous statements by the Fed that it was not involved in the gold market in any way.

Unwilling to let Fed Governor Warsh's letter be the last word on access to the Fed's gold records, on December 31, 2009, GATA sued the Fed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Fed told the court that the Fed really couldn't find many records involving gold. Implausible as this was, unfortunately the judge, Ellen Segal Huvelle, denied GATA's request to interrogate Fed officials under oath about what seemed to us to be their wholly inadequate search. Whereupon the judge reviewed, privately in her chambers, the few documents the Fed had submitted, and on February 3 this year she ruled that the Fed could keep secret all but one of those records. She ordered the Fed to disclose that one record to GATA within two weeks.

On February 18 this year the Fed released the document — the minutes of the April 1997 meeting of the G-10 Gold and Foreign Exchange Committee as compiled by an official of the New York Federal Reserve bank. The minutes showed government and central bank officials conspiring in secret to coordinate their gold market policies.

Perhaps of equal interest, the Fed claimed not to be able to find minutes of any other meeting of the G-10 Gold and Foreign Exchange Committee. Either the the G-10 Gold and Foreign Exchange Committee has met only that once, in April 1997, or the Fed was not represented at any other such meetings, or such minutes were conveniently misplaced for the purposes of GATA's lawsuit.

Thus GATA's lawsuit established that the Fed, despite its protests of innocence, has many gold secrets after all even as we managed to pry a couple of those secrets loose and publicize them — first, that the Fed has gold swap arrangements, and second, that in 1997 the Fed was conspiring with other central banks to coordinate their gold market policies, and that there was no announcement of this.

Almost as gratifying to us was that, since the court found that the Fed had illegally withheld that one document from us, Judge Huvelle ordered the Fed to pay court costs to GATA, which the Fed did in May, sending us a check for $2,870, which we'll display here later today.

But the revelations about central bank gold swaps don't end there. In August 2009, while GATA was waging its freedom-of-information battle against the Fed, our consultant, Rob Kirby of Kirby Analytics in Toronto, wrote to the German central bank, the Bundesbank, about a report that most of the German national gold was being kept outside Germany, particularly in New York, presumably at the New York Fed.

The Bundesbank replied to Kirby as follows:

"The Deutsche Bundesbank keeps a large part of its gold holdings in its own vaults in Germany, while some of its gold is also stored with the central banks located at major gold trading centres. This has historical and market-related reasons, the gold having been transferred to the Bundesbank at these trading centres. Moreover, the Bundesbank needs to hold gold at the various trading centres in order to conduct its gold activities."

So the Bundesbank says it keeps much of its gold at "trading centers" so that it may conduct its "gold activities."

What are those activities exactly?

In late 2010 the German journalist Lars Schall, who is here at this conference today, sought to follow up with the Bundesbank, posing 13 questions about those "gold activities," particularly as to whether the Bundesbank has any gold swap arrangements with the United States. The Bundesbank replied to Schall as follows:

"In managing foreign reserves, the Bundesbank fulfils one of its mandated tasks as an integral part of the European System of Central Banks. We trust you will understand that we are not able to divulge any further information regarding this activity. Particularly with respect to the confidential nature of information about where gold holdings are kept, we are unable to go into any greater detail concerning exact locations and the quantities stored at each of these. Likewise, owing to the strategic nature of the activity, we are not at liberty to provide you with more detailed information about gold transactions."

That seems like a pretty good confession that the Bundesbank has undertaken gold swaps as part of what it considers "strategic activity."

Another pretty good confession of the secret maneuvers being played with gold came at the hearing held by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology on June 23 this year, a hearing I attended. The Treasury Department's inspector general, Eric M. Thorson, testified that he had been told that no part of the U.S. gold reserve was encumbered. But he did not say exactly who told him this, so his comment was only hearsay. And when Thorson was asked just where the gold pledged by the United States to the International Monetary Fund is kept and how it is accounted for, Thorson couldn't say.

Three years ago when GATA put similar questions to the IMF — "Exactly where is your gold, and do you possess it or is it just a claim on the gold reserves of your member nations?" — the IMF was at first evasive and then abruptly cut off the correspondence without answering.

But then most official gold data is actually disinformation.

For the six years prior to 2009 China reported to the IMF that it held 600 tonnes of gold. But in April 2009 China reported that its gold reserves had increased by 76 percent, from 600 tonnes to 1,054 tonnes. Had China obtained the new 454 tonnes only in the past year? Of course not; China had been accumulating gold steadily without reporting it for six years.

In June 2010 the World Gold Council reported that Saudi Arabia had increased its gold reserves by 126 percent since 2008, from 143 tonnes to 323 tonnes. But a few weeks later the governor of the Saudi Arabia Monetary Authority said Saudi Arabia had not been purchasing gold lately and that the 143 tonnes in question had been held all along in what he called "other accounts" — held in accounts not being reported by Saudi Arabia.

That is, the true disposition of national gold reserves is a secret more sensitive than the disposition of nuclear weapons. For gold is a weapon just as powerful — a weapon crucial to market rigging, the secret knowledge of the financial universe. And while nuclear weapons can be used for blackmail, market rigging is a far more effective mechanism for looting the world.

Many of you have heard about the looting of Europe undertaken by the Nazi German occupation during World War II. But most of that looting did not take place as it is imagined, at the point of a gun. No, it took place through the currency markets.

This looting through the currency markets was spelled out by the November 1943 edition of a military intelligence letter published by the U.S. War Department, a letter called Tactical and Technical Trends. Of course the Nazi occupation seized whatever central bank gold reserves had not been sent out of the occupied countries in time. But then the Nazi occupation either issued special occupation currency that could not be used in Germany itself or, in countries that had strong banking systems, took over the domestic central bank and enforced an exchange rate much more favorable to the reichsmark. Or else the Nazi occupation simply printed for itself and spent huge new amounts of the regular currency of the occupied country.

It was this control of the currency markets that drafted everyone in the occupied countries into the service of the occupation and achieved a one-way flow of production, a flow out of the occupied countries and into Nazi Germany.

For a few years Nazi Germany had one hell of a trade deficit — and couldn't have cared less about it. For controlling the currencies of occupied Europe, Nazi Germany never had to cover that deficit, at least not as long as the military occupation continued.

Since the United States now issues the reserve currency for the world, the dollar, the United States now more or less occupies most countries economically, even those countries that have their own currencies, since even those countries hold most of their foreign exchange reserves in dollars. Thus the current one-way flow of production — out of the rest of the world and into the United States.

This exploitation is not well-publicized but it is no secret.

In the 1960s France's finance minister called it an "exorbitant privilege" for just one country — the United States — to be able to issue the world reserve currency.

In 2004 the deputy chairman of the Bank of Russia, Oleg Mozhaiskov, told the London Bullion Market Association conference held in Moscow:

"Although there are several reserve currencies, the blatant lack of discipline is demonstrated by the U.S. dollar. I am leaving aside the main aspects of this problem, such as the social and economic injustice of a world order that allows the richest country in the world to live in debt, undermining the vital interests of other countries and peoples. What is important for us today is another aspect, which is connected with the responsibility of the state issuing the reserve currency and for the international community preserving that currency's buying power."

Incidentally, the only words of English spoken by Mozhaiskov in that speech were "Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee." The Bank of Russia long had been following our work without our knowledge.

And just this week Russia's prime minister, former president, and perhaps future president, Vladimir Putin, called the United States a "parasite" on account of its huge external debt and the dominance of the dollar.

The whole gold price suppression scheme — a dollar-support scheme — is exposed by any serious questioning. But who will ask the questions? The scheme survives only because of negligent journalism about the true reserve currency, gold.

The falsity of the data about the gold market practically screams at financial journalists:

– There is the omission from official gold reserve reports of leased and swapped gold.

– There are the sudden huge changes in official gold reserve totals.

– And there are the deception and conflicts of interest built into the prospectuses of gold and silver exchange-traded funds, whose metal custodians happen also to be the world's biggest gold and silver shorters.

Valid documentation about the gold market also practically screams at financial journalists:

– There are the huge and disproportionate gold, silver, and interest rate derivative positions built up at just a few international banks, positions that never could be undertaken without the expressed or implicit underwriting of government, particularly the U.S. government.

– There are the many official records, collected and publicized by GATA over the years, demonstrating the explicit plans and desire of the U.S. government to suppress and control the price of gold.

Most obvious is the question that should follow the common disparagement of gold, a question that somehow is never asked. You've heard it: the constantly reported observation that gold has not come close to keeping pace with inflation over the last 30 years. Oil has kept up, food has kept up, other metals have kept up, but not gold.

So why not? Why hasn't gold kept up with inflation?

Could it be that someone found a way to vastly increase the supply of gold without having to go through the trouble of mining it — to dishoard and lease it from central bank reserves and then issue certificates against gold that never existed in the first place?

"Why" is supposed to be a basic question of journalism. But it has fallen out of financial journalism when it comes to gold.

In May I spent an hour in New York with the commodities reporter of The Wall Street Journal. That newspaper has been given much of the documentation GATA has collected but has not yet published anything about it.

Also in May a nationally broadcast television program interviewed me for an hour, with the cameras rolling, on the steps of the Federal Reserve in Washington. That program has all the documentation too. Nothing has been broadcast yet, though I'm hopeful.

Over the last year I've spent much time briefing a reporter for a major news agency, at her request. At my urging, unlike all other reporters, she even called the Fed and got a very telling "no comment" about the gold swaps. But last I heard from her, she couldn't get her editor's permission to write a gold story.

Frustrating as all this is, it can't be too surprising. After all, who are the major advertisers in the financial news media and the major sources of news? The market manipulators and governments themselves. And journalists seem to take for granted that central banks operate in secret, particularly in regard to gold, so there's no point in questioning them.

Well, maybe someday some journalist somewhere will put to a central banker a critical question about gold. Maybe it will be one of the journalists we met at our press conference yesterday.

In any case, whenever I come to this great city I can't help falling into June 1940 mode and reminding myself that liberty is worth contending for no matter how bad the odds — that there really isn't much else.

The other day a few blocks from here I went through the museum that has been made out of the old Cabinet War Rooms, where the rescue of all decent civilization was arranged even as the bombs of the most evil totalitarianism fell all around and Britain, at Churchill's urging, heroically faced them alone.

At the museum there was, of course, a photo of General DeGaulle, who refused to accept the fall of France and flew to London to fight on. For the time being, De Gaulle decided, in exile he would be France, and he was — though maybe, years later, he thought himself to be France even after France was once again able to do the job itself.

From GATA's beginning I have wondered whether we could really presume to speak for gold. And not just for gold, of course — we are not idolaters — but for the economic and political liberty it serves and stands for. With gold always under attack precisely for what it represents, and with no others coming forward to defend it for what it represents, with the gold mining industry's main trade association refusing to acknowledge the attack, we have hoped that any presumption on our part might be forgiven.

We remain largely amateurs. At the outset we did not half understand what was going on and what we were setting about to do. Our name preserves that imperfect understanding. We thought we had discovered just another anti-trust violation. It was a while before we perceived that we were up against government policy and that most of what we were discovering had been discovered long ago, at least in principle, just not well taught, publicized, preserved, and made timely again.

Because it can work only through surreptitiousness and deceit, this government policy will be defeated when it is more widely understood — and every day it is being better understood.

Just yesterday GATA Chairman Bill Murphy was invited on CNBC Europe — GATA's first invitation on CNBC in 12 years. And two more speakers at this conference, James Turk and Ben Davies, were on CNBC Europe this morning.

The word is getting around now, and thanks to you and the speakers who have come here today, we are no longer alone. That, I think, will prove decisive.

Some of our speakers will talk about what should be. At this turbulent time for its financial system, the world surely needs new options. But with your support GATA will keep working to reveal what is.

This is, we think, a great cause. And as Churchill said even as the bombs fell on this city, "When great causes are on the move in the world, we learn that we are spirits, not animals, and that something is going on in space and time, and beyond space and time, that, whether we like it or not, spells duty."



Reduce your assets to physical gold and silver just as fast as you learn how to do it safely.

#1 Find a trustworthy dealer/trader, and ask about their shipping, insurance, and payment method.

#2 Study and learn what physical form is the most marketable when you want to sell, and who to sell it too.

Remember you won’t buy food with a 1 kilo bar, so have plenty of 1 half oz, quarter oz, and 1/10th oz silver to trade with. Junk silver may be a good idea to have for trading as it is recognized everywhere as to it’s value.

#3 Buy a good heavy fire rated safe and bolt it down through the floor of the safe. Bury some in PVC pipes with capps on the ends in an auger drilled vertical hole at night. Record the measurements of each hole from immovable objects in your own code, and keep that in your safe.

#4 Do not be naive, there are plenty of slick salespeople happy to take your money.

#5 If you have some serious money, look into an offshore vault. But make damn sure you can get it on demand.

#6 Do not be surprised to learn our government will make  private ownership illegal again, so be prepared to tell them where to go. Hell is my suggestion!


August 6th, 2011 by


Normally I avoid videos and audios both, because I have a reference with text, and I can go back quickly and refresh my memory, add or edit something, and many people have their email settings to plain text only, so I would have to send them to a web-site link they may or may not trust. Besides that I consider videos boring. This time I found one that is 2hrs & 4minutes long, and it kept my attention all the way through, this is a first for me, but it was well worth it. If, you are (and you should be) curious about 911, only the most stubborn person will deny the truth in this video. It is well worth your time, as this is an amazing documentary by talented professionals.


Missing Links from Jew Movies on Vimeo.


August 6th, 2011 by




 From the article (STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES)

By Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow, Ret.

Most crises, other than natural, are the inventions of devious minds, they are the tools that have been – and will always be – used to seize power, to circumvent laws, to institute control, and to enable undesirable change. A crisis simply means that some person or a group of people has either created or simulated circumstances to influence some event or to promote a desired activity. Adolph Hitler was a master at creating crises, he promoted a series of such that enabled him to establish a fascist despotic rule over a nation and its people, to institute wars upon sovereign nations, to seize territory, to encourage genocide, and to force his will upon a major portion of the world.

