I received a comment from my nephew Ken about my December 4, post. I'm sorry Ken, but I accidently deleted your comment. My bad. He provided me with the elusive E in S-A-L-U-T-E, it's equipment. He asked if I thought that we had an oligarchy in control of our country. If that's not true, please feel free to correct me, Ken; thanks. He also referred me to Plato's Republic for a discussion of an oligarchy.
Essentially, an oligarchy is a group, basically a committee of people, set up to rule a country.
On the surface we see Congress enacting laws and the President signing or vetoing them as he deems necessary. But, we have to ask, who's calling the shots? Is it the American people or is it another group? Who benefits most from the laws that are being passed? Do the laws protect individual life, liberty and property? Those are the kinds of questions we have to ask. America isn't about the common good; it's about individual freedom. If you're losing your individual liberty (rights); then something is dramatically, drastically, wrong!
Which special interest group, above all others would have the kind of influence to get Congress to pass laws that are contrary to the Constitution and qualify as a committee of 'the ruling class'? There are two that come to mind immediately, The Council of Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Committee. This article by William Blase is an excellent summary of the CFR and its activities. You will have to answer the question for yourself. Is this country run by an oligarchy behind the facade of the American Republic?
Think about it...
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
So You Don't Think That It's All About Money?
During a visit to Britain in 1763, The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the new found prosperity in the colonies.
Franklin replied. "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."
In response, the world's most powerful independent bank used its influence on the British parliament to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764. This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold.
Here is what Franklin said after that. "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."
"The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War." - Benjamin Franklin's autobiography
"The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will... They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by (the power of) government, keep them in their proper spheres." - Gouvernor Morris at the Constitutional Convention
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing." - Thomas Jefferson, 1798
"It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners... is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country?... Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence... would be more formidable and dangerous than a military power of the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favour alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles." - Andrew Jackson on the Second National Bank.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson
"If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations." -Andrew Jackson
"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." -Abraham Lincoln
Despite these warnings, Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote: "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson
That's what great men and American presidents have had to say about central banks.
Think about it...
Franklin replied. "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."
In response, the world's most powerful independent bank used its influence on the British parliament to press for the passing of the Currency Act of 1764. This act made it illegal for the colonies to print their own money, and forced them to pay all future taxes to Britain in silver or gold.
Here is what Franklin said after that. "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."
"The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the colonists to get power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War." - Benjamin Franklin's autobiography
"The rich will strive to establish their dominion and enslave the rest. They always did. They always will... They will have the same effect here as elsewhere, if we do not, by (the power of) government, keep them in their proper spheres." - Gouvernor Morris at the Constitutional Convention
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790
"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing." - Thomas Jefferson, 1798
"It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners... is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country?... Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence... would be more formidable and dangerous than a military power of the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favour alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles." - Andrew Jackson on the Second National Bank.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson
"If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations." -Andrew Jackson
"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." -Abraham Lincoln
Despite these warnings, Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote: "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson
That's what great men and American presidents have had to say about central banks.
Think about it...
Why Can't We Get The Truth?
Something troubles me. Actually, a lot of things trouble me. But there is something that nearly makes me crazy.
- Why are the majority of Americans so ignorant about the events ocurring around them?
- Why are they willing to accept what they see and hear in the media as the truth?
- Why, if they are taught to question authority, accepting the authorities version of the truth?
The whys go on forever. My Dad once said, "Why is the first word in an argument."
Haven't you ever wondered why you never hear about the Fraud of the Federal Reserve System?
"In March 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests (bankers), the steel (Carnegie), shipbuilding, and powder interest (DuPonts), and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press.... They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers." - U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917. Notes inside parenthesis are my own.
If the media is unbiased, independent and completely thorough, why haven't they discussed the FED? Currently, half the states have at least a grass roots movement in action to abolish the FED, but there's no press coverage. In July, 1968, the House Banking Subcommittee reported that Rockefeller, through Chase Manhattan Bank, controlled 5.9% of the stock in CBS.
Furthermore, the bank had gained interlocking directorates with ABC.
In 1974, Congress issued a report stating that the Chase Manhattan Bank's stake in CBS rose to 14.1% and NBC to 4.5% (through RCA, the parent company of NBC). The same report said that the Chase Manhattan Bank held stock in 28 broadcasting firms. After this report, the Chase Manhattan Bank obtained 6.7% of ABC, and today the percentage could be much greater. It only requires 5% ownership to significantly influence the media. This is only one of 300 wealthy shareholders of the FED. It is believed other FED owners have similar holdings in the media. To control the media, FED bankers call in their loans if the media disagrees with them.
