Can The President Really Make Law?


Ah yes, the frenzy of false media punditry, memes, and speculation strikes again…

CNN, ABC, FOX, NBC, CBS, and all of the bought-and-paid-for U.S. media corporations, now more than ever acting within their prescribed “Mockingbird” rhetorical nonsense, are yet again confusing a very simple concept while relying on the ignorance of the citizenslaved population. A hidden past creates even a hidden present, where the actions of government seem to draw their authority from the ether of the unknown.

And as Obama’s presidential declaration of what is to become the militarized (executive) legal law in the form of an Executive Order forced upon the United States and its people to create “Mexicamerica” is being hailed even by a dishonest Congress as unconstitutional, the propaganda is getting ass-deep. In this classic false dialectic, the congress is once again pretending (lying) to its subject-citizenry that its hands are tied; that the president is acting in a rogue capacity while ignoring “the people’s will” of the congress. All this is merely another attempt to hide the reality that the President is a real, Congressional confirmed and approved and confirmed dictator under emergency war powers.

Let me once again set the record straight… with the congressional record, that is.

In 1933, Congress voluntarily made this little legislative law that all but stripped itself of its own powers to stop such outrageous whims of the president by declaring that the Office of President shall from that point forward have dictatorial powers without need of vote or congressional approval.  In the Act of March 9, 1933, Title 1, Section 1, congress itself declared:

“The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by subsection b of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and confirmed.”

It was thus codified, and later slightly altered to this:

“The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to the amended [12 USC Sec. 95a], are hereby approved and confirmed. (Mar. 9, 1933, c. 1, Title 1, Sec. 1, 48 Stat, 1.)”

And today it can be found in the U.S. Code in Title 50, entitled “War And National Defense,” and verbatum above as Title 12 Subsection 95a, here:

Link–> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/95b

–=–

What was the reaction by the few good men at the time who vehemently opposed such a travesty of interpretive law?

In 1933, at the inception, deliberation, and creation of this official usurpation of the powers and authority of Congress over its Executive (Corporation Sole Roosevelt), Congressman James M. Beck spoke officially, stating (from the Congressional Record):

“I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been suggested in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of emergency is the worst. It means that when Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. This means its death. It is the very doctrine that the German chancellor is invoking today in the dying hours of the parliamentary body of the German republic, namely, that because of an emergency, it should grant to the German chancellor absolute power to pass any law, even though the law contradicts the Constitution of the German republic. Chancellor Hitler is at least frank about it. We pay the Constitution lip-service, but the result is the same… the Constitution of the United States, as a restraining influence in keeping the federal government within the carefully prescribed channels of power, is moribund, if not dead. We are witnessing its death-agonies, for when this bill becomes a law, if unhappily it becomes a law, there is no longer any workable Constitution to keep the Congress within the limits of its Constitutional powers… This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities, assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”

–=–

It is important to note that Congressman Beck resigned his seat from the Legislature one year later, in September of 1934, and was quoted as giving the reason for his resignation. He stated that Congress had become “merely a rubber stamp for the Executive.”

Then newly elected criminal-minded president Franklin D. Roosevelt in his inaugural address on March 4rth, 1933 stated :

“I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require. These measures, or such other measures as the Congress may build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring to speedy adoption. But in the event that the Congress shall fail to take one of these two courses, and in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meat the crisis ­ broad Executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.”

–=–

And Congress granted happily and speedily that mutually beneficial request by the president to allow the office to be dictator under the doctrine of necesity, as we read above in U.S. Code.

“Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the Congress hereby declares that a serious emergency exists and that it is imperatively necessary speedily to put into effect remedies of uniform national application.”

This became the “Act of March 9, 1933″, as written into Congressional law.

–=–

Later in the congressional record, we find other honest appeals to the insanity of a congress that at any time can stop this power of the president with new legislation, but chooses in free will not to do so. This continuous state of multiple declarations of national emergency was speculated upon long ago as the road to dictatorship and martial law in America, again reading from within the congressional record:

“The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call reserve forces amounting to 2 1/2 million men to duty, institute martial law, seize and control all means of transportation, regulate all private enterprise, restrict travel, and in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all Americans…

“Most [of these laws] remain a potential source of virtually unlimited power for a President should he choose to activate them. It is possible that some future President could exercise this vast authority in an attempt to place the United States under authoritarian rule.

“While the danger of a dictatorship arising through legal means may seem remote to us today (in 1973), recent history records Hitler seizing control through the use of the emergency powers provisions contained in the laws of the Weimar Republic.”

–Joint Statement, Senators Frank Church (D-ID) and Charles McMathias (R-MD) September 30, 1973.

–=–

Why did these men have such horrific predictions for our current future?

In 1973, the Senate was charged with compiling a report of which it was to decide upon the efficacy and necessity of the continuance of these Emergency War Powers of the Executive Branch, showing that congress certainly has the power to end this nightmare at any time. This report was named Senate Report 93-549, and was commissioned by the “Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency”.

The report’s introduction opens as such:

Since March the 9th, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergencyA majority of the people of the United States have lived all their lives under emergency ruleFor 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency… And, in the United States, actions taken by the government in times of great crisis have ­ from, at least, the Civil War ­ in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.”

–=–

In order to cut through all of the bullshit that is being espoused by both mainstream and alternative armchair commentators, let this truth stand as an un-shattering reality. The congress voluntarily gave away its power to say no in 1933 in an official capacity, knowingly allowing all future presidents (the office) to declare and order any thing they wish as law. This is voluntary. And this act in U.S. Code can be reversed any time that congress wishes. The problem is, they don’t disapprove of the presidents actions, accept in public forums where the idiots who vote for them can see them pandering and appealing to the sympathy of the unknowing masses.

They say their hands are tied, and yes that is true. But they control the rope. They made the law that ties their hands, and at any time at all they can unmake that law.

But what would happen then? What would happen if this office of dictator were suddenly de-authorized?

That would mean congress would lose all of its modern post-war emergency power! It would mean that all “actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933,” would lose their authority. For emergency powers are supposed to be as temporary as any other declaration of war. But the wars against all the declared emergencies are still in effect, and even the Federal Reserve, which was created in a state of emergency under the auspices of the “Emergency Banking Act”, would need to necessarily be put to rest. Literally, the only way that congress can have so much power is to allow the president dictatorial power by vesting that power through congress to the office of president. Thus, the Hegelian dialectic is perfected within a false competition between congress and the monster it created and can destroy at any time.

Make no mistake, folks, congress is not opposed to legalization of illegal aliens into the nation. The more debt slaves the better. But rest assured that you are about to see endless congressional debate and media talking heads spouting more B.S. than you can stomach, all in the name of hiding the fact that you live in a pre-confirmed dictatorship that is both approved and continued perpetually and voluntarily by the United States Congress assembled.

Stop saying that everything that is happening in Washington is unconstitutional damn it! This law was in 1933 passed to bypass the constitution through emergency power!!! So guess what… that means that everything is “constitutional” by necessity  under a suspended constitution! Necessity is a state of lawlessness!!!

You want to change the political spectrum? Get the truth out. Embarrass congress when they lie and pretend that their political hands are tied. Demand that this reality be the one and only political subject and topic of debate at the presidential elections. Demand that this permanent declared state of emergency be banished by this and any future president and the law allowing this Congressional appointed dictatorship abolished. For this is the very soul of Homeland Security, the Patriot Acts, and all other emergency acts, declarations, and Executive Orders that violate every possible right imaginable. Without the power of emergency and war, which is the power of necessity (necessity knows no law), everything would have to go back to what it was before the military ruled the nation through executive force under emergency war powers.

Without this power and authority, congress would need to once again recognize the limitations to itself by the constitution, for necessity knows no constitution, either.

Until you stand up, foreigners are going to come. Illegal wars will be waged. Oppression will ensue. And the president will be dictator with the full and unfettered legal support of you, the People, as re-presented in congress.

The truth is that you are a militarily and politically defeated people.

You perish from lack of knowledge.

And admitting that is the first step…

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Friday, November 21st, 2014

Searching For Palestinian Soldiers


I clicked onto a random Youtube video today; one of the multitude bearing the familiar tag line of “Israeli Soldiers Abuse Palestinian _____.”

As I listened, it turned out instead to be the typical defense of Israel type of plea. The subject was the recent peace talks between Palestine and the Israeli “State”. And of course the narrator lamented upon the poor Israelis having a disadvantage in those talks. And now they’ve broken down yet again.

As I thought about her words juxtaposed to the film footage of Israeli soldiers engaging Palestinian pedestrians, a wonderfully ticklish feeling of confidence and sorrow came over me as I constructed an idea…

Even before I asked myself the question, I knew to my bones the answer. I didn’t just know it, I felt it.

Any time a man can dispel his own cognitive dissonance by logically destroying his own fallacious thought patterns programed since birth, a feeling of liberation and relief follows. Today, I found the ultimate weapon to showcase the true purveyors of abuse in the Holy Land. So simple…

And so I grabbed my keyboard and mouse to verify my new revelation.

First, I re-visited Youtube to utilize my two-part verification method. Therein I typed the phrase:

“ISRAELI SOLDIERS”

Up came a massive collection of video clips that showed Israeli soldiers interacting violently with the non-uniformed, non-militarized, Palestinian people. Abuse, bloodied and dismembered children, depleted uranium-exposed people on both sides, executions, violent arrests, child and elderly abuse, and all-around disrespect of life and liberty shown 100 times over; armed guards against an unarmed people.