In our own society environmentalists manufacture crises to abridge self-determination, to limit personal prerogatives, and to curtail various lawful activities and technical advances of which they autocratically disapprove. These may be identified by a display of obsessive-compulsive behavior when in the presence of chainsaws, bulldozers and construction equipment; they are only at ease while hugging a tree or in the presence of snail darters

Social do-gooders devise crises of various sort to force their personal, often totally selfish and stupid, desires upon their neighbors, upon those who are culturally different, upon the children of families other than their own, and upon businesses and industries who produce and sell products that they personally deem undesirable or inappropriate. The notable feature of them is that their noses are extraordinarily long, an anomaly born of sticking them into the business of others.

Human elephants?

And now we come to the most pestilent, the most dangerous, the most consistent, and the most fearsome perpetuator of false crises – the U.S. government. Most everything that the educated morons of our government carry out – on both the administrative and bureaucratic levels – is born of a crisis predicated upon simulated circumstances. That monstrous boondoggle Obamacare is a case in point.

As stated the bureaucrats have honed crises driven encroachments upon your liberties and freedoms to extraordinary lengths. The Food and Drug Administration – our food and drug Nazis – is an excellent example. The agents of this Gestapo- like outfit limits your choice of non-prescription natural supplements; forces the manufacturers of supplements to remove the effective natural constituents of certain supplements so that the sale of these might not inhibit the sales of prescription meds by their bosom buddies the pharmaceutical barons, and tells you what you can and cannot eat, experience or utilize.

There are many hundreds of examples of such phony crises-driven excesses by the various tyrannical bureaus and agencies, but time and space limits the listing of such. But, I would be remiss if I did not point out the fact that it is those who most often do the bidding of the heretofore referred domestic environmentalists and social do-gooders, who are equally responsible. We are indeed surrounded by idiots.


Because of my lack of linguist skills, I have capitalized on Sheriff Schwiesow’s extraordinary talent to set the stage for this less than polite rant, as a more articulate elucidation of this subject could not be composed by any another person whose work I have read.

One of the great benefits of being an extraordinary writer is in accumulating the love and admiration of thousands of people you have never met. In the case of this old misanthropic curmudgeon, obtaining my respect is a considerable accomplishment, and I freely admit to a considerable amount of respectful admiration for this gifted gentleman. Respect is something I hold in reserve for undeniable excellence. He has commented in a past article that some of his readers complain of his high-faluting vocabulary; but who gives a shit what the dull and ignorant think? His vocabulary is an indication of having an excellent memory and high degree of intelligence; something that seems to be lacking in most Americans these days. Including me.

The reason I got so honked off on Jim’s article today is because it is an excellent entry to a subject that has been rubbing a raw spot in my mind for twenty years now, and in one word, it is manipulation. Now manipulation is something any parent or husband has had plenty of exposure too, but coming from people who have power over me, it is an abomination, as bad as having shingles on my brain. It makes my mind hurt. For the upper class, manipulation has been given a new name to differentiate between personal and social manipulation. They call it the Hegelian dialectic and claim it has three stages, as in: “an interpretive method, originally used to relate specific entities or events to the absolute idea, in which an assertable proposition (thesis) is necessarily opposed by its apparent contradiction (antithesis), and both reconciled on a higher level of truth by a third proposition (synthesis)”

This is like giving your daughters girl friends free condoms to keep them safe, with an objective of promoting a promiscuous behavior, and justifying your constant insulting instructions to your daughter to keep her legs crossed, OR. IF YOUR MEMORY IS ASTUTE, hiring a couple of bank robbers in full body armor to instigate a shoot out with under trained and under equipped police officers, with the objective of changing everyone’s opinion of what kind of attitude and armament the officers should have. The result is, swat teams, and an attitude of disrespect for civilian life. It is also the beginning of, the militarization of our countries local law enforcement, and why you see every cop in town carrying an arsenal around their ample bellies. All of this was nothing more than social manipulation, to produce a social acceptance of fear. Along with the twin towers destruction by the manipulators, and the justification of creating the war on terror, Americans are no longer feeling secure with their law enforcers, or lawmakers, who are hell bent on removing our God given rights to be secure in our own homes and in our travels. Our politicians must all be graduates of the university of manipulation, because the bills passed in the last twenty years has produced a hell of a lot of synthesis, and a nation of damn cowards.


Surely by now the reader can figure out without studying anything that our government is, and has been, for a hundred years, our mortal enemy. Here is a great, simple, and fool proof I.Q. test folks. ARE YOU STILL VOTING?

If so, you have poop for brains, because your votes only assist the manipulators in setting up another crooked politician trained in manipulation, for the destruction of liberty. An informed and active population would never have fallen for the atrocities being forced on us by the scumbag employees of the International Investment Banksters.


The way things stand right now, we are about a year away from the end of the federal reserves 100 year contract, which means it will occur during this scumbag presidents reign, and the Banksters are supporting him with wall street money unlimited. Can you imagine OBAMA, and CONGRESS refusing to renew the banksers contract, when they should be defaulting on the banksters, and telling them to go piss up a rope. The Banksters have Obama by the short hairs folks, and all of congress to boot. So here is the bottom line. We have less than a year left to educate and inspire the majority of this country or bend over and kiss our ass goodbye.


They know what they are doing, and they will be disarming us this year come hell or high water. Then, we will be facing a bunch of traitorous police officers, and Obama’s brainwashed homeland military, to keep a tight lid on any rebellion. Take this to the bank folks, you will be slaves, and I will be dead by next winter. If you have friends or family in law enforcement or the military, you better inform them of their duty to the people, and to hell with the government.

If any government scumbag snitch is reading this,you, your congressional representatives, and your nappy-headed Dear Leader!

Sorry Jim, I know you do not associate with, or approve of people like me, but I have had all I can take.







Why Gold and Silver Prices Will More than Double Again Even From Current Prices

August 5th, 2011 by

Don’t Get Left Behind When Gold & Silver Explode in Price

By J.S. Kim of the SmartKnowledgeU investment system and the Underground Investor letter

August 4th, 2011

Those that are familiar with my writings about gold and silver for the last six years know that I have said gold was cheap at $500, $600, $700, $800, $1000 and $1,200 a troy ounce and know that I have said silver was cheap at $11, $12, $14, $16, $25, and $30 a troy ounce. Today, I will reiterate that gold is still cheap in the $1500 to $1600 range and that silver is still cheap in the $40 range because the largest movements in gold and silver prices as well as gold and silver mining stocks have still not happened and will materialize over the next four to five years. Again, this doesn’t mean that gold and silver can’t or won’t correct or consolidate again in the future because both PMs always do. I have written publicly so much about this topic over the years (and even in much greater depth to my subscribing members) because I truly believe it is insanity not to participate in one of the best ways to invest in gold and silver today – the ownership of physical gold and physical silver.


Hundreds of millions of investors worldwide, influenced by the propaganda of Western bankers, have consciously made poor decisions not to own a single ounce of physical gold and physical silver today. One of the first realities an investor must understand about the gold and silver market is that the Economics 101 concept of price being set by physical supply and physical demand is an utter lie.  In today’s world of banking and financial industry lies, the price of gold and silver are NOT set by the physical demand and physical supply of either of these metals, but rather by the artificial supply and demand of paper contracts predominantly backed by no physical metal.


By now, the following facts are very well known by seasoned physical gold and physical silver buyers but likely still unknown to the average investor worldwide. A CPM Group document released in the year 2000 stated, “With the start of the London Bullion Market Association’s release of monthly trading data, the market has become aware that 100 times more gold and silver trade hands each year, just in the major markets, than is produced or used. Some market participants have wondered aloud how 10 billion ounces of gold could trade via the major markets each year, compared to 120 million ounces of total supply and demand, while roughly 100 billion ounces of silver change hands, compared to around 628 million ounces of new supply.”  Thus, one can see that the fraud perpetrated by bullion banks in the silver futures market exceeds even the fraud they commit in the gold futures markets.  Take the figures provided above, and a quick calculation reveals that bankers were trading nearly 160 times of paper ounces of silver every year than the annual physical supply of silver mined from the earth.


However, break down these numbers even more and the fraud becomes even more astounding.  While in 2000, about 628 million ounces of new supply of physical silver came to market, in 2010, mine production of new silver supply was slightly higher at 735.9 million ounces. Net government sales accounted for another 44.8 million ounces, old silver scrap provided an additional 215 million ounces, and producer hedging accounted for the final 61.1 million ounces. Thus a total annual supply of roughly 1 billion ounces of silver existed in 2010.  However, industrial usage, photography and jewelry used up nearly 78% of the one billion ounces of physical silver supply in 2010 and left less than 100 million ounces available for minting in the form of silver coins. (Source: The Silver Institute). Despite this tightness of new investment silver supply, there have been days in recent months when more than 250 million ounces of paper silver traded on the COMEX in less than one minute! During the times ridiculous volumes of paper silver were trading on the COMEX, usually the price of silver was plummeting in intra-day trading. Thus, bankers were clearly using this massive artificial supply of paper silver contracts to knock down prices.  On top of this fraud, bankers have stretched the landscape of imaginary supply of gold and silver with their introduction of the gold ETF, the GLD, and the silver ETF, the SLV, both of which started trading in 2006. Both theGLD and SLV are highly suspect, likely fraudulent vehicles that probably are either (1) only partially backed by physical gold and physical silver and/or (2) respectively backed by unallocated physical gold/silver that have multiple claims upon themAgain, fraudulent derivative paper gold and paper silver products create a perception of increased supply even when there is no REAL increase in the underlying physical supply or even at times when physical supply is shrinking. Bankers have created this mechanism specifically to suppress the price of gold and silver and to keep their Ponzi fiat currency scheme alive – a scheme that they utilize every single day to silently steal wealth from every citizen on this planet.


I have heard the criticisms levied against Eric Sprott and James Turk regarding their pro-silver and pro-gold stance in that they are just selling their books as PM fund managers and bullion dealers. However, I believe these criticisms to be patently unfair. I don’t believe that either Mr. Sprott or Mr. Turk are so enthusiastic about the future prospects of gold and silver returns because they just want to “talk their books”. Rather, I believe that they are so enthusiastic due to their deeper level of understanding about PM markets than the average retail investor and the vast majority of uneducated commercial investment industry advisers. Furthermore, I’ve been one of the most passionate supporters of gold and silver for the last decade and I have never acted as a bullion dealer, have never received any commissions from any sales of mining stocks, and have never accepted a single cent from any mining company to provide coverage of their company to my subscribing members though I have been approached many times to do so over the years.


To illustrate the level of misunderstanding that still exists about gold and silver prices, here’s one piece of investment “advice” that landed in my email inbox on August 16, 2008: “The barbarous relic – gold – is another good choice, usually. But gold has already appreciated from just over $300 an ounce six years ago to almost $900 today. It could be a little late.” This adviser went on to push stocks and confidently declared that stocks would be the “big winner” once again over the next several years. From August 16, 2008 until today, the S&P 500 has lost 2.92% while gold has risen +111.33% and silver, +284.47%. Stocks, the big winner? I think not. But selling stocks is the big bread and butter money winner of most commercial investment advisers so that is the primary reason why they overwhelmingly always push their clients into purchasing stocks as opposed to the real big winner of precious metals. I recall reading a newspaper article several years ago from a financial adviser in Florida that claimed she was proud of convincing here clients NOT to buy gold at $800 an ounce because the gold price was too expensive and that it was her duty to protect her clients against their own foolish impulses. On November 8, 2007, thousands of people that subscribe to my free newsletter read the following statements from me:


“So with gold over $800 an ounce, is it still cheap? Emphatically yes, and here’s why. I’m not really sure how all the ‘Gold at 27-year high’ headlines came to be, but… if we experience a correction any time soon, and gold breaks back down to the $720 level again before continuing higher, it will just be really cheap. Here’s why. Anyone that’s ever studied the formula that is used to calculate the Consumer Price Index(CPI)  in the U.S. knows that the formula has been greatly tinkered with over the years to produce absurdly low inflation numbers that are merely an artificially manufactured number that probably fits some pre-determined number the government would like to report.”


So back then, even with gold trading at $800 an ounce, the banker-owned and controlled media in the Western world was filled with stories about an imminent “gold bubble” collapse because gold was at a “27-year high.” It’s important to review history from time to time to be reminded how easily you may have accepted patently absurd proclamations about gold and silver prices in order to avoid falling victim to the same banker-originated and banker-spread propaganda today.  The reason I have been overly passionate about gold and silver for years and still am today is because it takes great passion to overcome the widespread ignorance and deceit spread by the commercial investment industry to their clients about gold and silver.


Let’s see how things have panned out in the stocks versus PM investment game over the past few years. From the launch of my Crisis Investment Opportunities newsletter on June 15, 2007 until July 25, 2010, in a little over four years, my newsletter has returned a cumulative profit of  +211.49%. Over the same investment period, the S&P500, the FTSE100, the ASX200, and top 5 ETF iShares Dow Jones EPAC Select Dividend Fund have respectively returned  -21.39%, -11.99%, -26.51%, and -2.69%. Furthermore, during the next four year period, from 2011 to 2015, I truly believe that an attainable goal for my Crisis Investment Opportunities newsletter is to double or even triple my previous four-year cumulative returns, simply due to the following three reasons:


(1) Western bankers are increasingly losing control over the price suppression schemes they have enacted against gold and silver through their creation of bogus paper derivatives;

(2) The conditions that have lead to Euro and US dollar devaluation are worse today than they were 10 years ago and no underlying fundamental problem of the 2008 financial crisis has been adequately addressed as of today; and

(3) The percentage of people that have the amount of faith I hold in gold and silver to produce superior returns around the world is still minute.

Thus, once the average Dick and Jane retail investor finally believe in the facts surrounding gold and silver versus the garbage propaganda disseminated by crooked bankers and ignorant advisers, the price of gold/silver and PM stocks will finally experience a truly parabolic rise.