Rockefeller also controls the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the sole purpose of which is to aid in stimulating greater interest in foreign affairs and in a one world government. Nearly every major newscaster belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations. The Council on Foreign Relations controls many major newspapers and magazines. Additionally, major corporations owned by FED shareholders are the source of huge advertising revenues which surely would influence the media.
You can get a text file of people working in the media who are also members of the CFR here.
Have you ever wondered why?
Think about it...
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Why Am I Doing This?
Every effort worth doing requires a statement of purpose. Today, I'd like to write about the purpose behind this Blog.
The majority of my experience in life was as a military policeman and security specialist. My point of view in this world is from that experience combined with a firm belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
In the mid 1970s I went to school to learn Base Defense Skills. The Air Force decided that their old one week school was not going to cut it any more and the course became a six week school at Camp Bullis, Texas, outside San Antonio.
While I was there, I learned small unit tactics, recon patrolling, combat patrolling, land navigation and how to set up a defense plan for an Air Base. There are several things I carry with me to this day. One is a principle of gathering information about an adversary unit. It was an acronym SALUTE. Size, Armament, Location, Unit Designation, Time and for the life of me I can't remember E. Then, I remember, "Know thine enemy," and I can't recall where I read that. Most importantly I've read Sun Tzu's "The Art of War." They've all taught me one thing: You cannot conduct any kind of battle with your enemies if you don't know them.
My struggle is for the minds of men. Plain and simple.
Our single greatest hope in America is to take back our country from the Coporate Global Socialists headed by the international banks. In order for that to happen, education and action must take place.
There is only one legal document we need to restore things in the united States. The Constitution for the United States. There is only one group that needs to do our bidding, The Congress of the United States. Only Congress can make the changes. Not the President nor the Supreme Court.
As far as education is concerned, The Federalist Papers, The Anti-Federalist, various writings of the Founders of our country will give you a sense of why they wrote the Constitution the way they did. I will do my best to distill the principles behind Life, Liberty and Property. But most of it is up to you, my readers.
I'd like to recall a quote from Edmund Burke, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
I believe that we have an obligation to resist evil. And contrary to the do-gooder's philosophy, what we see going on around us is the result of spritual wickedness and evil. All of my studying about the so-called conspiracy has led me to one group of people. The Money-Lenders. They have purchased the hearts and souls of the Lawyers and the Scribes.
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pieced themselves through with many sorrows." - 1 Timothy 6:10 (NKJV)
While Paul was specifically addressing a group of people in the early church who were 'fleecing the flock', the principle applies out in the day to day world as well. The enemy we face are those who love money and the worldly power it can bring them.
Bottom Line: The purpose of this Blog is to help you open your eyes and quit believing what they are telling you. Take action to reverse the process began in 1913. Take back your republic and live like the free men and women you were born to be.
Think about it...
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Does It Really Matter?
I've been thinking about things for a week now.
I started sharing my knowledge and thoughts at Mom's prompting. It's primarily directed at my siblings and extended family. It's an attempt to educate them to dangers that are imminent.
What I've been sharing with you through emails and this Blog has been knowledge about things that threaten you and your liberties. I don't know about you, but I'm worried that we won't have a free country or government for the people and by the people when our children and grandchildren grow up. I'm concerned that they will be slaves of the Elite Socialists.
I get a very strong impression that people really don't give a damn about it as long as they are allowed to continue their lives without too much interference; and they're allowed to bitch when a new inconvenience shows up. They'll get over it after it's been around for a while. It doesn't mean a thing that their personal liberty is eroding in small bits. Hell, it wouldn't mean anything if they lost their liberty completely, as long as they can still watch their television, drink their beer or beverage of choice and continue on in their illusion of the American Dream.
Does it matter that the Real ID Act is the Nazi equivalent of, "Paper's please?"
Does it matter that the Patriot Act is patterned after The Reichstag Declaration and the Enabling Act of 1933; both pieces of legislation that destroyed the Weimar Republic of Germany?
Does it matter that the same people that bankrupted Europe prior to World War One have bankrupted The United States?
Does it matter that The Constitution for the United States has been set aside for a system of Corporate Welfare State socialism?
Does it really matter at all?
Think about it...
I started sharing my knowledge and thoughts at Mom's prompting. It's primarily directed at my siblings and extended family. It's an attempt to educate them to dangers that are imminent.