Now came the victory dance. For I then typed into the search box the words:

“PALESTINIAN SOLDIERS”

Now I didn’t expect to see very many videos of Palestinian Soldiers, but I was a bit shocked at my own ignorance to see that not only were there no videos at all showing Palestinian soldiers, but the same exact videos that came up with my previous search appeared on the screen, again showing Israeli soldiers abusing Palestinian men, woman, and children.

Just to be a bit more clear, I typed in a different search:

“PALESTINIANS ABUSE JEWS”

Of the 15 or so videos that came up, one was titled “Horse abuse by Palestinian on Jewish Land”.

The other videos were titled as follows:

Orthodox Jewish woman harasses Palestinian mother

Jewish settler hate

American Jew Abused in Israel Tel Aviv… (refering to Israeli Jew on American Jew – jew on jew - crime)

More Palestinian/Hamas Child Abuse. Kids TV

Life in Palestine under Jewish Occupation

Newt Gingrich trying to show loyalty to Israel by abusing Palestinian rights!

Historical Images: 900,000 Palestinians Fleeing,
Tens of Thousands of Jews Seizing their Homes

Israeli Checkpoints: Assaulting International Observers and Abusing Palestinians in Hebron

Israeli Soldiers & Police Attack Palestinian Children When Playing Near Al Aqsa

Mizrahi Jews steal Palestinian homes

–=–

So where is the Palestinian Army? Police? Soldiers? Anyone?

Where are all the videos of them abusing the Jews? Because they appear to be almost non-existent!

And then I thought… really? The organized efforts of the ADL, AIPAC, dozens of duel-Israeli citizen Cabinet members and politicians, the Christian/Jewish alliance, the CIA and the Mossad working side by side, and countless other pro-Israeli organizations and congresses… and they didn’t think to flood Youtube with either real or fake videos of Palestinians abusing Jews? I laughed out loud at the thought that this stupid little after-thought just turned into the most honest, in your face proof through logic, reason, and sheer in your face video evidence and fact, that the Palestinian people are completely suppressed by the Israeli army and have no weapons or army to fight back with. They have sticks and stones against sub-machine guns, tanks, planes, and a holy horror of illegal weapons designed for maximum carnage and suffering.

Incidentally, It is important to mention that I could find no videos or articles of Palestinians stealing any Jewish land or homes.

And of course, as I deconstructed the true situation over there, I realized that the Palestinian people have no army, navy, air force, or any protective force at all.

That’s the people. The people are defenseless, bravely using their own bodies as their only weapons, often in defense of their families and communities.

The Palestinian government, if you can call it that, is a bit different.

From Wikipedia:

The signing of the Oslo Accords in September 1993 brought about the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority. With the opening of Gaza International Airport, the PNA established a 200-strong Aviation Police (Shurta al-Jawiya), subordinate to the Palestinian Civil Aviation Department and based on Force 14 personnel. Consisting mainly of guards and security personnel, the unit initially also comprised crews responsible for maintaining and operating the authority’s fleet of three Mil Mi-17 helicopters. These, however, were all destroyed by the Israeli Air Force on December 3, 2001, during the Al-Aqsa Intifada.

The Palestinian Security Force is financed by the United States which, according to media estimates, pays an annual 3 million dollars for it.

As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict goes on, the security forces notably co-operate with other law enforcement agencies, such as arresting militant sub-groups and assisting the Israeli government with prosecuting those picked up. According the Jerusalem Post as well, “In the past, Palestinian security forces have released arrested terrorists and then quietly tipped off Israel to mitigate internal public criticism against handing over Palestinians to Israel.”

From the late 1990s, the CIA played the central role in building up PA security forces, in close co-operation with the Israeli military and intelligence. After the killing of three US officials in the Gaza strip in 2003, British forces played an increasingly active role.

Mohammed Dahlan was the first chief of the Palestinian Security Force in Gaza from 1994 to 2002. Dahlan was replaced by Rashid Abu Shbak. Jibril Rajoub was the chief president of the Palestinian Security Force in the West Bank and was replaced in 2002 by Zuhair Manasra.

The current state and activities of Force 14 are unknown, though it was reportedly still sending recruits on various training courses throughout the world in the mid 1990s.

–=–

Hmm… Well then, what happened to the Palestinian Liberation Army (PLA)?

Considering its enemy is the Israeli “Defense” Forces (IDF), they don’t exist in Palestine anymore. However, it has been reported that approximately 4,500 PLA members remain in Syria.

Wikipedia reports that:

PLA soldiers later became the core of the Palestinian Authority’s (PNA) National Guard, after the signing of the 1993 Oslo Accords, when they were allowed to enter the Palestinian Territories to take up positions in the PNA security services.

And what of the Palestinian Authority, which “keeps the peace” in the yet unrecognized status of the Palestinian state?

Palestinians in the diaspora and inside Israel do not vote in elections for the offices of the Palestinian Authority.

As I pondered this notion, I came to the startling realization that this is almost the exact story of what America went through, where it’s militias were demonized and replaced by the United States central government’s peace-keeping version of the lawful militia, called the Federal de facto “National Guard”. The people do not vote for their peace-keepers here either… but then the American people have no idea they are a militarily occupied union under the Leiber Code. Just like in Palestine, the army and the guards are there to protect government from the people, not the other way around.

So then what, pray tell, would happen if I searched the whole Internet for some small trace of a resisting Palestinian Army?

And this is about where I kicked myself…

Dear God!, I realized. Palestine is a country with no defense! It has no army, navy, air force, or any force at all – except the undying will of a totally oppressed people! Of course the Palestinians have no army. They have no ships or planes. They have nothing but their lands and homes; though this appears to be a conditional use at best, until the so-called Israeli “Jews” steal them while claiming right of return to a place they do not belong and have no actual historical right to claim.

So I’m supposed to believe it when the media states that the poor, poor Israeli “Jews” are being abused by a people with no military authority or force whatsoever, and that this justifies the most brutal of retaliation and genocide? By a people that don’t even have access to most streets? By a people oppressed in every conceivable way through Apartheid tactics? By people so desperate as to throw sticks and stones because all of their weapons and planes were confiscated or destroyed by the Israelis (which the United States paid for)?

Is there any greater internationally syndicated fallacy today then that of the cry of these oppressors as an appeal to their theft and murder of innocent men, women, and children in the name of plunder and racial superiority? Can we really expect anything less in our own lands if we stand by and do nothing as our own government’s contribute billions and billions to this travesty of morality and international law? Are we ourselves so corrupted by Talmudic, Zionist devices, brainwashing, and false patriotism that we silently consent to this atrocity in infinitude, even while our own governments around the world fund it?

Perhaps the Muslim’s are chanting and cheering “death to America” because they realize that the wholly Zionist United States government and its complacent, tacitly consenting, brainwashed people are the only thing keeping the “state” of Israel alive? Well, that and the Crown Corporation Sole, which militarily took over Palestine in the first place to reclaim its “Kingdom of Jerusalem.”

Ugh… now I’ve done it. I must officially be un-American, anti-Semitic, and a domestic terrorist for speaking the truth.

Give me a fucking break!

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, November 12th, 2014

Debunking Education: Exposing The Syndicate


Author’s note: The following presentation is designed to give a general overview of how organized crime has replaced not only government, but the cherished institutions we’re trained like animals to participate in and respect the opinions of. The “syndicate” as is uncovered here is the foundation of all legitimacy and right granted to the worst of criminal enterprise. While the focus here is foundational, the reader may apply their knowledge of such subjects as Common Core, the Delphi Technique, Lobbying, special interests, consensus building, monopolies and trusts, grants, uniform codes and regulations, and all other psychological tools and conditioning that allow the unthinkable to permeate as normality within our government and its institutions. In order to comprehend just how vaccination, Geo-engineering, cloning, psychiatry, unnecessary live animal research, and so many otherwise immoral and unethical practices that would otherwise be shunned in society are instead accepted as normal and as “best practices” within the various institutions regulated by government,  we must expose the centralized criminal organization that represents the authority behind those acceptations. And so here I present to you the underbelly of the beast – organized crime that I call the syndicate.

–=–
Debunking Education:
Exposing The Syndicate.
–=–

.

–=–

“The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity
but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities,
that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable,
that removes the sense that there is an outside.”

–Allan Bloom, “The Closing of the American Mind”

–=–

“Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes,
consume more resources than poorly educated people,
who tend to have lower incomes. In this case,
more education increases the threat to sustainability.”

–Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit Vol.2 2002

–=–

Have you ever seriously considered that education is the best and truest form of mass programming, or as Charlotte Iserbyt calls it in her now infamous book of primary research horror, The Deliberate Dumbing Down Of America? Is there more to it than just tainted textbooks and the drive to make kids less intelligent? Is there a criminal element organized at the very top that can only maintain its control and authoritarian grip on industry through this institutionalized education process, never allowing deviation from the prescribed curriculum of professors (those who profess) in a closed loop university system?

Many have considered the fleeting fancy that this is so… but establishing without doubt this notion as the foundational and obvious disposition regarding the institution of education is another matter. Mrs. Iserbyt certainly does a good job of creating the case through documentation and historical perspective, but is there some deeper aspect to this that we can delve into to prove the fraud of education as a cover for the continued inducement of organized crime?

It is my intention here to do just that.

We generally bow down to popular opinion as the majority of “normal” and “educated” people use fallacious defenses against reasonable criticism towards the education system, like titling those who question the institution of university and education as “conspiracy freaks”, even when those tomes of research comes from a former presidential appointed politician to the Federal Department of Education like Mrs. Iserbyt, who has nothing to share but first hand knowledge.

In topics of such depth and misunderstanding, sometimes the proof is in the very foundation of the object to be proved.