Once a small percentage of retail investors worldwide, or even just a small percentage of retail investors in a densely populated country like China, finally realize that bankers have created insane massive paper supplies of artificial gold and silver backed by nothing but air and are consequently moved to purchase their first troy ounce of pure gold and/or pure silver, this very small action will exert tremendous upward pressure on the price of gold and silver. And once this happens, I hope that you will have already secured your physical reserves of gold and silver because it is then that PM prices will truly go ballistic.


About the author: In 2005, JS Kim walked away from the immorality of Wall Street to form his own fiercely independent investment research & consulting firm, SmartKnowledgeU. Freed from the deceit and massive restrictions of the commercial investment industry, JS has been guiding clients towards significant profitability ever since. Currently, JS is working on completing two short books that explain the fraud of the modern banking system in simple terms and plans to donate 100% of all profits from these books to orphanages in S. Africa, Vietnam, and Thailand. Visit us athttp://www.smartknowledgeu.com to be informed of their release andFollow us on Twitter.

Republishing Rights: This article may be reprinted as long as the author acknowledgment and all text and links remain intact above. We have noticed that other sites have recently reprinted our articles with no author acknowledgment and in violation of our republishing guidelines. We will ask all sites to cease printing any of our articles that do not abide by our republishing rules. Thank you.

Le Metropole Members,

J.S. Kim: How bankers use imaginary supply to suppress gold and silver 

Submitted by cpowell on 05:24PM ET Thursday, August 4, 2011. Section: Daily Dispatches
1:18a BST Friday, August 5, 2011

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold (and Silver:

In commentary posted Thursday, J.S. Kim of the SmartKnowledgeU investment system and the Underground Investor letter describes how infinite amounts of paper gold and silver are used to suppress prices. Kim writes: "Fraudulent derivative paper gold and paper silver products create a perception of increased supply even when there is no real increase in the underlying physical supply or even at times when physical supply is shrinking. Bankers have created this mechanism specifically to suppress the price of gold and silver and to keep their Ponzi fiat currency scheme alive — a scheme that they use every day to silently steal wealth from every citizen on this planet."

Kim's commentary is headlined "Why Gold and Silver Prices Will More than Double Again even from Current Prices" and you can find it at the Underground Investor here:


CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

The money from heaven will be the path to hell.

August 3rd, 2011 by



Dear Concerned American,

Those were the exact words spoken to me two weeks ago by famed economist and author Robert Wiedemer, as we sat over dinner in a fine Palm Beach, Fla., restaurant.

“You see, the medicine will become the poison,” Robert said as he pulled some economic charts from his briefcase.

“We will likely see 50% unemployment, a 90% stock market drop, and 100% annual inflation . . . starting in 2012.”

I was skeptical at first, but then I saw the evidence (click here to see the same charts he showed me).

Wiedemer’s prophetic words rang true yesterday when the “medicine” — the rejoicing from Capitol Hill over the passing of the debt ceiling legislation . . . became the “poison” — the Dow plunging 266 points due to legitimate fears and anguish over what this bill REALLY means for the future of this great nation.

That’s eight days in a row of stock market losses (nearly 7%).

And this could be the beginning of the end . . . the last time we saw a market sell-off like this was three years ago, when investors helplessly watched as the Dow lost 50% of its value.

Amazingly, Robert was warning investors back then too!

In 2006, he was one of the few economists who accurately predicted the four-bubble meltdown in the housing, stock, private debt and consumer spending markets that almost sunk America.

In 2009 he also warned people about the federal debt and dollar crises that we are currently experiencing.

So when I heard Robert’s warning that night, I knew you had to see the evidence for yourself. And that is why Newsmax hosted theAftershock Survival Summit.

During it, Robert shows you exactly why he thinks we will be facing VERY difficult times ahead.

But Robert doesn’t leave you hanging hopeless.

The most important factor Robert discussed on this broadcast was a step-by-step plan you can take with your investments, retirement savings, life insurance, debt, home, and even your job . . . so that you and your family can stay safe in the coming years.

To launch a FREE airing of this critical interview, simply click here!

Aaron DeHoog
Financial Publisher
Newsmax and Moneynews

P.S. Over one million Americans have already united to watch this broadcast. Here is what they have to say:

  • Russ from Wichita, Kan., said it “scared the hell out of me. It was a great wake-up call.”
  • Susan from Montgomery, Ala., said it was “awesome, eye-opening, and mind-boggling.”
  • Don E. from Edgewater, Fla., said, “It caused me not only to think . . . but to act.” 

A Compromise Takes Two Plans

July 30th, 2011 by


By Rebekah Southerland

Freelance Reporter


FORWARDED for Education, Edification, and Information only
Contact: becworks@gmail.com

FACT: Piers Morgan on CNN News pressed his GOP audience to "believe" that IRS taxes pay for government and is presenting the GOP as "bad guys" in the ongoing saga of government down grade and default, per his program on July 29, 2011.

LINK: Grace Report: http://www.uhuh.com/taxstuff/gracecom.htm

FACT: The Grace Report presented to the American public by President Reagan told the truth about how the IRS-gathered taxes are used.  IRS taxes DO NOT pay for running the federal government. They pay for DEBT REDUCTION on the national debt…only and nothing else.

FACT: The British Piers Morgan is ignorant of how the American tax system operates, yet his opinion is used to persuade Democrats that the GOP is causing a default. 

FACT:  Piers Morgan refuses to discuss the fact that there is no Democrat plan in writing.  Neither the President nor the Senate Democrats have a written bill by which compromise can be made.

FACT:  Compromise cannot take place when only one side presents a written bill…compromise always involves two different written plans.  So, when the talking news heads say there is not compromise, they reveal how ignorant they are….or they are trying to spin the public opinion against the GOP.  Compromising "hot air" just will not happen.  Stupid opinion.

FACT: The Republican TEA Party knows that FREEDOM cannot compromise with COMMUNISM.

FACT:  Americans fought against Brits and taxation in the past.  They are doing it again.

FACT:  All Americans are smart….but, some Americans are smarter than others.

FACT:  Smart Americans know that the Communist Manifesto ten planks were inserted into the Democratic Party Platform with the influence of Eleanor Roosevelt.  This fact was made public by the British intelligence officer John P. Coleman, who disclosed the evidence.

FACT:  Smart Americans know that the communist-loving politicians have infiltrated both sides of the political aisle, and that a communist insurgency is taking place in the USA.  General Boykin made this fact known via video disclosure in 2011.

FACT:  Smart Americans know that without a $4 Trillion cut to the budget, Moody's will down grade the US Credit Rating.  So far, no political party has passed a bill that will cut $4 trillion.  The President refuses to put forth a plan to cut $4 Trillion.  The DOWN GRADE is now inevitable.

FACT: Smart Americans know that a DEFAULT of the federal level will literally put the federal level "out of business", thereby leaving the 50 State governors in charge of the country.

FACT: Smart Americans want total grid lock in the federal level.  They want a default.  They are ready to press the RESTART button for the FAILED FEDERAL LEVEL.

FACT: CNN is not telling the truth to the American public with the news coverage by the British Piers Morgan.

OPINION:  Piers Morgan is nothing but a talking head that is owned and operated by the Vatican and The Crown syndicate, which is usinghis position as a bully pulpit for the communist-oriented Democratic Party position ….smart freedom-loving Americans are ignoring CNN's Piers Morgan.



While Rebekah’s articles are always, and I mean ALWAY’S, accurate and professional. This one inspires me to comment on something missing.

She accurately points out that some American’s are smart, and some are not, but I wish she had commented on the majority just don’t seem to get it, whether they are smart or not. The fact’s existing prove beyond doubt that American’s have been brain-washed with the good guy bad guy communist political scenario for so long they no longer have the cognition remaining  to know or remember that this side-show going on in congress is a diversion tactic designed and conducted by the International Bankers puppets to widen the divide between voters. So, consider this, just WHO should we be attacking in this information war? Just like any other kind of war, the puppets are pitted one against another until they are nothing more than dead men walking, while the general’s kick back and watch with glee. It is time to start reminding every one world wide in every form of information transfer that thegeneral’s are the enemy, not the dumb-ass soldiers. Granted there are other factors involved such as the Vatican, and the city of London Crown, but teaching that is like making a foot soldier carry 200 pounds of ammo, it’s just too much for the majority of American’s to rap their minds around. In fact, the one part of this un-holy trio that is the king pin is the International Bankers, without which the entire system would collapse and freedom loving men and women would have a chance to educate the masses on the benefits of a free market economy, and a Republican form of government. Just consider what it would be like in America if the media industry and public education was no longer tolerated and the constitution was returned to its original form. If we in the internet revolution do not concentrate our focus on the Bankers soon (LIKE RIGHT NOW) the masses will never GET IT in time! They have been feeding the masses poison food for their minds and bodies for so long the masses have developed a preference for it. So, CONSTANTLY blaming the politicians for all of America’s problems is not changing their diet, it is KILLING THEM!  This is what the Bankers want! Remember this, the politicians would abandon their involvement in this surreptitious political carnival so fast it would make your head swimif THE BANKERS were incarcerated and broke. For the last one hundred years America’s government has been totally under the control of the bankers, and not even one of them have been ELECTED!  This is not a diatribe against Rebekah, as God knows she has been a tireless soldier in the information war, or against any other patriotic journalist, but it is intended to be a reminder that soldiers don’t win wars, BANKERS WIN WARS!  And the bankers should be our focus!

Comments like the Bankers minions in congress are at it again, will be more effective if it is constantly presented that way. We need to keep the masses focused on- the bankers own our government, and everything is their fault!

Without the bankers money power, the communist, liberials, and all other forms of scumbags they employee will be    impotent!

Here is another thing we should remember; while there are hundred’s of thousands of Piers Morgan’s in the world, there are only a handful of Bankers in comparison, and they are too smart to be in the public eye. To kill a snake, cut off it’s damn head!

So here is our message to congress,



After that happens, American’s will go into a damage control mode and from our innate desire for financial security we will show the world how God supported private enterprise can produce a life of abundance, liberty, health, and happiness. LESSON LEARNED: NEVER PUT A BANKER IN THE DRIVERS SEAT, AND ABANDON THE PARTY SYSTEM OF LEGISLATORS. There is only one kind of American WE WILL LET LEAD US, AN INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUALIST, WITH ENOUGH BRAINS AND COURAGE TO ARTICULATE AND ENFORCE THE EMPOWERING OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND LIMITING THE ROLL OF GOVERNMENT.



July 29th, 2011 by



TOTAL GLOBAL Contributions as of: 02/14/11 to 08/01/2011: (6 months)  $567 (12 contributors)

What is needed to be effective? 

A slight tad bit more than what was receivedbut then I did not ask this year for backing as I did in previous years. I left it to the individual to step forward without being asked.

So, in light of the results of not asking I guess I will have to ask for the first time in 2011 by a CAFR1 National email post sent for the month of August..

CAFR1 Donation Page updated for August 1, 2011:


* Millions of people from across the country are talking about what CAFR1 brought forward.

** Trillions of dollars are being moved to perpetuate "Business as Usual" for the government players and their cooperatives.

*** Gas provided this year for CAFR1 to reverse the tide for one and all as of August 1st 2011 is as seen above.

Let me say up front that help with operating funds for CAFR1 is and will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks and Sent FYI from,

Walter Burien – CAFR1

P. O. Box 2112

Saint Johns, AZ 85936

 Tel. (928) 458-5854

PS: Remember David and Goliath? It just so happened that David won.


Here is a man who is doing more for America than anyone I know, and what it has cost him in time and money is hard to imagine. By all rights this man should have a full staff and all of them with decent salaries, at our expense. If you donated as much as your worthless newspaper cost each week, you would never miss it and he could put it to a lot better use. C’mon folks, let’s all dig deep and support Walter.






Islam and the Fate of Norway and America

July 29th, 2011 by


By Mike Scruggs


On the front page of the Sunday New York Times of July 24, Norwegian terrorist and mass-murderer Anders Breivik was called “a gun-loving, right-wing, fundamentalist Christian opposed to multiculturalism.”  With this mainly false statement, the Times reporter attacked and slandered two of the Times’ favorite enemies: the adherents of traditional Scripture-based Christianity and supporters of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The desired implication was, of course, that conservative Christians, gun-owners, and advocates for limited government and traditional values should take part of the blame for Breivik’s twisted ideology and unspeakable crimes.


Breivik’s 1,500 page manifesto, however, indicates that he doesn’t have a clue about genuine Christianity. He writes in his manifesto and indicates in Internet posts that he is not religious, doubts God’s existence, and does not pray. He is an admirer of Charles Darwin and believes that science should have undisputed authority over religion, which is a crutch for weak people. He candidly admitted that he found no support for his actions in either Catholic or Protestant teachings. Breivik does identify with the cultural Christianity that is a foundational component of European and American civilization. Basically, he identifies with traditional European culture and believes it is being undermined by massive Muslim immigration, which has been encouraged by the Left-Socialist parties in Europe.


Murder, and especially mass murder, is inexcusable in the service of any cause, but that doesn’t mean that many Europeans don’t have some legitimate grievances and frustrations concerning the massive influx and growth of Islam in Europe. They are learning the hard way that the much-touted glories of multiculturalism are fool’s gold.

Multiculturalism insists that all cultural values are equal, so Norwegians and other peoples should not insist on preserving their own culture. They should feel guilty about preserving their culture and gladly give it up.


Just a few months ago, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the first major European leader to stand up and say that multiculturalism was not working and that the German people wanted a German culture. The leaders of Britain, France, Denmark, and the Netherlands have now rejected multiculturalism. Even Sweden is turning to the right. Multiculturalim has been a political and sociological fad for several decades, but its acceptance requires the closing of the mind to observed reality and logic. It is happy-clappy nonsense that many Europeans are now realizing is unaffordable, undesirable, and a serious threat to European cultural and political survival. 