What I've been sharing with you through emails and this Blog has been knowledge about things that threaten you and your liberties. I don't know about you, but I'm worried that we won't have a free country or government for the people and by the people when our children and grandchildren grow up. I'm concerned that they will be slaves of the Elite Socialists.
I get a very strong impression that people really don't give a damn about it as long as they are allowed to continue their lives without too much interference; and they're allowed to bitch when a new inconvenience shows up. They'll get over it after it's been around for a while. It doesn't mean a thing that their personal liberty is eroding in small bits. Hell, it wouldn't mean anything if they lost their liberty completely, as long as they can still watch their television, drink their beer or beverage of choice and continue on in their illusion of the American Dream.
Does it matter that the Real ID Act is the Nazi equivalent of, "Paper's please?"
Does it matter that the Patriot Act is patterned after The Reichstag Declaration and the Enabling Act of 1933; both pieces of legislation that destroyed the Weimar Republic of Germany?
Does it matter that the same people that bankrupted Europe prior to World War One have bankrupted The United States?
Does it matter that The Constitution for the United States has been set aside for a system of Corporate Welfare State socialism?
Does it really matter at all?
Think about it...
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
On War
I'd like to talk about the subject of war. This won't be a discussion of the morality of war itself. It is a necessary evil. This won't be a discussion of tactics or strategy. Nor will we discuss it in an abstract sense.
I want to discuss the lawful conduct of war by the American Republic. How do we conduct war and when?
"We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -- The Preamble to the Constitution
Art 1, § 8, "The Congress shall have Power... to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
Article 2, § 2, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;"
There is no provision in the Constitution for the President to send military forces to war. There is no provision in the Constitution for military adventurism such as Korea, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Gulf War 1, Bosnia, Iraq or any other conflict. There is no provision in the Constitution for maintaining a standing army. There is a provision for raising and supporting an Army, but the appropriations for that use can't be for any longer than two years.
The Founders didn't make any kind of allowances for Wars of Agression. Their plan was to provide for and enable the national defense only. Hence, the Militia.
During the cold war, I remember that we had a 1 million man force in the armed services. The largest portion of the national budget went towards defense. We are still maintaining posts and bases in 130 of the 150 nations of the world. Consider the drain on taxpayer's resources. Did you know that the largest employer in the United States is the Federal Government?
Where am I going with this? Simply this, there are necessary elements for national defense that we must maintain. Just as a Navy was up until the invention of the military aircraft. Now, it would seem logical to me that we would have to maintain the infrastructure for both naval and air defense. That would be a hefty chunk of money charged to the taxpayers, yes, but necessary. I also believe that some sort of human intelligence would be absolutely necessary. On the other hand if we recalled every soldier, sailor and airman stationed abroad, there would be a significant savings since not only could we return them back to civilian society, but we wouldn't have to pay the huge amounts of money maintaining bases.
Maintaining a standing army, such as we have; conducting wars that have not been declared, such as those we were involved in previously; and now Iraq, Afghanistan and very possibly Iran in the very near future; are unconstitutional.
Think about it...
I want to discuss the lawful conduct of war by the American Republic. How do we conduct war and when?
"We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -- The Preamble to the Constitution
Art 1, § 8, "The Congress shall have Power... to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"
Article 2, § 2, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;"
There is no provision in the Constitution for the President to send military forces to war. There is no provision in the Constitution for military adventurism such as Korea, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, Gulf War 1, Bosnia, Iraq or any other conflict. There is no provision in the Constitution for maintaining a standing army. There is a provision for raising and supporting an Army, but the appropriations for that use can't be for any longer than two years.
The Founders didn't make any kind of allowances for Wars of Agression. Their plan was to provide for and enable the national defense only. Hence, the Militia.
During the cold war, I remember that we had a 1 million man force in the armed services. The largest portion of the national budget went towards defense. We are still maintaining posts and bases in 130 of the 150 nations of the world. Consider the drain on taxpayer's resources. Did you know that the largest employer in the United States is the Federal Government?
Where am I going with this? Simply this, there are necessary elements for national defense that we must maintain. Just as a Navy was up until the invention of the military aircraft. Now, it would seem logical to me that we would have to maintain the infrastructure for both naval and air defense. That would be a hefty chunk of money charged to the taxpayers, yes, but necessary. I also believe that some sort of human intelligence would be absolutely necessary. On the other hand if we recalled every soldier, sailor and airman stationed abroad, there would be a significant savings since not only could we return them back to civilian society, but we wouldn't have to pay the huge amounts of money maintaining bases.