Not only does the central education curriculum promote a fallacious normalcy bias to protect itself and its vested interest in most walks of corporate society (education as a perfectly normal requirement for “success” in industry), it re-presents to students and teachers false history to build that bias within its own learning tools, professing the most convenient of historical biases to promote the need of its own continuity – as the preserver and teacher of history. It categorizes everything into “subjects”, as if one part of life were totally separate from the other and therefore must be taught and learned as such, thus creating “experts” with no expertise in anything but a tunnel-visioned set of false-dialectics on their particular subject of expertise. In reality, the education system has an audacious underbelly that needs to be comprehended in today’s institutional and political forum, as new standards such as “Common Core” are being implemented for ever more global centralization of what is deemed as well-adjusted “normalcy”.

To understand just what this education system is designed to do to our young and mature minds alike, we must be able to examine without bias its true structure, intent, and authority; dating back many centuries and subsisting through many empires. You see, the institution of education is what is called a syndicate.

The syndicate has always been there. It involves the most important of industries: from education, medication, legalization, appropriation, codification, and regulation. In other words, for the syndicate to maintain control over society in both profit and in the perception of its falsely projected final authority, it must be in control of government (public) opinion, medical opinion, legal opinion, access to financial grants (free taxpayer money), and most importantly the group-think opinion of the university system from whence all credentialed minds flow.

This is accomplished in modern times through the creation and use of private, non-governmental organizations and associations (NGO’s), from the American Medical Association (AMA) to the American and International Bar Associations (ABA/IBA), the National Teachers Association (NTA) and Parent Teachers Association (PTA), to the National Governors Association (NGA), which by the way holds the copyright to Common Core Standards. These completely private associations work together to impose an organized syndicate that controls the flow and false-legitimacy (stamp of approval) of information while guaranteeing profit-friendly regulation of industry. The money is of course syndicated through the Federal Reserve System, another politically “independent” association, representing the control of funding via congressional committees – the literal creator of money. This process of money creation is called “appropriation”, and it makes new taxpayer money instantly available today by creating new national debt due tomorrow. In other words, all taxpayer money collected today by the central government syndicate was already spent yesterday, the main reason it can’t be paid down. For government is ultimately the head banker; the creator, appropriator, and regulator of currency; another very important cog in the organized criminal monopoly via its publicly perceived and accepted simulacrum of legitimacy, despite its known and admitted de facto (illegitimate) nature.

The syndicate ensures and insures trust monopolies and legal standards that promote those monopolies, even as it wages war on any information or other competition that may contradict it. The syndicate is not only the seller of lies it is the promoter and insurer of them, literally syndicating its lies through mass media. Through education, the general population never comprehends the true nature of the syndicate, for its ties are not readily comprehensible and it is certainly not taught in school! Each organized institution within the syndicate is presented as a separate self-governing entity, which appears to be individually scrutinized and regulated by the other institutions that lie within the same syndicate. And yet they are all working together in syndication to promote and keep their monopoly of fraud going, each promoting the legitimacy of the other.

This is the normalization of fraud. The syndicate even teaches the proper management of fraud in schools, while producing a stage-show for the benefit of the educated people, utilizing the predictive programming taught in schools and universities to enhance the ego and appeal of the masses to their own unreasonable but authorized (syndicated) authority. As long as the money and retirement benefits flow, the syndicate remains a legitimized criminal authority in all things.

It is not that the government is the syndicate, it is that the syndicate slowly infiltrated and took over the running of the government from its inception. And from the centralized criminal government were spawned these several institutions to control each facet of industry. Thus we have the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice,  the Department of Treasury, the Department of Labor, and the individual agencies of the FDA, EPA, the Fed, and so many others. Today, private associations make the rules for government and industry, and include members that are the law makers themselves, the attorneys, the doctors, the pharmacists, the teachers… even the students have their own student “association”. Each of these seemingly separate groups are the created and promoted non-governmental associations of the syndicate, and these member-groups ensure the future normalcy bias and inducement process of men and women into the work environment within the syndicate. And for those that are not members, we seemingly have no choice but to study from the textbooks that are created by the corporations and funded by the syndicate itself, for the syndicate also holds the exclusive power to bestow title, to give credentials, to grant degrees, and to graduate men and women with false honors and flattering titles. The syndicate makes the rules and requirements for graduation, which of course always include only syndicated (approved) texts and learning materials. And no other school or university may be established without the syndicate’s approval and adherence to its required standards and practices.

–=–
Killing Us Softly:
The Etymology Of Education
–=–

So how do you define the word education?

To tame the wild beast…

Before we can fully recognize the roots and true intent of the mandatory education system implemented by the central syndicate, we must comprehend just who is behind that system, and just what its true intent is and always has been. The university education system, its foundation and a true description of its profess-ors, and all of the preparatory “grades” necessary to reach that university “degree” of education – to finally be granted permission to work within these syndicated corporate industries -  is defined by Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition quite plainly:

SYNDIC. In the civil law. An advocate or patron; a burgess or recorder; an agent or attorney who acts for a corporation or university; an actor or procurator; an assignee. In French law. The person who is commissioned by the courts to administer a bankruptcy. He fulfills the same functions as the trustee in English law, or assignee in America. The term is also applied to the person appointed to manage the affairs of a corporation.

SYNDICOS. One chosen by a college, municipality, etc., to defend its cause.

SYNDICATE. A university committee. A combination of persons or firms united for the purpose of enterprises too large for individuals to undertake; or a group of financiers who buy up the shares of a company in order to sell them at a profit by creating a scarcity.

SYNDACALISM (n.) – In 1907, from French syndicalismemovement to transfer ownership of means of production and distribution to industrial workers,” from syndicalof a labor union,” from syndicchief representative” (see syndic). “Syndicalism” is in France the new, all-absorbing form of Labor’s conflict with Capital. Its growth has been so rapid that its gravity is not appreciated abroad. This year, even more than last, the strikes and other “direct action,” which it has combined, have upset the industrial life of the country, and forced the attention of Parliament and Government. ["The Nation," June 20, 1907]

COMBINATION. A conspiracy, or confederation of men for unlawful or violent deeds. A union of different elements. A patent may be taken out for a new combination of existing machines.

CONFEDERATIONA league or compact for mutual support, particularly of princes, nations, or states. Such was the colonial government during the Revolution.

CONFEDERACY - In criminal law. The association or banding together of two or more persons for the purpose of committing an act or furthering an enterprise which is forbidden by law, or which, though lawful in itself, becomes unlawful when made the object of the confederacy. Conspiracy is a more technical term for this offense. The act of two or more who combine together to do any damage or injury to another, or to do any unlawful act. In equity pleading. An improper combination alleged to have been entered into between the defendants to a bill in equity. In international law. A league or agreement between two or more independent states whereby they unite for their mutual welfare and the furtherance of their common aims. The term may apply to a union so formed for a temporary or limited purpose, as in the case of an offensive and defensive alliance; but it is more commonly used to denote that species of political connection between two or more independent states by which a central government is created, invested with certain powers of sovereignty, (mostly external,) and acting upon the several component states as its units, which, however, retain their sovereign powers for domestic purposes and some others. See FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

–=–

Of course, you are not supposed to know that the federal government is actually built with intent as a simple and explicit “conspiracy” to commit unlawful acts; defined as “a combination of persons or firms united for enterprises too large for individuals to undertake“. But you need to know that this nation was created by the Articles of Confederation, which may as well be called the Articles of Conspiracy. For these words mean exactly the same thing! Just why do you think the word conspiracy is so demonized in meaning and application within the media portion of the syndicate, while the founding word “confederation” is worshiped and made to appear as if it was historically God-given?

A conspiracy and a confederation are simply defined as two or more persons organizing to defraud others. Nothing more, nothing less. And that is exactly what the Articles of Confederation achieved, leading to the constitution; a compact of debt, obligation, and enfranchisement of all men into corporate persons and debtors in an open-air prison called the United States.

The idea of syndicalism was quite successful, luring men from their families, their self-sufficient lifestyle, and their inherited land and communities into the rent and mortgage schemes within the megalopolises and manufacturing bases, inducting us into the various industries of the syndicate with the advertising and promotion of products and services. Labor unions, a communist ideal, had the very real goal of combinations of common men for the purpose of a private protected confederacy within the corporate structure. Monopolies and trusts were built, and the syndicate’s so-called industrial revolution successfully altered America into a syndicalist nation.

Labeled as “equal rights”, labor unions pitted brother against brother using the legal law to protect favoritism of member workers despite the unheard cry of equality for all men. The family farm and self-sufficiency was replaced by syndicated reality of production in factory assembly lines, where men owned and kept nothing of their own labor. And the means of production was violently switched from the individual and local people into the corporate and industrial syndicate. Homemade became industry made.  “Made in America” became “made in China”. The promise of more money and fatter pensions (the Biblical worship of mammon) secured the subversion of dignity, pride, and honor. The importance of the family unit became secondary to the importance of employment.

Once the means of production was centralized it could be exported, leaving a once independent people dependent on the retail imports and monopolized sweatshop industries of the syndicate and its foreign trade. Of course it was American syndicalist investments that built those foreign factories. Most importantly, through the education system (animal work training), men were learned with extremely limiting skills that could only be utilized in the syndicalist  industries and machine shops, creating a new form of ultimately skill-less laborer highly trained in a single employable (usable) function that was worthless outside of the syndicate (in nature) and its machinery. And those singly educated men were rewarded for this institutionalized ignorance by union membership and the detrimental benefits therein bestowed.

This incentive-based culling instilled the evolution of free men into employed men; and the words free and self-sufficient became known as “unemployment”. Of course unemployment simply means non-taxed and not syndicated – a description of both the poor and the entrepreneur. Even the savvy man was convinced to become “self-employed”, so that he could be taxed and managed in his or her capacity to produce and compete with the syndicate. Of course, most small businesses fold under such pressure and rigged competition.