Unfortunately, this silly, unrealistic, and logically defective philosophy has now become a totalitarian ideology. Just this year a Norwegian evangelist was arrested while quietly and unobtrusively evangelizing during Independence Day and Gay Pride parades. Hate Speech laws have essentially crushed free speech in Norway except for the multiculturalist left. The Netherlands is now revolting against the demise of free speech, but several years ago even political leaders faced the threat of criminal prosecution for criticizing multiculturalism.


Like Sweden, Norway has seen its crime rate go from near zero to problematic, with rape at the top of the criminal popularity chart. A disproportionate share of this crime wave is attributable to non-Western immigrants. Yet all the pressures of political correctness and the law have silenced any protest. Forty-six percent of Oslo’s welfare recipients are non-Western immigrants and consume 55 percent of the city’s social services budget. Norway is an especially wealthy country because of its North Sea oil reserves. Much of Norway’s welfare budget is funded by a petroleum fund, but the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise estimates that it will be depleted by 2015 unless immigration is drastically reduced.  A Norwegian journalist writing in Belgium recently made the statement that there was more free speech in North Korea than in Sweden. This is hyperbole, of course, but the problem is real and just as bad in Norway.


The level of frustration may be higher in Norway. Norwegians see their national retirement and medical care funds being devoured by people who have little identity with or appreciation for Norwegian culture and democracy. They see crime rates soaring. Yet the government is largely ignoring or even denying the problems. Furthermore, the prospects for political change are uphill because of limits to free speech on subjects touching race, religion, and foreign cultures. Christianity is more and more persecuted, while Islam is a sacred cow. Breivik’s atrocity, far from advancing or saving European culture, may have closed the political door to its survival in Norway. I pray not, for I love Norway and her people.


Here is a warning from American history, taken from the minority report of a U.S. Congressional Committee in 1871:


“…when people saw that they had no rights which were respected, no protection from insult, no security, even for their wives and children, and that what little they had saved…was being confiscated by taxation…many of them took the law into their own hands and did deeds of violence which we neither justify or excuse. But all history shows that bad government will make bad citizens.”


I hope my readers can see the global reach of the bankers control of governments, education, and media, and what they are doing to create a one world society.

Perhaps like me, you place a high value on our culture and will refuse to accept outside control of our country, it's laws,  religion, currency, and personal freedoms.

If you are still uninformed on this issue of International Bankers and how they are destroying the world, and peace in the world, you better visit this site more often.

You should know by now our government is non-responsive to us, and it will take a hundred million angry people to make a difference. Remember this! 

"All history shows that bad government will make bad citizens.”










Edwin Vieira Jr. on the Power Elite, the Police State, and Opposing the Authoritarian Trend

July 27th, 2011 by



Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.

Sunday, July 24, 2011 – with Anthony Wile

The Daily Bell is pleased to present this exclusive interview with Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.

Introduction: Dr. Vieira holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School). For over thirty-six years he has been a practicing attorney, specializing in cases that raise issues of constitutional law. He has presented numerous cases of import before the Supreme Court and written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals. His latest scholarly works are Constitutional "Homeland Security" (2007), a proposal to begin the revitalization of the constitutional Militia of the several states; Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2d rev. ed. 2002), a comprehensive study of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective; and How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary (2004), an analysis of the problems of irresponsible "judicial supremacy", and how to deal with them. With well known libertarian trader Victor Sperandeo, he is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered "crash" of the Federal Reserve System, and the political revolution it causes. He is now working on an extensive project concerned with the constitutional "Militia of the Several States" and "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."

Daily Bell: Thanks for sitting down with us again. We've interviewed you before and are always struck by your clarity and eloquence. In this interview we want to make some declarative statements, if you don't mind, and then have you respond. These are very "tough" questions by the way, and we don't mind at all if you disagree or do not wish to discuss them. Wouldn't be the first time and we wouldn't blame you a bit. Anyway, we'll start with a couple of basic questions … What's the single-most critical problem facing America right now? We think it's America's growing militarism and authoritarianism.

Edwin Vieira, Jr: I agree. The elaboration of a national para-military police state is the most dangerous development in recent times. The likelihood of a crash of the Federal Reserve System in hyperinflation is critical, too. But if that event occurs (as it probably will), the response of the power-structure will not be to correct the situation, but instead to impose the worst kind of third-world "austerity" on this country, in order to salvage the financial system at the expense of Mr. and Mrs. America. As most average Americans will not accept savage cuts in their standard of living gracefully, "austerity" will have to be rammed down their throats with police batons. Which, as far as I can tell, is the main, if not the only reason for the Department of Homeland Security.

Of course, I was predicting all this YEARS ago, to those who read my columns at www.newswithviews.com, so today I feel a bit like Cassandra must have. You know, the only reason we are aware of Cassandra is that (i) she was right in her predictions, and (ii) no one paid any attention to her! If the Trojans had harkened to her warning, they might have beaten the Greeks (or avoided the war altogether); and then credit would have gone to Priam, Hector, Paris, Aeneas, or some other "hero", rather than to the prophetess. That leaves me with something of a pessimistic outlook.

Daily Bell: What's going on in the Middle East? We've lost count of the wars and skirmishes in which the US is involved.

Edwin Vieira, Jr: What's going on in the Middle East is what has gone on there since the days of the Assyrians: naked imperialism, the struggle for resources, trade routes, military bases, and puppet local leaders and states to do the Empire's bidding (what used to be called "satraps" and "satrapies"). In ancient times, because the Middle East was largely "a world of its own", if an imperialistic state conquered the region it effectively ruled its world. Today, the Middle East is a point d'appui (as the military strategists say) for launching attacks on the whole globe, and a choke point for controlling the flow of vital resources. So, modern imperialists imagine, if they control the Middle East they can control the entire world.

Daily Bell: In the past six months our thinking has coalesced around the idea of what we now call "directed history" or conspiratorial history. We increasingly tend to believe, at least theoretically, that humanity's real history is a "directed" one. Make any sense to you? Are you a believer in the mainstream "great man" theory of history?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: No rational person believes that what happens in a social context is the product of purely individual action, by isolated people just (as was said of Lee Harvey Oswald) "acting alone ." Most of what happens in a social context, and certainly in an economic or a political context, is the result of concerted action by groups of people. Moreover, these people do not act for no reason, or for mutually contradictory reasons. As the Austrian Economists point out, "human action is purposeful behavior ." There is always a reason (although it may be a bad one or an incorrect one) on the basis of which the members of the group concert their activities. To call these actions "conspiracy" may or may not be correct, depending on whether the ends envisioned or the means employed are illegal or immoral. But to deny that they are concerted actions of particular people, intentionally directed to some specific goals believed by those people to be beneficial to themselves, and that they are usually more successful, because they are concerted, than similar actions by isolated individuals, is ridiculous.

Sometimes these groups attain so much economic, political, or military power or influence that, for a time, they "direct" (or seem to "direct") a society's course, or important aspects of it. The "paper-money oligarchy" is one such group. But we must remember that competition always develops among existing groups, causes some old groups to disappear, and stimulates the formation of new groups. So we might say that there is "sporadic direction", or "intermittent direction", and certainly "competition in direction", but not "permanent direction" by any one group.

For example, Tsardom was a huge apparatus of concerted action that "directed" "all the Russias" for several hundred years. Then it collapsed, and the Bolsheviks took its place – literally, with Stalin more of a "Tsar" than even Ivan the Terrible had been. But the whole Bolshevik enterprise imploded and then fragmented under Gorbachev. What are we to say? Sic transit gloria mundi. These supposedly "directing" powers apparently lacked the power necessary to "direct" their own survival. Tsardom may not have been a "conspiracy", but Bolshevism certainly was. (Lenin himself viewed and ran the Communist Party as such.) So even supremely powerful conspiracies can come apart at the seams.

As for "great men", surely there have been individuals who have stood out as "leaders", for good or ill, throughout history. But no Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, to cite the worst modern examples, could have succeeded without dozens of lieutenants, and tens if not hundreds of thousands of lower-level helpers and hangers-on who had to be just as bad as they were, because the lower-level operatives were the ones who actually performed the arrests, actually confined people in concentration camps (gulag, laogai), and actually pulled the triggers in the execution-cellars. I am not aware of any evidence that Hitler, Stalin, or Mao ever shot some political enemy in the back of the head; but hundreds of thousands of supposed "enemies" were shot by their lackeys. "Great men" of that stamp are apparently "great" because they can convince large numbers of "little men" to behave in the most bestial ways towards even larger numbers of their completely innocent and harmless fellow men. The questions that need answers, then, are: Why do the "lesser men" follow the Hitlers, Stalins, and Maos into the labyrinth of evil? And why do the masses allow themselves to be herded, and even slaughtered, by these thugs as so many sheep?

Daily Bell: Like you, we are far from endorsing the Great Man theory of history. In fact, we believe the forces behind this directed history over the past 500 years anyway are Anglo-American elites. These are basically banking families and their enablers based in Britain, Europe with military and intelligence arms (along with other such families) in Israel and the US. Your thoughts?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: There is no question that this "banking" (or, more descriptively, "financial racketeering") group has been, for a long time, the dominant economic, political, and social force in Western Civilization, and more recently in world civilization. But the cracks in its facade are already widening to a dangerous degree: Its paper-money and credit schemes are in the final stages of Ponzi self-destruction. Its militaristic imperialism has arrived at the point of "overstretch ." Its "social programs" to keep the masses content with "bread and circuses" are proving too expensive to maintain while funding the other major line-items of the imperialistic agenda. Its political and economic fronts of "democracy", "free elections", "two parties", "the rule of law", "freedom of speech", "free markets", "free trade" et cetera ad nauseum, are being exposed as frauds. So the game seems to be up.

Daily Bell: Again, we agree. But that has not stopped them so far. In fact, we believe these families use what we calldominant social themes or fear-based promotions along with military actions (wars, large and small) to reshape the world and set it increasingly on the path toward one world government … and continue to do so.

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Yes, agitation and propaganda focusing on fear and greed, fomenting of international and civil wars, artificially created and managed "booms and busts", cultural subversion … they are all aimed ultimately at a global police state. Whether this police state turns out to be predominately fascistic or socialistic in character depends upon which of the contending forces within the globalist movement proves more realistic, resilient, and ruthless: the governmental bureaucrats and the politicians and intelligentsia allied with them ("the Red Front"); or the supra-national corporations and the bureaucrats and politicians allied with them ("the Brown Front"). At this point in the United States, I should bet on the Brown Front, because of the tremendous power of the Military-Industrial Complex, and the recognition by the deep thinkers in the Pentagon that they need the things only the industrialists can supply far more than they need anything the pencil-pushers in the civilian bureaucracy can offer.

Daily Bell: We want to focus a little more on this idea of unified world control because you have been magnificent in calling attention to what is going on in America, but there is perhaps a larger WHY. We don't believe these US andNATO foreign wars are wars for resources. These are wars of neo-colonial control. Correct? Incorrect?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Why would any materialist want to control some geographical territory and a troublesome hostile population, except for what can be gained in material terms from that control? There are valuable natural resources, and (to use the "planners'" favorite term) "human resources", too, in those far-away places. Also, denying resources of various kinds to opponents is part of a war for resources.

Of course, one cannot discount the involvement of psychopathological elements in all this. Psychopaths–with whom modern governments have been staffed to superfluity throughout the Twentieth Century and even unto this very day – do not usually think in strict economic terms of "cost versus benefit." Hitler, for example, wanted to exterminate the Slavic populations in the East, and resettle those lands with ethnic Germans (the "lebensraum" policy). Apparently, because of his racist aberrations, it never dawned on him (or he rejected the idea) that the Slavs could more easily and profitably have been reduced to "haulers of wood and drawers of water," and thus been made to pay their own way more or less in cooperation with the occupying forces. And his brutal policies against the indigenous populations significantly contributed to his losing the war against Stalin. Then, how many people did Stalin murder senselessly (or apparently senselessly, according to what we would consider a rational calculation) in pursuit of "collectivization of the land" or various "five year plans"? Or Mao, with "the Great Leap Forward" and "the Cultural Revolution"? There may have been some method behind these events; yet they all certainly reeked strongly of madness, too.

Daily Bell: Ok, point taken. But let's press you a little on that. In addition to seeking control – domination – over additional regions of the world, we believe that an entire global infrastructure has been built up over the past 60 years and that this is no accident. The UNIMF, NATO, World BankBISICC are all recent globalist inventions, not to mention globalist trade associations and other entities such as WHO. Seems the entire world is becoming subject to a kind of creeping world government. Coincidence?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Hardly. The globalists know they cannot set up their world superstate in one fell swoop. So they are laying a few bricks here, and a few more there, that somewhere down the line will serve as the foundation, and then the walls, and then the roof of their projected building. Moreover, their plan is not just "creeping" along, any more than the construction of any complex edifice can be called "creeping" simply because it takes a long time to complete. They have their schedule. Unfortunately for them, quite a few people in the world oppose the project, albeit in somewhat chaotic fashion. So the schedule is set back now and again, in unpredictable ways. And some parts of the construction, such as military alliances (NATO, the various "coalitions" cobbled together for ad hoc aggression in the Middle East), will doubtlessly prove to be merely temporary expedients, just as a wooden frame into which concrete is poured for a foundation is discarded after the concrete hardens.

Daily Bell: We've noticed that military pressure plays a part in this globalization of the Western paradigm – one we call regulatory democracy. In Iraq and Afghanistan for instance, almost the first thing American officials did was start a central bank. The second thing would be to set up a public school system. Then tax collection, military police etc. Seems like neo-colonialism to us, even though you have stated that this occurs at least partially for purposes of a resource grab? So let us ask the question again. Is the ultimate purpose one of control – of culture and regions – or one of resources?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Put it that way and these are the instruments of control, the means rather than the ends. If, as applied to foreign countries that the imperialists take over, in the aggregate they represent the mechanistic essentials of "neo-colonialism", what are they to be called in the imperialists' own countries (the United States and the United Kingdom, in particular)? Apparently, the US and the UK were "colonized" long ago by use of these various techniques, which were then perfected for export to unwilling customers worldwide. So then the question becomes, Who were (and still are) the original "colonizers"? Remember, human action is purposeful behavior by identifiable individuals, not disembodied "forces" or "trends ." We need to identify, as Captain Renault would have said, "the usual suspects."