Maintaining a standing army, such as we have; conducting wars that have not been declared, such as those we were involved in previously; and now Iraq, Afghanistan and very possibly Iran in the very near future; are unconstitutional.
Think about it...
Republic or Democracy?
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship." —Alexander Fraser Tyler, 1700
I don't know who Alexander Fraser Tyler was, or even that this is attributed to the correct source, but I do know that this quotation is prophetic.
What kind of government do we have in America? Is it a Democracy or is it a Republic? Time and again I hear the talking heads of the 'free press' and the pundits they air, calling our government a democracy. I read in various sources something like, "In a democracy such as ours..." What twaddle!
Allow me to recount an anecdote I once read:
In 1788, as the Constitutional Convention came to a close in Philadelphia, a woman approached Benjamin Franklin and asked, "What have you wrought, Sir?" His reply was, "A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it."
His words apply as much today as they did then.
What's the difference anyway? Most will ask that question and it's a valid question.
A Democracy is a simple Majority Rules system. It seems fair; in reality it isn't. The reason is that there are no protections from the mob. The mob will always be swayed by the most eloquent speaker. The laws can be changed at the whim of the leader, and as long as he can sway the majority (mob), he can have his way. There are no checks and balances in a Democracy. Don't be deceived by those who think a democracy is a better system of government. In a democracy, the shiftless and lazy can take your wealth through taxes and give it to themselves. There are no laws to protect you from them. Because, they make the rules as they go along. Nothing is permanent. It all depends on how the mob feels, if you will.
A Republic, on the other hand, is a system of rule by law. Our Constitution enumerates the powers that Congress, the Executive and the Judicial Branches may exercise. Congress was delegated 20 powers in Article 1, § 8. There are 10 prohibitions in Article 1, § 9, and 10 further restrictions in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. As you've seen, government cannot ride rough-shod over you, the individual. Why? Because you have laws that prevent it from doing so.
In a democracy, there is no protection from government's abuses. And, Dear Reader, that's what's wrong with our government today. Everyone thinks it's a democracy, so they ignore the laws that protect the private person from abuse. They pass laws that plunder his labor, that have stolen his children, his property and invaded his privacy. Is this what you want?
I don't know who Alexander Fraser Tyler was, or even that this is attributed to the correct source, but I do know that this quotation is prophetic.
What kind of government do we have in America? Is it a Democracy or is it a Republic? Time and again I hear the talking heads of the 'free press' and the pundits they air, calling our government a democracy. I read in various sources something like, "In a democracy such as ours..." What twaddle!
Allow me to recount an anecdote I once read:
In 1788, as the Constitutional Convention came to a close in Philadelphia, a woman approached Benjamin Franklin and asked, "What have you wrought, Sir?" His reply was, "A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it."
His words apply as much today as they did then.
What's the difference anyway? Most will ask that question and it's a valid question.
A Democracy is a simple Majority Rules system. It seems fair; in reality it isn't. The reason is that there are no protections from the mob. The mob will always be swayed by the most eloquent speaker. The laws can be changed at the whim of the leader, and as long as he can sway the majority (mob), he can have his way. There are no checks and balances in a Democracy. Don't be deceived by those who think a democracy is a better system of government. In a democracy, the shiftless and lazy can take your wealth through taxes and give it to themselves. There are no laws to protect you from them. Because, they make the rules as they go along. Nothing is permanent. It all depends on how the mob feels, if you will.
A Republic, on the other hand, is a system of rule by law. Our Constitution enumerates the powers that Congress, the Executive and the Judicial Branches may exercise. Congress was delegated 20 powers in Article 1, § 8. There are 10 prohibitions in Article 1, § 9, and 10 further restrictions in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. As you've seen, government cannot ride rough-shod over you, the individual. Why? Because you have laws that prevent it from doing so.
In a democracy, there is no protection from government's abuses. And, Dear Reader, that's what's wrong with our government today. Everyone thinks it's a democracy, so they ignore the laws that protect the private person from abuse. They pass laws that plunder his labor, that have stolen his children, his property and invaded his privacy. Is this what you want?
- Would you rather sit on your comfortable couch, with a cold beverage and watch the square screen across the room as it blares its mindless blather at you?
- Would you rather hear the comforting words of the talking heads, assuring you that everything is okay while each day you sink deeper and deeper into debt and slavery?
- Or would you rather challenge the status quo and become a free people once again?
Freedom isn't free, people. It takes the dedicated efforts of everyone to keep it. As long as you are willing to let someone else do it. You won't be a free people much longer, regardless of what your favorite TV personality tells you.
Think about it...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)