Today, with the syndicate strong and men weak in their knowledge and life experience away from nature and its laws, the slow dismantling of labor unions represents the syndication of them into the legal codes of the syndicate. With all men dependent upon it, the syndicate can now pay less and charge more, for the new generations haven’t a clue that it was ever any other way. Equal pay for equal labor – the pathetic cry of the oppressed.

EMPLOY‘ – verb transitive [Latin plico.] 1. To occupy the time, attention and labor of; to keep busy, or at work; to use. We employ our hands in labor; we employ our heads or faculties in study or thought; the attention is employed, when the mind is fixed or occupied upon an object; we employ time, when we devote it to an object. A portion of time should be daily employed in reading the scriptures, meditation and prayer; a great portion of life is employed to little profit or to very bad purposes. 2. To use as an instrument or means. We employ pens in writing, and arithmetic in keeping accounts. We employ medicines in curing diseases. 3. To use as materials in forming any thing. We employ timber, stones or bricks, in building; we employ wool, linen and cotton, in making cloth. 4. To engage in one’s service; to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business; to commission and entrust with the management of one’s affairs. The president employed an envoy to negotiate a treaty. Kings and States employ embassadors at foreign courts. 5. To occupy; to use; to apply or devote to an object; to pass in business; as, to employ time; to employ an hour, a day or a week; to employ one’s life. To employ one’s self, is to apply or devote one’s time and attention; to busy one’s self.

EMPLOY’noun That which engages the mind, or occupies the time and labor of a person; business; object of study or industry; employment. Present to grasp, and future still to find, The whole employ of body and of mind. 1. Occupation, as art, mystery, trade, profession. 2. Public office; agency; service for another.

SERV’ICEnoun  [From Latin servitium.] 1. In a general sense, labor of body or of body and mind, performed at the command of a superior, or the pursuance of duty, or for the benefit of another. service is voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary service is that of hired servants, or of contract, or of persons who spontaneously perform something for another’s benefit. Involuntary service is that of slaves, who work by compulsion. 2. The business of a servant; menial office. 3. Attendance of a servant. 4. Place of a servant; actual employment of a servant; as, to be out of service. 5. Any thing done by way of duty to a superior6. Attendance on a superior.

–=–

Voluntary servitude… now where have I heard that before? No one may wish to ponder the role of money and monopolized industry as the instigators of voluntary slavery, but the shoe certainly fits. This brave new institutionalized world was created to replace the old forms of master and slave relationship, evolving the slave mentality into one of common patriotic service to industry and state (which are the same thing) – the basis of functionality of the syndicate. The words voluntary and involuntary are now so intertwined that most people have no idea what the word slave really means, simply because they can choose which form of labor they are employed (used) in as service to the syndicate.

Of course, modern ideas of slavery involve Hollywood’s version of the black man with chains around his neck.

But let’s go back to a time when Webster still roamed the land, speaking truth in his defining of terms.

SLAVE, noun 1. A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no will of his own, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. In the early state of the world, and to this day among some barbarous nations, prisoners of war are considered and treated as slaves. The slaves of modern times are more generally purchased, like horses and oxen. 2. One who has lost the power of resistance; or one who surrenders himself to any power whatever; as a slave to passion, to lust, to ambition. 3. A mean person; one in the lowest state of life. 4. A drudge; one who labors like a slave(–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

SLA’VERY, noun [See Slave.] 1. Bondage; the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another. slavery is the obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract of consent of the servant. slavery may proceed from crimes, from captivity or from debt. slavery is also voluntary or involuntary; voluntary, when a person sells or yields his own person to the absolute command of another; involuntary, when he is placed under the absolute power of another without his own consent. slavery no longer exists in Great Britain, not in the northern states of America. 2. The offices of a slave; drudgery. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

And so you see, a slave by any other employable name, is still merely a slave.

Now, one might fallaciously argue (advocate) the fact that because they are paid equally as others in their employ (use) or because they are part of a labor union (a syndicalist) making them house slaves who receive a bit more pay than those other supposedly equal slaves, that employment is not actual slavery. Read again! The use of a currency which represents nothing but debt is not designed as a payment tool, but as a limiting object for voluntary slaves so they never get ahead. The wealthy elite of the syndicate aren’t as much interested in obtaining wealth as they are in having enough wealth so as to have no objects in front of them limiting their own freedom within their own syndicate. The only way this can happen is if they employ the rest of the population with limited circulation of money, obstructing their ability at self-sufficiency through currency exchange. And through the system of education this false sense of freedom is instilled upon the common class so that they volunteer against their best interests to be employed within the syndicate, never self-actualizing their own disposition. Our freedom is only what the state allows it to be, for the word freedom is yet another misunderstood word, and its true definition is not taught in public school (training of animals for future employment).

Employment is like addiction. Sure, you can claim that you can quit your job at any time, but then how will you quench your addiction to buying stuff, and for that matter your addiction to food and shelter? After all, it’s all but illegal to obtain food without money or permission from government to hunt and fish! Raw dairy is outlawed and highly regulated. Live animal restrictions abound. And small backyard gardens are next on the regulation chopping block.

But it’s a free country…

All slaves and livestock are of course free within their master’s borders and fences.

Bouvier’s 1856 Dictionary of Law, which was commissioned to be “ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION”, explains what freedom really is…

FREEDOM - Liberty; the right to do what is not forbidden by law. Freedom does not preclude the idea of subjection to law; indeed, it presupposes the existence of some legislative provision, the observance of which insures freedom to us, by securing the like observance from others.

–=–

And so a whole population is employed (in usury) by the slave-masters of the syndicate, who train the population in school to believe in a false notion of what freedom actually is. And the population then runs around claiming (professing) to be a free people while never knowing that freedom means forced servitude to the laws created by the syndicate and legislated though the state… or else a boot to the face. And many are employed (used) to be the boot against their own fellow slaves, forcefully ensuring a perpetually indentured society; paid mercenaries called police and military whose authority doesn’t actually exist but for the belief by the overpowering 100′s of millions that it does. A uniform and badge goes a long way in instilling faith in what does not exist but in name and credential only.

–=–
The Dictator:
Institutionalization Of God’s Legal Laws
–=–

Like every religion-based government institution of the past, the United States claims God as its foundation, somehow making right and equitable the economic enslavement of all people within its borders through its own legally bound doctrine of law. This will be clarified as we proceed…

Perhaps we should call this syndicate what it really is… a confederation theory.

The word syndicate is broken down as such:

SYN – “together with, jointly; alike; at the same time,” from Greek synwith, together with, along with, in the company of.”

DICTION – “expression of ideas in words,” from Late Latin dictionem, a noun of action from dic-, past participle stem of Latin dicere speak, tell, say“, related to dicare proclaim, dedicate,” and from Old English teon to accuse,” tæcan to teach“).

–=–

This combination creates the foundation of an unseen dictatorship. It is after all foolish to believe that the word dictator refers to just one individual as dictator. Congress is certainly a dictator via its E Pluribus Unum, (out of many, one) enfranchisement. Congress is simply a confederation; a combination of men who syndicate.

DICTATOR – late 14c., from Latin dictator, agent noun from dictare (see dictate (v.)). Transferred sense of “one who has absolute power or authority” in any sphere is from c.1600. In Latin use, a dictator was a judge in the Roman republic temporarily invested with absolute power.

SHIP – word-forming element meaning “quality, condition; act, power, skill; office, position; relation between,” Middle English -schipe, from Old English -sciepe, Anglian -scipstate, condition of being,” from Proto-Germanic *-skapaz (cognates: Old Norse -skapr, Danish -skab, Old Frisian -skip, Dutch -schap, German -schaft), from *skap-to create, ordain, appoint,” from PIE root *(s)kep- (see shape (v.)).

E Pluribus Unum

Emblem on Continental Currency $40 note (1778)

–=–

To put it simply, a dictatorship is what one calls the state of being governed by those who dictate the law as “one” body politic (one corporate body). In this way, any form of government is thus a dictatorship, no matter how large a “combination” and “confederation” those lawmakers account for, and no matter how many constituents they claim to re-present. Even a so-called “democracy” is simply a dictatorship of the foolish majority over the foolish minority, neither group ever comprehending what a simple dictatorship is – a non-stop cruise-line; destination: subjection and extortion. And the majority and the minority never comprehend their equally important parts played in the legitimization of the syndicated congressional dictatorship simply through the act of voting – unwittingly confirming through voting cycle after cycle the dictatorial combination you now know as “the syndicate.”

To vote is to legitimize the syndicate.

How many times have we heard that this candidate is bought and paid for by “Big Pharma”, that this party has sold out to “Big Oil”, and that those party affiliated senators support banks over people? Well of course they do. They are all part of the same monopolized syndicate. And just so you understand, political parties are also non-governmental, private associations, which have infiltrated and now control the actions and reputations of politicians.

It would be immature to simply believe and dismiss this association (combination/confederation) of regulators, lawmakers, and corporations as simple greed. For the syndicate thrives on power and authority as any dictatorship has and will. Its purpose is not payoffs behind the scenes, but perpetual control over the entire population by its combined brotherhood and its spawn. Greed is too simplistic. The syndicate wishes to play god.