Daily Bell: Excellent. This is absolutely true in our view. These strategies were worked out at home and applied abroad. It seems to us that the World War I extended Anglosphere control to Germany. World War II crushed Japan as an independent entity and the Vietnamese and Korean wars brought Asia into the Anglosphere fold. Now this is happening in the Middle East and Africa. In others words, almost every war on the past century has really been fought to advance globalism. Other rationales and mainstream history are actually a kind of smokescreen. Too cynical?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: As no war in recent memory has been waged in order to bring about, or even support, true national independence for any country (including the United States), one can presume that globalism was the purpose for them all. As Sherlock Holmes would say, once every other explanation for the crime has been eliminated, the one that remains is likely correct.

Daily Bell: Let's return to this issue of regions versus resources. We don't believe the US and Britain are playing the "great game." We think the countries in the Middle East and Africa are the only ones left that do not participate in the so-called unity of nations and that what is going on now in the Middle East and Africa is a kind of final push to subjugate the world. Any truth to this in your view? Just paranoia?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Even paranoids sometimes have real enemies. I doubt, though, that all of the countries in the world other than those in the Middle East and Africa are playing the "unity of nations" game in the same way the US, the UK, and their client (or puppet) states are playing it. The Chinese and the Russians, certainly, do not intend to become "junior partners" of the Anglo-American cabal, if they can help it. And perhaps the Germans might recognize the benefit of their allying with the Russians and the Chinese in a sort of modern "Dreikaiserbund", as the Anglo-American funny-money apparatus explodes in hyperinflation. So there are many wild cards left to be played in this deck.

Daily Bell: It seems to us that regulatory democracy – which you could also call fascism – is the preferred form of government that the Western elites want to spread around the world. Yes? No?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: The fascistic model is the one that "works," after a fashion, because it retains a modicum of free-market direction of resources. Besides being proven by Mises and other economists to be unworkable in theory, the socialistic model of central bureaucratic planning has also been discredited in practice by its failure in the Soviet Union, Mao's China, and so on. The Western "elitists" may be knaves; but they are not entirely fools. So, given that their ascendancy cannot abide the free market and limited government, and that they cannot maintain that ascendancy economically through socialism, fascism would seem to be their only realistic choice.

Daily Bell: Can you expand on China's and Russia's relationship with the West?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Russia is a semi-Western country; but its leadership class harbors significant resentments and jealousies against the Anglo-American Establishment. So I think it's being "on board" [with elite globalism] is problematical. As for the Chinese, they are an entirely different culture. They may lead the Anglo-Americans into believing that they are "on board"; but why they should actually be "on board" mystifies me, particularly in that they must recognize that the Western funny-money Ponzi banks and financial centers are in the final throes of self-destruction. If you knew the iceberg was waiting for you, would you sail on the Titanic?

Daily Bell: This globalist push seems to have started about ten years ago, right after 9/11. In fact, 9/11 seems to have been the galvanizing force behind the current leg of militaristic internationalism. Does this make you suspicious of the official story behind 9/11? We've joined voices with others calling for a new investigation, maybe an international one. Is this naïve? Does it matter anymore? As Bill Clinton would say, should we just move on?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: If Bill Clinton said it, we have good reason to be suspicious. We still don't know exactly what was going on in Mena, for Heaven's sake! The key event in 9/11 was the obvious controlled demolition of WTC-7. That and that alone should settle the question that the "official" 9/11 story is bunkum, through and through.

What the truth of the matter is, only a real investigation can determine. But the people behind the cover-up should realize that thousands of innocent individuals were murdered on 9/11; that there is NO statute of limitations on murder (and certainly not on mass-murder); and that whoever aids and abets the actual murderers by covering up the crime after the fact is equally guilty. So the perpetrators of this crime and their henchmen are playing with nano-thermite, as it were. If a real American patriot ever should become President, with control of the investigatory apparatus of the government in Washington, and as Commander in Chief of the Militia in every State, they are finished.

Daily Bell: The ramifications of the theory of directed history are sizeable. But let's stick to the present. Is Barack Obama a kind of elite puppet?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: He is certainly operating far "above his pay grade", as the expression goes. And it appears that he did not arrive there on the basis of outstanding personal merit, or decades of hard, effective work as a legislator or administrator. So what would Sherlock Holmes's conclusion be?

Daily Bell: Is central banking the engine that drives the elites' increasingly global governance?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: So far it has been. Which leads one to expect that, with the imminent collapse of the Federal Reserve System as the de facto world central bank, the "elitists" will now attempt to set up a de jure world central bank independent of every particular country's laws.

Daily Bell: Can you see in American history a pattern of increasing centralization of money and political authority – power drained from the states. Is this simply coincidence?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: It certainly was NOT "coincidence"! But as I wrote a book of some 1,700 pages on this subject, entitled PIECES OF EIGHT: THE MONETARY POWERS AND DISABILITIES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION (available from Amazon), I shall refer your readers there for the full story.

Daily Bell: We think the modern historical paradigm pits the truth-telling of the Internet Reformation against the fear-based promotions and militarism of the elites. Any credibility to this?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: The Internet is full of "fear-based promotions and militarism", too, because the Establishment is learning to "game" it. Also, it is overrun with drivel and nonsense, from every wavelength of the political spectrum, because anything can be posted by anyone at any time at very low cost. In addition, I find that people who habitually use the Internet, almost to the exclusion of reading books, tend to develop very short attention-spans. Confronted by more than one page of text, they impatiently click to some other link (usually with pictures). They come to demand–and to receive – very easily chewed "e-bites" of information, which, being so limited in substance, tend often to be as much mis-information as real information. That is, for most people the Internet is not Harvard University's Widener Library, but what amounts to a "Dick and Jane" primary-school reader.

There is also the problem of the incalculable mass of material floating through the ether. How does one discriminate? Of X thousand web sites and blogs, which ones are actually worth reviewing? Does someone utterly unknown to you have a basis for what he is publishing? On balance, though, the Internet has opened up many doors that the Establishment would prefer to see permanently closed. So, on the principle that "it takes a crooked stick to beat a mad dog," I'm all for it.

Daily Bell: We think in fact the modern Internet Reformation era is partially a replay of what happened when theGutenberg press helped spark the Renaissance, Protestant Reformation, etc. – as well as a series of endless Peasant wars. Your thoughts?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: I'm glad that you observed that "the Gutenberg press" might have had untoward, as well as beneficial, consequences. I suppose the ultimate point is that information, by itself, is not enough. A bit of discrimination and prudence has to be added, or things will tend to get out of hand.

Daily Bell: Good point, though actually the Peasant Wars were started to distract people from the influence of the Press so far as we can tell. Anyway, if modern history IS directed by Anglo-American elites, is world government inevitable – as this seems to their goal?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Nothing has ever proven to be "inevitable" in human affairs except death. Did we not just come through a century of destructive idiocy during which huge numbers of supposedly intelligent people professed to believe in "dialectical materialism", "scientific socialism", and "the dictatorship of the proletariat", all summed up in "the inevitability of communism"? But outside of American universities, anyone who stood up and proclaimed "the inevitability of communism" today would be viewed as a candidate for psychiatric intervention.

Practically speaking, the "elitists" do have their goals. But hundreds of millions of other people have other, contrary goals. And as those people outnumber the "elitists" by orders of magnitude, as "God is on the side of the heavier battalions," and as the "elitists'" goals are unworkable in any event, I wonder whose goals in the long run will prove to be "inevitable."

Daily Bell: Do you think these elites wish to reduce the world's population? What do you think of the Rosicrucian Georgia Guidestones?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: I harbor no doubt that psychopaths in positions of power would not shrink from murdering anyone who stood in their way – whether particular individuals, economic classes, races, and so on. Have they ever shrunk from mass murder?

Daily Bell: If one accepts modern directed history, it seems as if the effort to create global governance has taken a step back because of Pashtun/Taliban resistance. We see the British, in particular, having tried to crush the Pashtuns three times in the past 150 years. We don't think these were resource wars but were wars specifically aimed at erasing tribal resistance to create an easier path toward a one-world order. Any truth to this?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Lenin and Stalin ruthlessly crushed the so-called "kulaks" and a large part of the ordinary Ukrainian and Russian peasantry as well. Tens of millions died. These events were part of the Bolsheviks' "resource wars", primarily for control of food, but with the ultimate aim of stabilizing and preserving the Bolshevik regime (the proposed "new world order" of its day). The Bolsheviks would not have murdered so many peasants, if the peasants had not engaged in a kind of "tribal resistance" to collectivization, expropriation, starvation, deportation to labor camps, and so on. So which is the chicken and which the egg?

As far as I can tell, the difference between the British and the Bolsheviks with respect to matters such as these consists in the letters that follow the "B", and not much more. 

Daily Bell: We notice the current wars in the Middle East are for the most part tribal. The Yemenis and Somalis claim tribal kinship with each other, the Afghan Pashtun and Pakistani Punjabs are very ancient tribes; the Persians once dominated an empire. It seems as if rather than being a war on terror, the current wars breaking out are aimed at subjecting the oldest tribes of the world to the yolk of Western globalism. We think the war on terror simply disguises what is a war against the world's most ancient tribes. Any comments?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Yes, these various tribes do stand in the way of "Western globalism", are made up of refractory people who have the temerity to want to live their own lives in their own traditional manners, and will not knuckle under to anything short of overwhelming force. Ergo, force is being applied to them at almost a genocidal level; but, unfortunately for the globalists, it is proving to be less than overwhelming.

On the other hand, the globalists would be following exactly the same policies if those areas were inhabited by refractory, armed people transplanted from Cleveland, Ohio (who, I understand, are pretty tough, too, or they never would have survived there).

These so-called "wars" (so-called because they are not constitutional) are not "wars ON terror", but "wars OF terror", of which not all the victims are among these foreign tribes. The American people are victims, too. The Middle Eastern tribes do not hate Americans' freedoms, with which they have had no experience whatsoever; rather, they hate America's leadership class, which is bombing, shooting, and otherwise trying to kill them on a daily basis. And if Americans want to preserve their freedoms, they should begin to look closely at this situation through those tribesmen's eyes.

Daily Bell: We worry that if the Middle East and Africa are overrun, there could be nothing standing in the way of the elite's quest for global domination. In such a situation, we think the elites would enlarge their authoritarian efforts domestically. Thus, while it is bad now, it will be worse in the future for citizens of the West if the elites consolidate their gains abroad. Just paranoia?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: No, you are probably correct, IF no resistance were forthcoming from Americans themselves. But we see that the "elitists'" present "authoritarian efforts" are generating a tidal wave of disgust, anger, and increasing "push back" from average Americans across the country. So the idea that apparent "elitist" victories in the Middle East and Africa will shore up their position at home is not well founded.

Daily Bell: Some less geopolitical questions. Is Barack Obama going to win re-election?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: If the Republicans persist in nominating any one of their present "front runners" for President, the Democrats could nominate a stuffed rhinoceros and expect to win.

Daily Bell: How about Ron Paul?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: The Republicans will never nominate him. He is as dangerous to them as he is to the Democrats. Perhaps more so.

I hope that, after the Republicans and their lap dogs in the big media perform their usual "hatchet job" on him, Dr. Paul will run on a "fusion ticket" of the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party, and whatever other third parties still desire their members to live in a free society. In that way, he might be able to find a place on the ballot in all or most of the States. If such a "fusion ticket" drew enough support, it would signal the impending death of the Republican Party. (And good riddance.)

Having decided not to run for re-election to Congress, Dr. Paul has nothing to lose, and can afford to go all out. And he could contribute nothing more valuable than to leave this country with a true "second" party. Then elections will become real contests between American patriots (the Whites, the traditional color of counterrevolution), and the fascist-socialist combine (the Browns and the Reds).

Daily Bell: If someone like Ron Paul were to win, would he be able to reverse the authoritarian tide in the US?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Let me put it this way: Dr. Paul has far more practical experience in government than do I. But if I were elected President, within six months or so I should have the "elitists" running pell-mell for the exits, by applying the "Seven I's Policy": namely, illuminate, investigate, interrogate, implicate, indict, inculpate, and incarcerate. Remember 9/11, for example. How many would have to "take a fall" for that little episode? So, I suspect that if Dr. Paul were to become President, and were to appoint the right people to the right offices, he could do a very great deal "to reverse the authoritarian tide" in short order. After all, in history as on the beaches, the tides flow and the tides ebb.

Daily Bell: We've noticed the tribal areas that remain the freest – or at least unengaged from global government – are the ones where people are armed, like Yemen and Afghanistan. Is this coincidence?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Hardly. As Mao Tse-tung wrote, "'[p]olitical power grows out the barrel of a gun'." Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-tung (Peking, China: Foreign Languages Press, First Edition, 1966), at 61. The Second Amendment makes the same point, albeit more idealistically: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Daily Bell: Are the elites worried about sparking a guerilla war in the West? Is this the reason for gun control?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: The reason for gun control is to deny common Americans the ability, and thereby the right, to live in "a free State", because the Second Amendment tells us that "the security of a free State" depends upon "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." You can't have the former without the latter. And you can't attack the latter without attacking the former.

Obviously, the "elitists" must be extremely concerned with the level of armament among average Americans, and how ill it bodes for their schemes. If they push too hard, too fast, and too openly, some hard-bitten Americans are likely to start asking their oppressors point-blank: "Is enforcing the latest bit of bureaucratic stupidity and insolence worth anyone's life?" And once the shooting starts, all bets are off. Indeed, a betting man would probably not give odds against 100 million or more angry Americans armed with 200 to 300 million firearms and who knows how much ammunition. (Especially if a sizeable part of the Armed Forces sided with the insurgents.) Thinking about that possibility must keep the "elitists" in a cold sweat at night. Of course, no rational person wants any shooting to start. And the "elitists," if they were rational, would want it less than everyone else. But how rational are they?

Daily Bell: Is it rational to believe that if martial law came to America, that the country could be easily subdued?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: Martial law" – which is not "law" at all, but simply military force applied without limit to the populace – will not "come to America" until the country has been subdued. A "declaration of martial law" is nothing but that, until it is enforced. That's where the admonition "the Devil is in the details" will be proven true in spades.

Daily Bell: Best case – where is the US and the world headed? Worst case? Are you hopeful? Do you foresee a freer civil society to hand your children?

Edwin Vieira, Jr: I foresee a great deal of trouble before this country and the world exit the dark tunnel into which the "elitists" have led us. Do you imagine that the Federal Reserve System's monetary Ponzi scheme and the U.S. Treasury's gargantuan burden of debt, utterly unpayable in real terms, will not be dealt with by, or lead inexorably to, hyperinflation in the near term? And do you imagine that hyperinflation will not result in economic collapse, political upheavals, and massive civil unrest?

Out of all this a free society may emerge. But, first, a lot of teeth will have to be pulled from the vampires now parasitizing this country and the world. And they will not sit still in the dentists' chairs for the operations, I warrant. So I hope that my children turn out to be as tough customers as the Finns were not so long ago. They fought Stalin to a standstill twice, and walked away still in control of their own country. That proves it can be done, if one wants it enough.

Daily Bell: Thank you for your time once again – and for answering the "tough" questions.

Dr. Edward Vieira Jr. is an example of a person who should be ensconced in the bosom of wealth and power-elite fame by now. He went to the right schools and is a person of substantive intellect. But instead of finding himself heading up a corporation or fronting for a big mainstream media outlet, he has chosen the path of mainstream obscurity.

He is, however, still very well known and even loved by those who understand his courage in speaking out across the spectrum of the "alternative press." He has surely given up a much better living (no matter how good it is), than he could have made by turning his talents toward promoting the elite new world order.

But he didn't. We would guess that he didn't because he wouldn't. The problem that Western elites (Pharisees, one could call them) have in recruiting people for their plans is that they are mostly second raters. People who are real intellects, like Dr. Vieira, won't compromise what they believe in because they cannot. They have put extraordinary time and effort into becoming what they are and have not taken short-cuts. Therefore, they cannot psychologically accept the possibility of reconfiguring their points of view – not even for fame or money.

Everyone trims his or her sails "a little" now and again … but what the power elite demands is seeming total intellectual subjugation. Anyone who is a thinking person in this day and age, and not a sociopath, must go through life haunted by the ramifications of what he or she is doing in helping to support the coming world order. They must know their children, and their children's children will regret it.

The point is that the new world order will end in the death of millions, even billions. Totalitarianism, once established, and without opposition, always does. Fortunately, there is the Internet Reformation, which is continually bollixing up the schemes of those who wish to impose global governance in the near term. From global warming to central banking to the phony war on terror, the most powerful, fear-based dominant social themes of the elite have come under attack.

The play-book is as old as time. It is a mafia-like one. Create outside threats and then demand taxes, draftees and other sacrifices from the middle and lower classes. The trouble is that the intelligentsia has to be co-opted as well. And that is far more difficult during a communications revolution.

Whatever history was before, it is now a struggle between dominating elites and those who are enlightened by communication technology. The first "modern" struggle was waged 500 years ago during the era of the Gutenberg Press. The current struggle is being waged in the era of the electronic communication – also known as the era of the Internet Reformation.

We believe that power elites do not win these modern struggles. They may not lose, but their plans are cyclically disrupted. Just as they were recovering from the damage done by the Gutenberg Press, along came the Internet. It must be frustrating.

What the Internet has done is reveal the vast panorama of control the elites established in the 20th century. For someone like Dr. Vieira, such a revelation (no matter when it occurred) is not personally tolerable. He cannot help it. He must speak out when others will not.

Let us also make clear that Dr. Vieira is a patriot of the most fundamental sort. He loves his country, friends and family. He loves the system on which these "united States" was founded; one of natural law, minimal government and untrammeled free markets that gave opportunity to all.

All great systems of commerce are fractured: It is their eventual cohesion that gives rise to empires. But the natural state of humankind is one of dissipated authority. It is from this that freedom arises, and freedom midwifes wealth. The Seven Hills of Rome, the City States of Greece and the Italian Renaissance … in each case, oppressed people had the ability to pick up and move to where they could still use their own language and continue their affairs without rupture. Thus governments did not have ability to grow to oppressive. 

But now we are constantly told the world is "smaller" place and that governance must reflect this centralized reality. The system of sociopolitical disparate parts is the one the elites are continually undermining; not overly but covertly as people would not stand for an overt undermining of the freedom that created the world's greatest and most prosperous state in the modern world. They fund their depredations through central banking (printing money from nothing); now they have created a phony "war on terror" that they can direct as they wish, like a Hollywood producer moving "the action" wherever he chooses, or wherever freedom needs to be eradicated. 

And yet … more and more begin to understand. Dreamtime gradually evaporates. This is the real trouble that the Anglo-American power elite faces in the 21st century. Post Internet it is a game of numbers. There are billions who would not want a new world order and a few who do. As prominent voices like Dr. Vieira's speak up, as they must, the odds of global governance (for the time being anyway) are perhaps diminished. There are not many like Dr. Vieira, but they are people who matter.





Need a job? $174,100 a year. And you don’t need any experience to qualify.

July 26th, 2011 by

July 26, 2011

Dear Money Morning Reader,

If you or anyone you know is looking for a job right now, take a look at this opening… and please pass it on to anyone you might know.

Base pay – right off the bat – is $174,100 a year. And you don't need any experience to qualify.

People with all kinds of backgrounds have held this job.

Carpenters, police officers, accountants, taxi drivers, volunteer firemen, musicians, dentists, engineers, farmers, nurses, bank tellers, ministers, driving instructors… Even a tollbooth operator has held this position.

And little education is required, either. Twenty-seven people currently holding one of these jobs have no more than a high-school diploma. And even that isn't required. Not even a GED.

Not bad, considering you'll never have to worry about money again.

In fact, practically every other colleague you'll meet in this job is a millionaire – or multimillionaire.

And in addition to an instant six-figure salary, you'll get three retirement plans. I'm not kidding. This is absolutely true.

You'll be eligible for Social Security benefits, of course, like everyone else. But you'll also get a 401(k)-like plan that "matches" up to 5%. And you'll get an increasingly rare chance to participate in a pension plan, too – a good one.

How good?

Even if you only last five years on the job, you're guaranteed an immediate, full pension when you retire at age 62… or at age 50 if you've worked 20 years… or at any time after you've worked 25 years.

You'll collect nearly 44% of your six-figure salary, depending on how long you worked.

Hard to believe, I know… especially these days. So please, if you know someone with good character who's looking for a job, listen up… Because the position gets even better…

While most Americans are paying out the nose for health insurance (and getting less of it) this job comes with the best healthcare money can buy. You'll get to choose from 10 different first-rate plans.

And if you have a pre-existing condition, that's okay. You'll be fully covered anyway.

You'll even have the option of visiting a doctor on site, whenever you want.

Or working out in a top-flight gym – for free…

Or taking a spin in your free "company" car, burning all the free gas you can buy…

Or parking it – for free – at the two regional airports near headquarters, which comes in handy…

Once you get this job, you'll be able to fly almost anywhere in the world for free… and make even more money while you're doing it. That's because you'll receive a per diem travel allowance… and get to keep whatever you don't spend – up to $3,000 per trip.

These are just a few of the job's perks. But here's the best part…

You barely have to work.

In fact, most of the people who hold this job work only three days a week. And they all enjoy more than a month of paid vacation every year on top of it… often much more.

This may be hard to believe, but it's absolutely true.

Now, if you'd like to apply for one of these openings, there are only two qualifications:

You must be at least 25 years old. And you have to be a U.S. citizen for at least the last nine years. That's it.

The only drawback is that you must be willing to travel to Washington, D.C. from time to time. But only when you really want to, between jaunts to Martha's Vineyard.

And things get even better…

That's because the annual salary is not all the money you can make in this job.

You see, when members of Congress leave office, they can still keep spending the PAC money on whatever they please… until it's gone.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), for example, has spent $50,807 this way at the Boulders Resort in Carefree, Arizona. And Rep. Pete Sessions of (R-TX), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has spent $49,739 at several Las Vegas sites, including Dos Caminos, a restaurant that brags about its "vibrant bar scene."

Who's got time to worry about some "debt ceiling" when there's so much extra cash to burn?

But it's not just about the extra money…

Members of Congress can also increase their existing wealth… in ways the rest of us aren't allowed.

If, for example, Congress is considering a law that would help or harm a particular industry, members are free to use that information to buy or sell stock. So it's totally legal for them to personally profit from insider information.

The most popular investment among members of Congress? General Electric, in which 82 current members have invested.

GE paid no taxes last year.

Members also get a special tax deduction of $3,000 to write off living expenses when away from their congressional districts or home states. And, of course, the value of most of the other perks is not taxable.

I mean, why tax that income when you can simply add to our country's debt problems?

Let's face it… Our "representatives" are officially out of touch. They have no idea how real Americans live on a day-to-day basis.

I don't know about you, but I'm ready to stop filling up 535 extra gas tanks each week…

Especially when 58% of Congress members are millionaires. And the "non-millionaires" are doing just fine.

The median wealth of a House member in 2009 was $765,010.

For or a senator, it was $2.38 million.

So let's be honest…

Despite what they tell us, working in Congress is not a "Public Service."

It's a job – an incredibly lucrative one.

We believe it's too lucrative.

And that's why we're petitioning members of Congress from all over the country to pay their fare share – just like the rest of us.

Today, you can join us.

We're looking for 1 million American taxpayers to sign our petition – people who, like us, are tired of paying for all of the excessive perks our rich members of Congress take for granted.

Our petition is not directed at Democrats or Republicans. It's not political at all. It's American – a straightforward attempt to end Congress' rampant abuse of power… regardless of party affiliation.

These people possess more wealth than 99.9% of Americans, and they write and protect laws to preserve this fact – laws that benefit them more than the rest us.

What's more, their compensation packages stretch far beyond the limits of their "public servant" roles. And they're funded at our expense!

This is wrong. We believe members of the U.S. Congress should be subjected to the same economic realities the rest of us must face.

So we're demanding one simple change: To eliminate their excessive, taxpayer-funded perks and make them pay their own way… just like the rest of us. No more freebies.

And we will get their attention…

You see, this is more than a petition you can sign. It's an event.

That's why we're filming it…

Money Morning Chief Investment Strategist Keith Fitz-Gerald isn't just appearing on the Hill to hand-deliver this petition. He's taking it one big step further…

Keith's going to take every single member of Congress… and "nail them to the wall."

(Wait 'til you see how he does it!)

He's even giving them time to prepare…

Keith's sending them a letter, announcing to every member of Congress exactly where he'll be… when he'll be there… and why he's coming.

So are you ready?

Are you ready to stop filling up 535 extra gas tanks a week? Are you ready to stop paying for your representative's gym membership? Or taking care of his parking tickets? (Yes, we pay for those, too.) Or funding her extra retirement plan?

Are you ready to start making these people live like the rest of us?

We are. And now we're ready to do something about it.

You can sign our petition here. And if you know anyone else who would like to stop buying gourmet soups and sandwiches for rich people on Capitol Hill every day, pass this on.

Yours truly,

William Patalon III
Executive Editor, Money Morning


July 23rd, 2011 by



  By James P. Tucker Jr.

The Minnesota state government shut down in July, closing state parks on a normally busy holiday weekend, because of a $5 billion “budget deficit.” At least 10 states have expanded gambling options for casinos, inviting more mobsters into their streets, again because of “budget deficits,” which they blame on the weak economy. However, it’s not “deficits” but states hiding money that causes this pain. Minnesota’s shutdown threw thousands of state employees out of work. Construction projects stalled. Millions of dollars in state revenues were lost. But Minnesota had $2.9 billion hidden from taxpayers in fiscal 2010, which ended June 30.

Assets exceeded liabilities by $10.9 billion. Another $2.9 billion in “unrestricted net assets” were hidden from public view. 

What all states are not saying is they have plenty of bucks salted away, but you aren’t supposed to know that. Each year, all state and local governments prepare a financial report on assets, liabilities, revenues and expenditures called the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, or CAFR. You read about the budget and how your tax dollars are supposed to be spent in your local newspaper, but you don’t read about money hidden in the CAFR, because America’s controlled media hides these important facts.

CAFRs combine the financial reports of government agencies at all levels. They report all government funds, including those held outside the government treasury. It cites amounts owed the government but not received by the end of the fiscal year. It contains information on real property and other fixed assets and long-term obligations held outside the government treasury. 

Walter Burien, a former commodity trader and leading authority on CAFRs, claims that state governments are sitting on more than $600 billion worth of assets. And that’s just the states. When you tally up the holdings of all 85,000 local, state and federal governments, the value of all of the assets comes to about $60 trillion, says Burien.

“Being that the CAFR is the accounting document for every local  government, and with it effectively being blacked out for the last 60 years, this intentional omission of coverage is the biggest conspiracy that has ever taken effect in the United States,” said Burien. It’s “the biggest game in town.”

Alan Greenspan, a Bilderberg luminary, got it right years ago when he testified as chairman of the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve before a Senate Committee: “I’m of the old fiscal school that you raise revenues for basic government purposes and if you don’t have those purposes you give the money back or you don’t tax it. . . . [P]rivate rates of return are significantly higher than the government rates of return.”

The good news is that, thanks to the Internet, it is becoming increasingly difficult for governments to bury their assets. A quick search on the Internet turned up thousands of websites dedicated to exposing CAFRs.

AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the “elite” media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author ofJim Tucker’s Bilderberg Diary: One Man’s 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker’s experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.