So that we fully understand, a syndicate is defined above as a university committee. In case you haven’t noticed, most of the research grants and studies that are created, that directly correlate to the medical and pharmaceutical industries, come from and are completed through the university system. Most of the other research is done at these medical and pharma companies themselves, where they literally test and report on their own laboratory creations funded by taxpayer dollars in the 100′s of billions; labeled as research and development (R&D) grants. Free money…

The FDA, as an integral and completely controlled regulatory agency of the syndicate, sweeps in for “public” good and consumption, placing its required stamp of approval on these harmful and deadly pharmaceutical drugs without ever testing any of them itself, instead relying on the “integrity” of its own syndicate corporations (combination/confederation/conspiracy) to promote and advocate its own portion of the syndicated monopoly. The word “public” is just another definition of E Pluribus Unum - from many voices, one false consensus-based opinion (out of many, one), where the voices of the many are never heard by the dictator-ship sailing us all into oblivion. For it is the opinion of the syndicate in the end that retains the right to possess the only opinion that has any “authority”.

Massive amounts of taxpayer money ends up in the university system as well, mostly hidden from the public within investment funds and touted as research grants, not to mention unreasonably high tuition rates to pay for it all. The syndicate creates the requirement of education to enter into industry, and so it can charge anything it wishes for a diploma allowing one to be employable in its syndicate. Of course the government is always listed as a patent holder of whatever novel disease or counterpart medical breakthrough, drug, or vaccine is created through the education/research part of the syndicate, for it supplies a direct link to the wallets of all the taxpayers of the United States. And that is the ultimate power of all – the power of the purse. But the purposeful side-effect of this syndicate insures a steady influx of patients that are made sick by its forced monopoly on all things food, health, medical, and pharmaceutical. And the syndicate protects itself through its total control of the BAR associations that in turn control the courts and thus public opinion. In essence, the population are mere guinea pigs for the syndicate, suffering and sometimes reporting negative side-effects only after drugs are already approved as “safe and effective” by the stage-play act known as the FDA.

The correct legal term for this fact, ironically, is that we are indeed legal patients of the syndicate. We allow the syndicate to use us exactly as they wish: as test-subjects. And without legal remedy of complaint due to the syndication and limitation of those legal avenues and the associations that run and regulate them, we are indeed merely a population of full-time patients:

PATIENT, adjective pa’shent. [Latin patiens.] 1. Having the quality of enduring evils without murmuring or fretfulness; sustaining afflictions of body or mind with fortitude, calmness or christian submission to the divine will; as a patient person, or a person of patient temper. It is followed by or before the evil endured; as patient of labor or pain; patient of heat or cold. 2. Not easily provoked; calm under the sufferance of injuries or offenses; not revengeful. 3. Persevering; constant in pursuit or exertion; calmly diligent. Whatever I have done is due to patient thought. 4. Not hasty; not over eager or impetuous; waiting or expecting with calmness or without discontent(noun) A person or thing that received impressions from external agents; he or that which is passively affected. Malice is a passion so impetuous and precipitate, that it often involves the agent and the patient 1. A person diseased or suffering bodily indisposition. It is used in relation to the physician; as, the physician visits his patient morning and evening. 2. It is sometimes used absolutely for a sick person. It is wonderful to observe how inapprehensive these patients are of their disease. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

We, the citizen-patients seem to have no inkling that our collective disease (political, mental, and physical) is purposefully caused and carefully managed by the syndicate, and that the syndicate is the disease of government. This gives new definition to the concept of “managed healthcare.” Instead, we can behold an abused and decimated population base that is so ill and not of right mind that perhaps it cannot muster the mental and physical response to fight back or seek revenge. And so the viscous cycle of disease continues as a profitable business-as-usual model under the syndicate, and the “people” remain hopelessly beholden to its authority as nothing more than mental patients.

–=–
How Attorneys Project The Syndicate
By Controlling Imput And Output Data
–=–

 The concept and goals of what is called advocacy are not at all dissimilar in function to what is today known by title as lobbyists, pundits, or political shills. An attorney, also known as an advocate or agent, literally re-presents some person or thing within an official capacity (an artificial realm of legal) in order to attempt to legitimize and sway opinions in favor of that subject matter. An advocate’s duty is to shift public opinion in order to create a normalcy bias and thus a general acceptance to the object of his or her advocacy.

So how does the syndicate utilize advocates in its total control system?

To start, the majority of our legislature (the law-makers) are generally attorneys, all pledged to the same private BAR association. Many of our presidents, including Obama, have been pledged attorneys as well. Likewise, most governors, and of course all legal persons in the Judicial Branch and Justice System are now required to be BAR member attorneys, while the Supreme Court of the United States generally refuses to hear non-BAR presented cases. Sometimes we forget that a member of some thing is also an advocate of that thing, for without that fictional thing, their fictional legal title would not exist. And so having BAR members as advocates of an International Bar Association full of advocate-attorneys working in syndication as the law-makers, executive force, and judicial overseer seems to be an obvious combination and confederacy with just a cursory glance. Our government is full of advocates and is thus in a severe epidemic state of conflict of interest. And the rest are bankers, doctors, accountants, and other professionals that hold their credentials and titles only because of and on behalf of the fictional institutions within the syndicate, creating not a government but an advocacy group posing as government – a simulation of legitimacy and of reality.

In other words, by default, any person with a diploma and job title that requires a college “education” must therefore hold (confirm) the fraudulent syndicate and government to be legitimate while being an unwitting advocate of the education system that bestows the allowance to be titled. Any person with a vested interest in some thing will always advocate for that thing, especially if their power and authority (credentials) stem solely from that very thing – the creator of those credentials. And enticing us as prostitutes with a bit of syndicated money helps ensure advocacy. Institutionalized “professionals” can seldom be expected to bite the hand and source of their own fraudulent existence as titled and credentialed professionals within the syndicate. Their very careers depend upon the existence and continuity of the syndicate, without which their flattering titles would hold no meaning or authority. They are literally professed as being experts, thus the term professional. If you understand this, you understand the power of the syndicate over morals, ethics, reason, and logic, which are no longer contemplations of men but rather defined concepts of the syndicate, their true meaning squashed by statute and legalese. The syndicate, for all intents and purposes, is the god of such concepts. The syndicate is the creator of titled gentry such as doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, CEO’s, and politicians. And so the monopoly extends not only over industry, but over the ethical and moral capacity and general operating procedure of those industries, including government itself.

The syndicate then places its paid, mind controlled advocates into its various controlled institutions, such as education and medicine.

From these places of perceived credibility and monopolized authority, through officially syndicate-credentialed scientists, biologists, professors, teachers, and research specialists, the syndicate can literally make anything happen, get anything approved, make anything appear and be defined as moral and ethical, and create any exception and acceptation to any rule or code (legal exemption) it wishes. It can do this simply because its advocates are everywhere within these institutions, ensuring pro-syndicate cause and effect models to create the desired “public opinion,” E Pluribus Unum,without question. They are the presidents, the faculty, the doctorates, the legal council, the regulators, the professors, the professionals, and the go-betweens.

The word advocate is defined as:

AD’VOCATE, noun [Latin advocatus, from advoco, to call for, to plead for; of ad and voco, to call. See vocal.] 1. advocate in its primary sense, signifies, one who pleads the cause of another in a court of civil law. Hence, 2. One who pleads the cause of another before any tribunal or judicial court, as a barrister in the English courts. We say, a man is a learned lawyer and an able advocate In Europe, advocates have different titles, according to their particular duties. Consistorial advocates, in Rome, appear before the Consistory, in opposition to the disposal of benefices. Elective advocates are chosen by a bishop, abbot, or chapter, with license from the prince. Feudal advocates were of a military kind, and to attach them to the church, had grants of land, with power to lead the vassals of the church war. Fiscal advocates, in ancient Rome, defended causes in which the public revenue was concerned. Juridical advocates became judges, in consequence of their attending causes in the earl’s court. Matricular advocates defended the cathedral churches. Military advocates were employed by the church (government) to defend it by arms, when force gave law to Europe. Some advocates were called nominative, from their being nominated by the pope or king; some regular, from their being qualified by a proper course of study. Some were supreme; others, subordinate. Advocate, in the German polity, is a magistrate, appointed in the emperor’s name, to administer justice. Faculty of advocates, in Scotland, is a society of eminent lawyers, who practice in the highest courts, and who are admitted members only upon the severest examination, at three different times. It consists of about two hundred members, and from this body are vacancies on the bench usually supplied. Lord advocate in Scotland, the principal crown lawyer, or prosecutor of crimes. Judge advocate in courts martial, a person who manages the prosecution. In English and American courts, advocates are the same as counsel, or counselors. In England, they are of two degrees, barristers and serjeants; the former, being apprentices or learners, cannot, by ancient custom, be admitted serjeants, till of sixteen years standing. 3. One who defends, vindicates, or espouses a cause, by argument; one who is friendly to; as, an advocate for peace, or for the oppressed. In scripture, Christ is called an advocate for his people. We have an advocate with the father. 1John 2:1. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

AD’VOCATE – (verb transitive) To plead in favor of; to defend by argument, before a tribunal; to support or vindicate. Those who advocate a discrimination. The Duke of York advocated the amendment. The Earl of Buckingham advocated the original resolution. The idea of a legislature, consisting of a single branch, though advocated by some, was generally reprobated… A part only of the body, whose cause be advocates, coincide with him in judgment. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

ADVOCATE -  See Judge-Advocate. An assistant ; an associate in conducting a lawsuit. A person who makes a profession of presenting cases orally. Of advocates, or (as we more generally call them) counsel, there are two species or degrees: barristers and sergeants. In the United States no distinction is made between an advocate and an attorney. (–W.C. Anderson 1889 Dictionary of Law)