Beyond Repair

July 23rd, 2011 by



by Luke Hiken / July 22nd, 2011

Never in the history of this country has there existed such widespread corruption, incompetence and weakness as now confront the American people. Unlike other periods of history, where certain segments of the ruling class, or elected officials, or power-brokers, seemed to dominate and characterize what the country had become, the extent of the breakdown is now universal throughout the country.Our political leaders are caricatures of what statesmen and women should be: they are spineless; petty; self-serving; and corrupted puppets of the moneyed interests that own them. The divisive bickering that passes for political dialogue is pathetically shallow.Wall street, the bankers, mortgage companies, vultures and their lobbyists that “advise” the politicians regarding how to salvage our economy, and who are responsible for the economic catastrophe facing the entire nation, are nothing short of robber barons. They knowingly and brazenly steal the wealth of the American people without so much as a “thank you.” Their profits make the usurious thieves of the past look like honest businessmen.

The insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and health industry bring shame on every person connected with them. Foreigners shake their heads in disbelief at the farce and charade our health industry has become. More and more Americans are literally outsiders in what has become an exclusive resource for the rich: health care.

Our educational institutions have priced themselves out of the public realm. They now serve as research arms of the corporations that fund them. Students can’t possibly graduate with a meaningful education without incurring hundreds of thousands of dollars in debts and loans. The arms industry, Pentagon and multi-national corporations control virtually all of the research of our “educational” institutions.

The public service sectors of our economy have not only failed to keep up with the needs of the people, they barely even recognize the crumbling infrastructure that surrounds them. Public highways look like minefields; streets are rarely cleaned; public buildings fall into disrepair, with no money to keep them up; electricity is becoming too expensive for middle class households to support; and, more garbage fills the streets of our cities than the landfills created to hold it.  Even water will soon become a scarce resource, to be bought and sold by those who “own” it.

Police and their cohorts, the prison guards have become invading armies joined at the hip in our cities and counties. The widespread murder and torture perpetrated by these “armed servants” of the ruling class is of epidemic proportions, and the laws protect these murderers in the name of law and order. Police who murder are seldom prosecuted, their names are hidden from the press, and those who challenge their authority face life-threatening opposition.

The courts have been bought and paid for by the corporations that finance judicial elections, and the politicians who appoint their lapdogs to the bench, do so upon orders from above. Prosecutors run our judicial system, and justice is nowhere to be found.

The media has become an arm of the entertainment industry, and good looks are more important to a reporter’s success than having a brain, or developing anything like investigative skills. The news is what corporate America and the Pentagon say it is – nothing more and nothing less.

Corporations, in the name of profit, are destroying the environment and our natural resources at an unparalleled pace. Even if the human race is able to outlast the catastrophes created by the ruling class, it is questionable whether the earth itself can survive.

The military-industrial complex defines our foreign policies pure and simple. Manufacturers of weapons systems and the Pentagon, which use those weapons, assure the world that our country will continue to invade and kill anyone who can’t fight back.

In short, there is such widespread graft and immorality amongst those who run and control our society as to prevent any meaningful change in the self-destructive course the nation is taking. We are as doomed as imperial Rome, Napoleonic France, or the Third Reich. We have sown the seeds of our own destruction, and there is no way back.It is for this reason that so many Americans have abandoned national politics and turned to their local communities for support, to organic gardening, and to spiritual sanctuaries for relief and protection. There is simply no room for salvation within the current U.S. hierarchy. The waiting game has begun, and nothing short of external attacks upon this country will result in meaningful change.Resistance to the insanity foisted upon us by the rich is the only rational and humane response possible. But where does one start when the depth and breadth of the corruption we face is so vast? Do we sign petitions to send to our sycophant politicians? Do we boycott the corporations that are the cause of our destruction? Do we pick up weapons against the police and prison administrations that imprison and beat us? Do we attempt to create communities and support systems outside the control of corporate America? Do we flee the country and support resistance struggles elsewhere in the world?

We can all certainly choose which flavor of dissent we prefer, but when the body politic is so laden with disease, it might make more sense to hasten its demise and start over anew.


What the Government Will Never Tell You About the Debt Crisis

July 23rd, 2011 by


What the Government Will Never Tell You About the Debt Crisis


By Dan Ferris, editor, The 12% Letter

Saturday, July 23, 2011



Last week, I devoted the latest issue of The 12% Letter to the debt ceiling… and how it will affect us as investors.

After sifting through the government's numbers and mindless claims of "Armageddon," I believe it should not worry you as an investor. And I'm convinced as ever the "debt ceiling" debate is a dog and pony show that distracts Americans from our country's biggest problem.
Politicians like Barack Obama and Tim Geithner tell us that a failure to raise the debt ceiling by August 2 will result in catastrophe. They say many government employees and vendors will not get paid starting on August 3. I doubt this is true. The government will always find a way around the rules to borrow and spend.

But let's take the government at its word for a moment…

The Bipartisan Policy Center (the "BPC") – a non-profit group that studies solutions to political problems – has published a report on the debt ceiling "crisis." The report's conclusion is generally in agreement with Obama and Geithner: If we do not raise the debt ceiling by August 2, we could cause serious trouble for our economy. That's not surprising. The BPC was created by members of Congress, so it will toe the political line to keep us scared.

According to the BPC, if the debt ceiling isn't raised by August 2, the U.S. government will wake up on August 3, and find itself unable to pay about 45% of the bills due between August 3 and August 31.

In its debt ceiling report, the BPC considers two broad scenarios under which the Treasury Department might pay some agencies and not pay others. Imagine, for example, all IRS refunds not being disbursed starting on August 3. Imagine $14.2 billion in federal salaries and benefits not getting paid. Imagine nearly $32 billion in defense vendor payments not being made. Defense-related stocks would be cut in half instantly. Imagine the lights going out at Veterans Hospitals and active military duty pay not going out.

I have no illusions about the turmoil of a real government shut down. It's ugly. For some period of time, it would be hell for millions of people. I don't want that. I'm sure you don't, either. No one wants mass economic hardship. I'm fully aware we're talking about people's lives here…

But if the government shrinks 45% starting August 3 and remains permanently smaller, the hardship would be temporary. We'd come out the other side of it a better, stronger, wealthier, and maybe even less arrogant nation.

Simply reducing the deficit wouldn't mean you'd pay less in taxes – so it's not that we'd all have more money in our pockets starting August 3. It's that there'd be less government, which means less government meddling in the economy. There'd be fewer parasites and more potential producers. We'd be freer to create new wealth and grow new businesses. A little more freedom would go a long way.

It would be good to have more productive minds looking for ways to create new wealth with fewer government impediments to doing so. It's much better than having those same productive minds rotting behind government desks, meddling in other people's lives, and destroying wealth instead of creating it.

But I do think the debt ceiling will be raised by August 2. Among other reasons for this belief, there's something you'd learn in the ensuing crisis if the ceiling was not raised, something nobody wants you to learn…

You'd find out government is the problem not the solution, and that we'd all be better off with a lot less of it.

That's why Treasury Secretary Geithner says it would be a "catastrophe" not to raise the debt ceiling. It's why Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke says it would be "calamitous." It's why Komrade Obama says it would be "financial Armageddon." They're all trying to scare you.

Everybody thinks people would starve without the big, strong government to feed them. It's not true. We'd be a more productive, dynamic, and wealthy society. You'd see this happen right before your eyes if a large portion of the government shut down permanently.

But nobody in government wants you to see that.

Our economy doesn't suffer from a lack of government intervention. It suffers from too much government intervention. The solution to too much government intervention in the economy isn't more government intervention. It's less government. That's what you'd get on August 3, without a higher debt ceiling.

Laying all my cards on the table, I freely admit that I relish the potential shutdown of huge swaths of our bloated, oppressive federal bureaucracy. And I relish the prospect of hundreds of thousands of government employees, people with perfectly productive minds, some of them quite brilliant, making the change from parasites to producers… though I realize it's unlikely to happen.

Imagine for a minute the unleashing of entrepreneurial energy in the wake of a shutdown of 45% of the federal government. The U.S. government is filled with intelligent, highly educated, highly trained people. Many are experienced leaders. Many are more than capable of positively heroic feats of entrepreneurship, feats we'll never witness if they don't leave their government jobs and get to work.

Frightened children like Obama, Bernanke, and Geithner see scary monsters everywhere. Adults with vision and experience see opportunities. I promise you those opportunities are real. They exist. If the government wakes up August 3 and can't pay 45% of its bills, it won't be long until many of those opportunities are seized and exploited, to the benefit of us all.

Good investing,

Dan Ferris

P.S. I've been contacted by several people asking if they can pass along this commentary. My answer is yes. Please… absolutely pass this along. Send it to everyone you know. The more people realize it's better to run your own life instead of letting the government run it for you, the better.


Just as soon as I sent the last letter out, I downloaded another batch of incoming mail and the above info from Dan Ferris showed me how a much better writer could get the job done. I spend a horrendous amount of time doing research and distributing other peoples writing skills, and pray constantly that you will benefit from their superior knowledge. I am deeply aware of my intellectual shortcomings, and only provide you with the best I can find. That is the best I can do, your best would be to accept their knowledge as a free and valuable free gift.


July 19th, 2011 by

Why the “Balanced Budget Amendment” is a Hoax – and a Deadly Trap

By Publius Huldah.


Introduction By James P. Harvey

07 19 11

I sure as hell hope the title of this letter got your attention, because if it did not there will be civil war in America sooner than you think, and a lot more shooting will be going on in your neighborhood, as bands of starving looters rob and rape anyone then can. Got food? No! OK, lay down then.

Take this to the bank folks, when America goes down many of us will not take it laying down, and that is where we’re headed if these scumbags pass this bill.

Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. LEE, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. KYL, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. TOOMEY, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. RISCH, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. DEMINT, MR. PAUL???, Mr. VITTER, Mr. ENZI, Mr. KIRK, Mr. THUNE, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. BURR, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. COBURN, Mr. MORAN, Mr. LUGAR, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts, Mr. JOHNSON of Wisconsin, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. ROBERTS, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Ms. AYOTTE, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. COATS, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. CORKER, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. JOHANNS, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. PORTMAN, and Mr. WICKER) introduced the following joint resolution which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


Balanced Budget Amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 10 (March 31, 2011)

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to balancing the budget.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

‘Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a roll call vote.

‘Section 2. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific amount in excess of such 18 percent by a roll call vote.

‘Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which–

‘(1) total outlays do not exceed total receipts; and

‘(2) total outlays do not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year.

‘Section 4. Any bill that imposes a new tax or increases the statutory rate of any tax or the aggregate amount of revenue may pass only by a two-thirds majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. For the purpose of determining any increase in revenue under this section, there shall be excluded any increase resulting from the lowering of the statutory rate of any tax.

‘Section 5. The limit on the debt of the United States shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for such an increase by a roll call vote.

‘Section 6. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war against a nation-state is in effect and in which a majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for a specific excess by a roll call vote.

‘Section 7. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article in any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in a military conflict that causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. Such suspension must identify and be limited to the specific excess of outlays for that fiscal year made necessary by the identified military conflict.

‘Section 8. No court of the United States or of any State shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.

‘Section 9. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except those for repayment of debt principal.

‘Section 10. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays, receipts, and gross domestic product.


‘Section 11. This article shall take effect beginning with the fifth fiscal year beginning after its ratification.’.


My guess is that most people did not read this far, and those who did are not aware of any big problem, and that is what’s really wrong in America; congratulations to Public Education. If you keep reading you may learn something………………..Maybe!


By Publius Huldah.

You can not responsibly support a proposed Amendment to Our Constitution unless you have read and understand the proposal, and how it would change our Constitution. You must look behind the nice sounding name!  Will the Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) really “reign in” the federal government? Will it really “show them” that they have to balance their budget the same as we do?

Or does it actually legalize spending which is now unconstitutional?  Is it actually a massive grant of new constitutional powers to the President and the federal courts – a grant which will cut the Heart out of The Constitution our Framers gave us?

Amending the Constitution is serious business – and you are morally bound to get informed before you jump on The Amendment Bandwagon.

So, lay aside your giddy joy at the fact that all 47 U.S. Senate Republicans are co-sponsoring the Balanced Budget Amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 10 (March 31, 2011).  Let’s go through it.  What you believe the BBA will do, and what it will actually do, are two very different things indeed.

But First:  How Did We Get a National Debt of $14.4 Trillion?

Congress gave us a debt of $14.4 trillion which increases at the rate of $4 billion a day.  Let us look at a few of the items which comprise this $14.4 trillion debt:

Congress spent $2.6 million to teach Chinese prostitutes how to drink responsibly. Congress appropriates $147 million a year to subsidize Brazilian cotton farmers.  Congress spent $3.6 million to fund a study of the sex lives of dope-smoking, menstruating monkeys.  Congress paid $500,000 to paint a salmon on an Alaska Airlines passenger jet.  Congress appropriates Foundation where they fund such research as that which revealed the amazing fact that sick shrimp do not perform as well on stamina tests as do healthy shrimp.Citizens Against Government Waste’s pig book shows Congress spent $16,547,558,748. on pork projects last year.  In Sen. Tom Coburn’s Waste Book 2010, which lists 100 spending projects, he shows that $1.5 million was spent to spruce up apartments in Shreveport, La. before they were torn down.

All this spending – every penny of it – and trillions more which is not here listed – has one thing in common:  It is all unconstitutional as outside the scope of the powers delegated to Congress in the Constitution. Congress has no constitutional authority to spend money on these projects.

So!  It was Congress’ unconstitutional spending which put us in the mess we are in today.

What Does Our Constitution Permit Congress To Spend Money On?

WE THE PEOPLE ordained and established a Constitution wherein the powers WE delegated to the federal government are limited and defined – “enumerated”.  Read the list at Art. I, Sec. 8!  Basically, all WE gave Congress authority to do for the Country at large is international relations, commerce & war; and domestically, the creation of an uniform commercial system (weights & measures, patents  & copyrights, a money system based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, mail delivery & road building.)  Some Amendments authorize Congress to make laws protecting civil rights. That’s about it, Folks!  The list of objects on which Congress may lawfully appropriate funds is short.  The only significant authorized expense is the military.  James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution, said in Federalist No. 45 (9th para):

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.  [boldface added]

Note that Madison contemplated that the federal government would be financed in large part by taxation on foreign commerce.  That is because the constitutional powers of the federal government are so limited & defined!  The States and the People are to handle everything else.

Do you now see that Our Constitution does not authorize Congress to pay for a museum for neon signs ($5.2 million),  to archive memorabilia for a rock group ($615,000), or to post poems in zoos ($997,766.)?  [See Sen. Coburn's Waste Book 2010].  Congress has no lawful authority to do most of what they do. They just do it because they want to, they have been doing it for a long time, and WE haven’t known enough to stop them.  Our $14.4 trillion debt was caused by Congress’ spending in thousands of areas where they have no constitutional authority to spend.

Is the BBA Really the Solution? 

So!  These 47 Senate Republicans (and some in the House) are showing you how much they now “care” about fiscal responsibility by supporting the BBA.  But think:  Why don’t they control their spending now?  The Republicans control the House – NO spending can get through the House unless the Republicans approve it.  So if the Republicans really wanted to control spending and balance the budget, they could do it now. Why don’t they do it?  Because they don’t want to.

Furthermore, the BBA they support with such broad smiles and glib promises of future fiscal responsibility, doesn’t make them control their spending.  Instead, it would legalize spending which is now unlawful and would markedly increase the powers of the federal government. And it would do-nothing to reduce spending.  In short, the BBA is a Scam and a Terrible Trick.

What Would We Get From the BBA ?

In plain English, this is what the 10 Sections of the BBA mean  [but read it yourself –  it's very short]:

Section 1: They won’t spend more than they take in unless they vote to spend more than they take in.

Section 2: They won’t spend more than 18% of the GDP unless they vote to spend more than 18% of the GDP.

Section 3: The President will write the budget: He will designate the taxes, and what the money will be spent on.  He won’t spend more than he decides to tax you for, and he won’t spend more than 18% of the GDP.  The GDP is a computation made by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the Department of Commerce, an agency under the control of the President. [Do you see?  The President controls the agency which computes the number which limits his spending.]

Section 4: Congress won’t make a law raising your taxes unless they vote to raise your taxes.

Section 5: Congress won’t raise the debt limit unless they vote to raise the debt limit.

Sections 6 & 7: Congress can waive the above provisions of the BBA (except for Sec. 4 which says they can’t raise your taxes unless they vote to raise your taxes) when there is a declared war or  a “military conflict” which they think justifies their waiving the above provisions of the BBA.

Section 8:  Courts can’t order your taxes to be raised. [But you can bet your life that this section, together with section 3, will be seen to authorizethe President to order that your taxes be raised.]

Section 9: I leave this to others to explain. But be assured the President’s minions will define stuff however he wants; make stuff “off-budget” or “on-budget” to fit his agenda.

Section 10:  Congress can make laws to enforce the BBA, and can rely on numbers provided by the President who is to be given constitutional authority to order tax increases & decide how to spend the money.

So!  Do you see?  You get no benefit from the BBA.  But it will cause us irreparable harm.

How Would the BBA Cut the Heart Out of Our Constitution?

1. It would Transform Our Constitution From One of Enumerated Spending Powers To One of General (“Unlimited”) Spending Powers.

Congress’ Powers are enumerated.  Thus, the objects on which Congress may lawfully appropriate funds are limited to those listed in the Constitution.  Congress has ignored the limitations on its powers for many decades – but at least the limitations are still in the Constitution, to be invoked if We The People ever repent. 2

But the BBA, by ignoring the unconstitutional objects of Congress’ spending, and by merely limiting the amount of such spending to 18% of the GDP & the taxes the President assesses, repeals the enumerated powers aspect of our Constitution.  Furthermore, if Congress limited its appropriations to its enumerated powers, they could not possibly spend a sum as vast as 18% of the GDP.  Thus, the BBA is clear intention to repeal the enumerated powers, and transform the federal government into one of general and unlimited powers.

Congress’ idiotic spending is now unlawful & unconstitutional. But with the BBA, it would become lawful & constitutional, as long as the total spending doesn’t exceed the limits (unless they waive the limits).  With the BBA, it will become lawful for them to appropriate funds for whatever the President (who will write the budget) says!  3

2. The BBA Transfers Control of the “Purse” from Congress to the President.

The federal government didn’t even have a budget until Congress passed the Budget. That “law” purported to grant budget making power (taxes & appropriations) to the President.

But the Budget Act of 1921 is unconstitutional: The Constitution places the taxing & appropriations powers squarely in the hands of  Congress – not the Executive Branch; and contrary to the beliefs of indoctrinated lawyers, Congress may not “amend” the Constitution by making a law. 4

Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 1, grants to Congress the Power to lay and collect Taxes; and Art. I, Sec. 9, next to last clause, grants to Congress the Power to make the appropriations:

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

Accordingly, for most of our history, Congress made appropriations as the need arose; determined the taxes, and kept records of  both. [See Bruce Bartlett's excellent history of the budget process.]

Our Framers gave us an elegant system of separated powers, whereCongress commands the purse – not the Executive Branch and notthe Judicial Branch!  In Federalist No. 78 (6th para), Alexander Hamilton outlines this separation of powers:

…The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules …  The judiciary … has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society… 5

In Federalist No. 58 (4th para from end) Madison explains why the House alone is granted power to propose taxes (Art. I, Sec. 7, cl. 1):  To protect The People from overreaching by the other branches of the federal government:

…The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose, the supplies requisite for the support of government. They, in a word, hold the purse that powerful instrument by which we behold, in the history of the British Constitution, an infant and humble representation of the people gradually enlarging the sphere of its activity and importance, and finally reducing … all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government. This power over the purse may … be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance…

Ponder Hamilton’s and Madison’s words. You must understand what they are saying if we are to restore our Constitutional Republic.  Otherwise, the BBA will usher in a totalitarian dictatorship.

Pursuant to the unconstitutional Budget Act of 1921, the President has been preparing the budget. Since the Budget Act is unconstitutional, the President’s preparation of the budget has been likewise unconstitutional.  Section 3 of the BBA would legalize what is now unconstitutional and unlawful.

But Section 3 of the BBA does more than merely legalize the unlawful. It actually transfers the constitutional power to make the appropriations and to determine taxes to the President.  Congress will become a rubber stamp.

Now look at this pretty little snare:  Section 8 of the proposed BBA says:

No court of the United States or of any State shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.  [emphasis added]

Our Constitution does not grant to courts the power to “order” tax increases.  So why does Sec. 8 of the BBA say they can’t do it?

It’s a trap!  There is an ancient maxim of  legal construction which goes like this:  “The Expression of One Thing is the Exclusion of Another”:

An implied exclusion argument lies whenever there is reason to believe that if the legislature had meant to include a particular thing within the ambit of its legislation, it would have referred to that thing expressly. Because of this expectation, the legislature’s failure to mention the thing becomes grounds for inferring that it was deliberately excluded. Although there is no express exclusion, exclusion is implied. …[emphasis added]

Why does Sec. 8 of the BBA exclude the President?  From this exclusion, one may reasonably infer that the intent of Sec. 8 is to permit the President to order tax increases.  If the BBA is ratified, you can be sure that Presidents will claim power under Sec. 8 of the BBA to order tax increases. That inference is strengthened by the fact that Sec. 3 of the BBA transfers constitutional power over the Budget to the President.

So!  The BBA surrenders the purse to the President!  Our Framers understood the danger of having the sword & the purse held by one person.  That is why our Constitution provides for Congress to make the decisions on taxes & appropriations; and, as pointed out in Federalist No. 72 (1st para), the President is to apply and disburse “the public moneys in conformity to the general appropriations of the legislature”.

With the BBA, Congress’ sole remaining constitutional function over taxing & spending will be to rubberstamp the dictates of the President.

3. The BBA grants judicial power over taxing & spending to the federal courts.

Article III, Sec. 2, cl. 1 states:  “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases…arising under this Constitution.”

If the BBA is ratified, it will become an Amendment to the Constitution which is subject to the judicial authority of the federal courts.

You say the BBA won’t transfer power over the purse to the President?  You say Congress won’t become a mere rubberstamp whose sole remaining function over taxing & appropriations is to enact into law the dictates of the President?

Who will decide?  Since this would be an issue “arising under the Constitution”, the supreme Court will decide. The Judicial Branch – a branch which Hamilton took care to point out should have no power whatsoever over The Purse.

And so five (5) people on the supreme Court will decide an issue which goes to the heart of our Constitution – an issue which the People clamoring for the BBA don’t even know exists.  And remember:  Our supreme Court is filled with fallen people who looked at Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment and said it means that women may kill their babies. They looked at the 1stAmendment and said it means that Congress may regulate political speech, and courts may ban Christian speech in the public square, but it gives Westboro “baptists” a “right” to spew their filth & hate at private funerals of dead American heroes.

If the BBA is ratified, do you really want five (5) of those judges deciding this issue? 6

What is the Solution to The Financial Plight Congress has put us in?

We have 47 Republican U.S. Senators who don’t understand [or do they?] the ramifications of the BBA which some of them (most notably Senators Jim De Mint & Mike Lee) are determined to cram down our throats.  Many supposedly conservative talk show hosts & pundits  (most notably, Redstate.com), are carrying their water.  Whether these people are fools or tyrants, I do not know; but you must learn that you can not trust anybody. You must insist that people prove what they say!

WE THE PEOPLE must reclaim our glorious Heritage. We must find & support candidates who understand the Constitution, obey it, and agree to work to dismantle the unconstitutional federal apparatus.  We can eliminate the trillions of dollars of unconstitutional spending by restoring constitutional government.  In an orderly fashion, we can dismantle the multitude of offices and agencies and departments of the last 100 years which harass us and eat out our sustenance.

Oh my People!  The grinning politicians and pundits who promise you “fiscal responsibility” with their BBA will actually strip you of the protections of Our Constitution. Their BBA will legalize a totalitarian dictatorship.  Do not be deceived by them – they are leading you astray, and their BBA will destroy us.

Oh you Proponents of this thoroughly Evil Scheme:  I throw my glove in your face:  Show me, if you can, where I am wrong.  Or rethink your position. PH

End Notes:

1  Our Constitution does not authorize Congress to fund scientific research. Congress’ only power in the areas of the arts and sciences is to issue patents and copyrights (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 8).  If Congress obeyed Our Constitution and stopped funding “scientific” research, the proponents of these idiotic studies would have to do something useful instead of sucking at the taxpayers’ teat.

2  We must repent of  our desire to live at other peoples’ expense. This is the contradiction which undermines the Tea Party.  Many don’t want a constitutional government of limited & enumerated powers. They just want to eliminate funding for programs they don’t like. They want their social security, their Medicare, their government retirement pensions, their perks.  I beg each of you who is now living at other peoples’ expense:  Are you willing to sacrifice your grandchildren so that  you can keep your handouts?  Or will you accept an orderly & gradual dismantlement of the unconstitutional “entitlement” programs?

3  Are you aware that federal executive agencies are forming their own SWAT teams?  Are you aware that DHS is federalizing our local police and using their fusion centers to turn them into a national secret police – America’s version of the STAZI?  Building Obama’s “civilian national security force” which is “just as powerful just as strong just as well funded as the military” takes money.  Lots of it!  The BBA will permit the President to write into the Budget the funding needed to build this armed force; and it will be under his sole & personal control.

4  Article V sets forth the exclusive methods of amending The Constitution.

5  In Federalist No. 26, Hamilton addresses how Congress is to determine (after public deliberations) the appropriations for the military; and warns that the President must never be given power over the purse respecting armed forces: 

The legislature of the United States will be OBLIGED, by this provision [Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 12], once at least in every two years, to deliberate upon the propriety of keeping a military force on foot; to come to a new resolution on the point; and to declare their sense of the matter, by a formal vote in the face of their constituents. They are not AT LIBERTY to vest in the executive department permanent funds for the support of an army, if they were even incautious enough to be willing to repose in it so improper a confidence…. (9th para) [capitals are Hamilton's; boldface mine]

It has been said that the provision which limits the appropriation of money for the support of an army to the period of two years would be unavailing, because the Executive, when once possessed of a force large enough to awe the people into submission, would find resources in that very force sufficient to enable him to dispense with supplies from the acts of the legislature…. (12th para)

Do you see that Hamilton warned us not to trust the President with power to determine the funding for the armed forces?  Learn from Hamilton & Madison. Or perish.

  • If the President disagrees with the supreme Court’s decision, he – who would, thanks to the BBA, hold both the sword & the purse – could ignore it with impunity. PH
  • THANK YOU Publius Huldah


    1-202-224-3121 It may ring several times, as they are a switchboard to your congressional representative. Give them your Name and zip code and they will connect you to your congressional representative’s office. Tell them you are adamantly opposed to the balanced budget amendment, as it will make a dictator out of the executive branch. See my article today at http://anationbeguiled.com


    Stop or I’ll Shoot part 1

    Why the “Balanced Budget Amendment” is a Hoax – and a Deadly Trap


    How many of you want Obama to have the power of the purse? That belongs to CONGRESS ALONE, DON’T LET THEM GIVE IT AWAY! Most of the supporters of this bill don’t have the brains to understand it. EVEN RON PAUL SIGNED ON geeeezze!






Surely, only the dull and ignorant are unaware that our three branches of government are working for the international bankers and against the people of the United States of America, and if this was not bad enough, read about the bankers move to destroy America by destroying the dollar as the world reserve currency and implementing a global SDR currency. It is printed below this article. 6 Steps by the IMF for a One-World Currency

If you would turn that stupid TV off, and follow the internet revolution news sources, you would know by now how America is being destroyed, and know what to do about it.



SEO Powered By SEOPressor