FACULTY - noun [Latin facultas, from facio, to make.] 1. That power of the mind or intellect which enables it to receive, revive or modify perceptions; as the faculty of seeing, of hearing, of imagining, of remembering, etc.: or in general, the faculties may be called the powers or capacities of the mind. 2. The power of doing any thing; ability3. The power of performing any action, natural, vital or animal. The vital faculty is that by which life is preserved. 4. Facility of performance; the peculiar skill derived from practice, or practice aided by nature; habitual skill or ability; dexterity; adroitness; knack. One man has a remarkable faculty of telling a story; another, of inventing excuses for misconduct; a third, of reasoning; a fourth, of preaching. 5. Personal quality; disposition or habit, good or ill. 6. Power; authority9. Privilege; a right or power granted to a person by favor or indulgence, to do what by law he may not do; as the faculty of marrying without the bans being first published, or of ordaining a deacon under age. The archbishop of Canterbury has a court of faculties, for granting such privileges or dispensations. 10. In colleges, the masters and professors of the several sciences. One of the members or departments of a university. In most universities there are four faculties; of art, including humanity and philosophy; of theology; of medicine; and of law. In America, the faculty of a college or university consists of the president, professors and tutors. The faculty of advocates, in Scotland, is a respectable body of lawyers who plead in all causes before the Courts of Session, Justiciary and Exchequer. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

COUNSELOR, noun 1. Any person who gives advice; but properly one who is authorized by natural relationship, or by birth, office or profession, to advise another in regard to his future conduct and measures. Ahithophel was Davids counselor. His mother was his counselor to do wickedly. 2Chronicles 22:1. In Great Britain, the peers of the realm are hereditary counselor of the crown. 2. The members of a counsel; one appointed to advise a king or chief magistrate, in regard to the administration of the government. 3. One who is consulted by a client in a law case; one who gives advice in relation to a question of law; one whose profession is to give advice in law, and manage causes for clients. Privy counselor is a member of a privy counsel. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

COUNSEL, noun [Latin , to consult; to ask, to assail.] 1. Advice; opinion, or instruction, given upon request or otherwise, for directing the judgment or conduct of another; opinion given upon deliberation or consultation. Every purpose is established by counsel Proverbs 20:5. Thou hast not hearkened to my counsel 2 Chronicles 25:16. 2. Consultation; interchange of opinions. We took sweet counsel together. Psalms 55:14. 3. Deliberation; examination of consequences. They all confess that, in the working of that first cause, counsel is used, reason followed, and a way observed. 4. Prudence; deliberate opinion or judgment, or the faculty or habit of judging with caution. O how comely is the wisdom of old men, and understanding and counsel to men of honor. Ecclus. 25. The law shall perish from the priest, and counsel from the ancients. Ezekiel 7:26. 5. In a bad sense, evil advice or designs; art; machination. The counsel of the froward is carried headlong. Job 5:13. 6. Secrecy; the secrets entrusted in consultation; secret opinions or purposes. Let a man keep his own counsel 7. In a scriptural sense, purpose; design; will; decree. What thy counsel determined before to be done. Acts 4:28. To show the immutability of his counsel Hebrews 6:17. 8. Directions of Gods word. Thou shalt guide me by thy counsel Psalms 73:24. 9. The will of God or his truth and doctrines concerning the way of salvation. I have not shunned to declare to you all the counsel of God. Acts 20:27. 10. Those who give counsel in law; any counselor or advocate, or any number of counselors, barristers or sergeants; as the plaintiffs counsel or the defendants counsel. The attorney-general and solicitor-general are the kings counsel. In this sense, the word has no plural; but in the singular number, is applicable to one or more persons. – (verb transitive) [Latin] 1. To give advice or deliberate opinion to another for the government of his conduct; to advise. I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire. Revelations 3. 2. To exhort, warn, admonish, or instruct. We ought frequently to counsel our children against the vices of the age. They that will not be counseled, cannot be helped. 3. To advise or recommend; as, to counsel a crime. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

Note here that the word “god” and the word king, magistrate, prince, and pope are one in the same, explaining the repeated Bible references above. In other words, these counselors are placed throughout the syndicate’s institutions to specifically advocate for the will of the magistrates (gods) of the syndicate. This use of a religious concept in government and its frightening reality will be further defined below.

It is quite difficult to comprehend the fact that the University system is indeed packed full of attorneys (advocates) and counselors. After all, reasonably speaking, it would seem fairly odd that so many attorney/advocates should be required within a university, other than perhaps in the legal studies department. But this misconception stems from a total lack of comprehension regarding the true intent and purpose of the education system, and more to the point its important roles played out within the syndicate by these attorney advocates and counselors to maintain its illusion of legitimacy and authority. A simple online search uncovers the many attorney-based, often BAR membership required jobs available within the university structure. And because of this revelation, we receive a new understanding of just what this organized advocacy group we call the BAR Associations of the world really entails. For advocates are not simply lawyers, they are also accountants, financial officers, statisticians, councilors, teachers, expert witnesses, fellows, presidents, legislators, professionals, prefects, principles, etc…

Take for example this recent job posting for the well known medical university institution (syndication) of John’s Hopkins University:

“The Johns Hopkins University offers a one-year fellowship to a graduate of an accredited U.S. Law School. Commencing on or about October 16, 2012, the Fellow will spend one year working at the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel. The Vice President and General Counsel is the chief legal officer for the Johns Hopkins University. With a staff of nine attorneys, the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel provides legal representation and advice to the University and its trustees, officers, and employees acting on its behalf.”

“The office provides advice on a broad range of legal issues affecting the University, including labor and employment, government contracts and grants, litigation, investigations, faculty appointments, student issues, non-profit law, academic freedom, privacy, intellectual property, technology transfer, clinical practice, safety and environmental law, research and other compliance, health law and other legal issues relating to the School of Medicine, philanthropy, investments, real estate, international issues, business transactions, financing and tax matters. The attorneys prepare and negotiate contracts to which the University is a party. The office drafts and reviews proposed University policies. The office represents the University in litigation and before regulatory agencies. As in-house counsel, the office attorneys are in the unique position of being part of the goal-setting and strategic planning for the University. This role gives office attorneys the opportunity to do a significant amount of preventative lawyering, including running training programs and assisting with University compliance with federal, state, and local obligations. The Fellowship position provides recent law graduates an opportunity to work closely with all of the attorneys in the Office. The Fellow can expect to do legal research and prepare memoranda of law; review and draft agreements and procedures as well as litigation materials; and attend meetings related to the work assigned. The attorneys will review the Fellow’s work closely and meet with him or her to provide feedback. By providing exposure to the work and challenges of a university counselor’s office, the Fellowship is an excellent opportunity for those with an interest in the field of higher education law or any of the substantive areas in which we practice.”

SOURCE: http://attorneyjobmaryland.blogspot.com/2012/08/law-fellow-job-at-johns-hopkins.html#.VEDD_hAgtH4

–=–

Well gosh golly, I can’t imagine why so many attorney’s are needed at a school… but I can imagine the billable hours they must accumulate. I wonder why tuition is really as high as it is in most universities? Any ideas…?

And in point of fact, is the reader at all comfortable with the roles described here where attorneys are part of the “goal-setting and strategic planning for the University?

These advocates are the people you see on government panels as the invited guest speakers, often referred to as “experts” or “expert witnesses”. In other words, they are PAID WITNESSES! They did not actually witness anything regarding the case. They are there simply to promote and advocate for the syndicate to keep business as usual and to counter any actual evidence to their contrary. If the syndicate needs an expert witness, you can be assured it calls upon its roster of advocates within the education or other institutionalized (syndicated) systems. And any former employee of the education system that relied on grant money can attest that with the appointed position and research grants allotted to advocates, their positive advocacy for (and never against) the university system and all other parts of the syndicate involved must be maintained. So many good men and women with syndicated titles have lost their good name and standing within for simply criticizing the syndicate for what it really is – a confirmed fraud promoting institutionalized fraud. And they find out the hard way just how organized the fraud and crime really is only after losing everything the syndicate bestowed upon them in the first place, from research grants to reputation, while having been completely severed (black-balled) with regards to access to employment and syndication.

Advocates can appear in so many different ways, and are generally considered to be re-presentations of public opinion. They represent the people E Pluribus Unum style (from many opinions, one opinion), and through their official and legal capacity as attorneys they advocate for the criminal syndicate while pretending to be concerned parents, non-partial witnesses, and invited impartial experts. With countless cases of fraud and conspiracy decking the courts regarding doctors, judges, scientists, and other advocates of the syndicate, one would be hard-pressed to believe a single thing that comes out of the mouth of any “expert” presented by government or its syndicated corporate monopolies of medical, pharmaceutical, scientific, regulatory, legal, or financial advocacy.

For the court’s opinion is alas constituted in finality as the now official “public opinion”, creating even a monopoly on opinion itself through consensus. And the advocate as “expert witness” is key to ensuring the triumph of this syndicated opinion over any contrary outside notion.

OPINION, noun opin’yon. [Latin opinio, from opinor, to thing, Gr., Latin suppono.] 1. The judgment which the mind forms of any proposition, statement, theory or event, the truth or falsehood of which is supported by a degree of evidence that renders it probably, but does not produce absolute knowledge or certainty. It has been a received opinion that all matter is comprised in four elements. This opinion is proved by many discoveries to be false. From circumstances we form opinions respecting future events. OPINION is when the assent of the understanding is so far gained by evidence of probability, that it rather inclines to one persuasion than to another, yet not without a mixture of uncertainty or doubting. 2. The judgment or sentiments which the mind forms of persons or their qualities. We speak of a good opinion a favorable opinion a bad opinion a private opinion and public or general opinion etc. Friendship gives a man a peculiar right and claim to the good opinion of his friend. 3. Settled judgment or persuasion; as religious opinions; political opinion 4. Favorable judgment; estimation. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

To verbally or in writing opinion a subject is to magically transform through word magic often devious and misleading concepts into a tangible (written) official thing (legal law), making that concept accepted as normal no matter how ridiculous or despised it may be. Legal law can only be proven to exist via court opinion. The court transforms through opinion and thus final judgement falsities and lies into “facts” of law – institutionalized and syndicated bullshit, if you will. And the court is the representation of the public, as “the People” vs. everything and anyone. It thus creates opinion as a fiction of law. Yes, it exists only as a fiction. And a fiction only exists with belief and consent to its validity by the “public”, which is of course re-presented as “government”. Fiction is literally nothing more than a confirmed and accepted fraud (lie).

And government is a fiction…

As we can read, institutional thoughts need not be proven (as by scientific and medical research and through deliberation) to become what is then the “official” legal opinion of the syndicate, which then disseminates its own court-ruled opinion as “public opinion”. You could call this the doctrinal religion of the state, preached and taught by advocate profess-ors of the syndicate.

So many drugs that are labeled safe and effective by the regulatory portion of the syndicate called FDA are often years later revealed by the many maimed and harmed “patients” within the public or general population as extremely life-threatening, poisonous, cancer-causing, or as causing any number of other serious “side-effects” not listed in the syndicated pretrials, studies, and inserts of those drugs. And the FDA labels them as unsafe or ineffective only after many “patients” have been seriously damaged or died by them after initial approval, during the time period when the FDA’s official opinion (confirmed fraud) was that they were “safe and effective”.

This consensus of thought is often reached by committee, which generally consists of advocates (experts) paid by the syndicate to promote its lies. These advocates are everywhere, attorneys acting as agents of the syndicate while also playing the part of school teacher or professor, scientist or pharmacologist, expert or professional, etc.

And just what is a “committee”, Mr. Black, when considering that a syndicate is defined as a “university committee”?

Is it really just an advocacy group of attorneys disguised as caring professionals with the public’s best interest at heart?

(Hint: The syndicate is re-presented as public! It is the public!!!)

COMMITTEE – In practice. An assembly or board of persons to whom the consideration or management of any matter is committed or referred by some court. An individual or body to whom others have delegated or committed a particular duty, or who have taken on themselves to perform it in the expectation of their act being confirmed by the body they profess to represent or act for.  The term is especially applied to the person or persons who are invested, by order of the proper court, with the guardianship of the person and estate of one who has been adjudged a lunatic. In parliamentary law. A portion of a legislative body, comprising one or more members, who are charged with the duty of examining some matter specially referred to them by the house, or of deliberating upon it, and reporting to the house the result of their investigations or recommending a course of action. A committee may be appointed for one special occasion, or it may be appointed to deal with all matters which may be referred to it during a whole session or during the life of the body. In the latter case, it is called a “standing committee.” It is usually composed of a comparatively small number of members, but may include the whole house. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONFIRM – To complete or establish that which was imperfect or uncertain; to ratify what has been done without authority or insufficiently. To confirm is to make firm that which was before infirm. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONFIRMATION - A contract by which that which was infirm, imperfect, or subject to be avoided is made firm and unavoidable. A conveyance of an estate or right in esse, whereby a voidable estate is made sure and unavoidable, or whereby a particular estate is increased. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

–=–

To be clear, a committee is another word for combination or confederacy (conspiracy). It is a committee of persons (secretly or openly representing the syndicate), all of whom work within the syndicate monopoly, while appearing to the public at large as a meeting of opposing sides. But in reality, a committee is mere formality to fool the viewing public (which contains no actual legal voice) into believing that the outcome of the committee’s opinion is in the best interest of the population (the many), and not in fact just for the continuity and profit of the syndicate (the one). This is like trusting the opinion of a bunch (combination) of oil company executives who meet in committee to decide the correct course to take for an oil spill. The syndicate has one goal as a corporation: PROFIT AND GAIN. To achieve its end, it must create a false sense of consensus through committee advocacy. So perhaps it is easier to comprehend the fraudulent nature of committee hearings in government if you just realize that every member stands to profit from within the syndicate from his or her bestowed title, and that the general population is ultimately just the taxpaying customer and consumer of the syndicate monopoly – the patients of the syndicate.

Ultimately, this government stage-play is just that – an act. The statute laws created are even called Acts. And of course everyone should know by now that actors in a play are nothing more than paid, professional liars. Nothing more, nothing less. Advocates engage in the art of lying. Their term of art is always double-speak. They lie as best they can simply to ensure that the act goes on in syndication without end (think: The Truman Show)…

PLAYER - noun One who plays in any game or sport. 1. An idler. 2. An actor of dramatic scenes; one whose occupation is to imitate characters on the stage. 3. A mimic. 4. One who performs on an instrument of music. 5. A gamester. 6. One that acts a part in a certain manner.

ACTOR – noun 1. He that acts or performs; an active agent. 2. He that represents a character or acts a part in a play; a stage player. 3. Among civilians, an advocate or proctor in civil courts or causes.

AGENT, adjective Acting; opposed to patient, or sustaining action; as, the body agent [Little used.]

AGENT, noun 1. An actor; one that exerts power, or has the power to act; as, a moral agent 2. An active power or cause; that which has the power to produce an effect; as, heat is a powerful agent 3. A substitute, deputy, or factor; one entrusted with the business of another; an attorney; a minister.

PERFORMER - noun One that performs any thing, particularly in an art; as a good performer on the violin or organ; a celebrated performer in comedy or tragedy, or in the circus.

PORTRAYER - noun One who paints, draws to the life or describes.

(–All definitions from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

http://lawrencecconnolly.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/masks.jpg
The true nature of every politician, as agents of the syndicate.

–=–
The Science Fiction of Truth:
Practice Makes Perfect
–=–

Doctors practice “medicine”.

Nurses practice “health”.

Lawyers practice “law”.

Bankers practice “banking”.

Preachers practice “religion”.

Teacher’s practice “education”.

Somewhere along the way tools such as the “scientific method” were trans-mutated into the institutions of their name, such as the institution of “science”. This created the doctrine of “science,” as if the tool of measuring and arriving at a scientific theory was ever meant to arrive at a final conclusion. This doctrine of written words is what is now called “science”. It does not teach the method as much as it teaches a syndicated preference of the perceived outcome of the method. Science is often taught as past discoveries that should not be challenged or improved upon, for new data is inconvenient to the established doctrinal models. This, of course, is nothing new. The science of Earth was that it was officially flat, until the doctrine was changed into the current description of round. It was heresy to claim anything else, for the religious government of science is of God, not method. Nothing has really changed. And the industry and syndicated education of science ignores the ethical lessons learned along the way in order to create a purely unscientific simulation of the scientific method, making it possible for the syndicate to legalize the most horrific of what it refers to as “scientific practices.”

And this model of taking an adjective or verb (to educate/scientific) and turning it into a noun/name/title (the institution of education and of science) was essential in the process of institutionalizing every uncontrollable action of man. For it is now illegal to help another in need without license from the state to practice that help as a profession. And in order to get that license, one must pay tuition and get credentialed by the syndicate so that one’s charity becomes an employable profit model for the corporate biosphere.

Notice the difference between the verb and noun (name) forms of the word practice below, from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language:

PRAC’TICE, noun [Gr. to act, to do, to make; Eng. to brook, and broker; Latin fruor, for frugor or frucor, whence fructus, contracted into fruit; frequens.] 1. Frequent or customary actions; a succession of acts of a similar kind or in a like employment; as the practice of rising early or of dining late; the practice of reading a portion of Scripture morning and evening; the practice of making regular entries of accounts; the practice of virtue or vice. Habit is the effect of practice 2. Use; customary use. Obsolete words may be revived when they are more sounding or significant than those in practice 3. Dexterity acquired by use. [Unusual.] 4. Actual performance; distinguished from theory. There are two functions of the soul, contemplation and practice according to the general division of objects, some of which only entertain our speculations, others employ our actions. 5. Application of remedies; medical treatment of diseases. Two physicians may differ widely in their practice 6. Exercise of any profession; as the practice of law or of medicine; the practice of arms. 7. Frequent use; exercise for instruction or discipline. The troops are daily called out for practice 8. Skillful or artful management; dexterity in contrivance or the use of means; art; stratagem; artifice; usually in a bad sense. He sought to have that by practice which he could not by prayer. [This use of the word is genuine; from Latin experior. It is not a mistake as Johnson supposes. See the Verb.] 9. A rule in arithmetic, by which the operations of the general rules are abridged in use.

PRAC’TICE, verb transitive [From the noun. The orthography of the verb ought to be the same as of the noun; as in notice and to notice.] 1. To do or perform frequently, customarily or habitually; to perform by a succession of acts; as, to practice gaming; to practice fraud or deception; to practice the virtues of charity and beneficence; to practice hypocrisy. Isaiah 32:1. Many praise virtue who do not practice it. 2. To use or exercise any profession or art; as, to practice law or medicine; to practice gunnery or surveying. 3. To use or exercise for instruction, discipline or dexterity. [In this sense, the verb is usually intransitive.] 4. To commit; to perpetrate; as the horrors practiced at Wyoming. 5. To use; as a practiced road. [Unusual.]

PRAC’TICE, verb intransitive To perform certain acts frequently or customarily, either for instruction, profit, or amusement; as, to practice with the broad sword; to practice with the rifle. 1. To form a habit of acting in any manner. They shall practice how to live secure…  3. To try artifices. Others, by guilty artifice and arts – Of promis’d kindness, practic’d on our hearts. 4. To use evil arts or stratagems5. To use medical methods or experiments. I am little inclined to practice on others, and as little that others should practice on me. 6. To exercise any employment or profession. A physician has practiced many years with success.

ARTIFICE - noun [Latin artificium, from ars, art, and facio, to make.] 1. Stratagem; an artful or ingenious device, in a good or bad sense. In a bad sense, it corresponds with trick, or fraud. 2. Art; trade; skill acquired by science or practice.

–=–

Title is another word for artifice. These titles of doctor, attorney, teacher, etc. are nothing but terms of art, or artifices. They are fictional creations of the syndicate, used to separate the educated from the uneducated (indoctrinated vs. un-indoctrinated). But the education institution is not a verb but a noun, signifying the false mark of the beast through degree and diploma giving legal (not lawful) permission and license from the state to act under a title, and thus to act in the name (noun) of the state.

A license has one and only one meaning – to have permission to do an otherwise illegal act.

The syndicate versus the people…

Fiction versus reality…

VERSUS – (prep) mid-15c., in legal case names, denoting action of one party against another, from Latin versusturned toward or against,” from past participle of vertere (frequentative versare) “to turn, turn back, be turned, convert, transform, translate, be changed…German werden, Old English weorðanto become” (for sense, compare turn into); Welsh gwerthyd “spindle, distaff;” Old Irish frithagainst“).

–=–

Now you might comprehend the strange-but-true nature of science fiction elements for the scripted characters called “agents” in movies such as The Matrix and The Adjustment Bureau, the everyone-else-is-an-agent fiction of The Truman Show, and even the real life fictional agents of the syndicate; the attorney advocates called Internal Revenue Agents, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, and so forth. Whether it be in the fiction of movies or within the fiction of law, these agents of the syndicated government always seem to show up when one of us gets out of line and somehow manages to break through the barriers set forth by the syndicate and its monopolies. If you can’t beat them, accuse them. Call them tax-avoiders or terrorists! Set them up with prostitutes or sabotage them with well-placed kiddy porn. Confine and confiscate all competition! Anything and everyone, or at least their reputation, may and must be sacrificed for the good of the syndicate. For the syndicate judges all, and the judgement is always pro-syndicate.

As portrayed in these fantasies, anyone can ultimately be an agent; an advocate undercover, acting and performing as one of the “patients” until his stage-call is exposed. All of the agents in the Truman show were of course paid employees who participated in the fraud and advocated for it because it paid them to act against their own interest and their moral objections.

The syndicate is the main employer!

The power of the purse…

It is important to note here that this syndicate was formed at the inception of the United States. And while it was not so technologically organized as it is today, the confederation and then constitution of this nation created a virtually unlimited potential for the central syndicate to grow and expand; a nest of red tape and protections from which the syndicate was berthed into America (the states). Each state of the “Union” of this confederation we call the United States was literally and by force required to confirm the fraudulent constitution of the United States central federal government in their own constitutions. States had no choice in the matter, for without confirmation of the supreme and sovereign authority of the central federal syndicate, they would not be allowed to even become states of that union. You can verify this in your own state constitution and enabling acts. For states are nothing more than acts of congress, confirmed by the president of the syndicate.

The act of confirmation is more simply defined as the conveyance of the right of estate.

CONVEYTo pass or transmit the title to property from one to another; to transfer property or the title to property by deed or instrument under seal. To convey real estate is, by an appropriate instrument, to transfer the legal title to it from the present owner to another. Convey relates properly to the disposition of real property, not to personal. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONVEYANCE – In pleading. Introduction or inducement. In real property law. The transfer of the title of land from one person or class of persons to another. An instrument in writing under seal, (anciently termed an “assurance,”) by which some estate or interest in lands is transferred from one person to another; such as a deed, mortgage, etc. Conveyance includes every instrument in writing by which any estate or interest in real estate is created, aliened, mortgaged, or assigned, or by which the title to any real estate may be affected in law or equity, except last wills and testaments, leases for a term not exceeding three years, and executory contracts for the sale or purchase of lands. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

–=–

As hard as it is to admit and as painful as it may be perceived to the patriotic reader, the states had to confirm the fraud (confederation) of the central municipality of Washington D.C. as being the supreme power. No state can exist in the United States (union) without this confirmation regarding the sovereignty of the United States corporation and its constitution (debt compact). There is no right of succession within states, as the Civil war proved without doubt and as each state constitution now plainly instructs, naming states as inseparable from the union. To confirm some fictional thing like the United States is to confirm that particular fraud as the “law of the land”. While fraud is avoidable, a confirmed fraud is in turn unavoidable.

A constitution is a compact (contract) and consent to evil (fiction). The fraud becomes the government, just as the de facto United States became the federation, and thus the formation of the syndicate and its stated authority is also unavoidable as it exists only under the government’s perceived and syndicated authority. Confirmation is the action of making or turning what is unlawful and thus avoidable into a legally permissible and thus unavoidable fraud by consensual contract. The states of the union, therefore, as post-civil war corporate creations (admissions) of the union, are also mere fictional frauds, held together by nothing more than the implied consent of the inhabitants of each state – whom of course have been given a healthy dose of complete and total ignorance of these facts by the syndicate and its forced government education system, where it subjects its subjects to “history” indoctrination.

Centralized education was a requirement in the constitution of all states, not a choice.

Advocates (attorneys) do well as partners in the fraud and crime, for their whole job and lifestyle is one with a mere fictional title of limited nobility promoting the lie.

Dissenters are allowed to speak in controlled unofficial forums, providing the illusion of freedom of speech and political participation but with no actual voice (authority). An activist may never speak or present in committee or with official opinion in any seriously considered capacity. The minority always fails, while the ignorant majority lives in its own shit-pile of consequence.

E Pluribus Unum is a powerful tool and the foundational creed of the United States’ organized criminal syndicate. And so it was that the syndicate was incrementally formed and evolved over time, centralizing all power by confirming the corporate institutions and private associations that oversee all things without exception from within this wicked combination.

–=–
Defining The Syndicate
–=–

We must now dig further to discover that the purpose of education is not to educate, but to syndicate false information that ensures the syndicates’ ability to continue in perpetuity to be the syndication vehicle of information and regulations. In short, the syndicate exists only to perpetuate its own existence, and for no other purpose, rewarding its advocates along the way.

When something cannot be decided in committee, the syndicate may refer it to a circus parlor trick called a “conference”. A conference is simply a congress of syndicate advocates drawn together in fraud to reach a predetermined consensus.

CONFERENCEA meeting of several persons for deliberation, for the interchange of opinion, or for the removal of differences or disputes. Thus, a meeting between a counsel and solicitor to advise on the cause of their client. In the practice of legislative bodies, when the two houses cannot agree upon a pending measure, each appoints a committee of “conference,” and the committees meet and consult together for the purpose of removing differences, harmonizing conflicting views, and arranging a compromise which will be accepted by both houses.

–=–

Here, in conference, a bunch of syndicate representatives (advocates) congregate and use word magic and trickery to “remove differences of opinion or disputes” and to advocate the “harmonizing of conflicting views” that the real public might express through non-syndicated activism – the people’s individual voices that are virtually never actually heard, and are instead worked around. Thus, through conference and via dispute resolution, an official sounding deliberation is conferred by the government regulatory bodies of the syndicate so that its profitable corporations may prosper in combinations never comprehended or commissioned by its patients – the public at large.

The voices of decent and reason are squashed in conference and committee.

E Pluribus Unum

Some call this the forming of “consensus”. Others refer to it as the utilization of the Delphi technique. Whatever you call it, the syndicate is nothing if not the great decider.

Anciently, this same system of Delphic decisions of the gods (magistrates) were instituted by the church, which was and still is the state without separation. For legislation is simply the religious civil doctrine of the state – the acts of a 24 hour a day stage-play.

SYNOD - A meeting or assembly of ecclesiastical persons concerning religion; being the same thing, in Greek, as convocation in Latin. There are four kinds: (1) A general or universal synod or council, where bishops of all nations meet; (2) a national synod of the clergy of one nation only; (3) a provincial synod, where ecclesiastical persons of a province only assemble, being now what is called the “convocation;” (4) a diocesan synod, of those of one diocese. A synod in Scotland is composed of three or more presbyteries.

SYNODAL – A tribute or payment in money paid to the bishop or archdeacon by the inferior clergy, at the Easter visitation.

SYNODALES TESTES - Synods-men (corrupted into sidesmen) were the urban and rural deans, now the church-wardens.

–=–

And from these committees of the syndicate come its offspring, called the syllabus, for which the education system and its advocate “teachers” must follow as professor of that instruction. The syllabus is the end result of syllogism, which through committee and conference creates also a monopoly on logic, reason, and debate, so that the curriculum taught in schools and universities is the eventuality of the sole proprietary creation and fiction of the syndicate. The syllabus offers no freedom of thought or dissenting viewpoints, for it represents the opinion of the syndicate; of the public court.

SYLLABUS - A head-note; a note prefixed to the report of an adjudged case, containing an epitome or brief statement of the rulings of the court upon the point or points decided in the case.

SYLLOGISM - In logic. The full logical form of a single argument. It consists of three propositions, (two premises and the conclusion,) and these contain three terms, of which the two occurring in the conclusion are brought together in the premises by being referred to a common class.

SYNGRAPH - The name given by the canonists to deeds of which both parts were written on the same piece of parchment, with some word or letters of the alphabet written between them, through which the parchment was cut in such a manner as to leave half the word on one~part and half on the other. It thus corresponded to the chirograph or indenture of the common law. A deed or other written instrument under the hand and seal of all the parties.

SYNCOPARETo cut short, or pronounce things so as not to be understood.

–=–

Ultimately, the purpose of the syndicate is a simple one, though it requires the unprecedented organization of fraud and crime that we have thus-far revealed. Quite simply, the end goal is only the acquirement of total (tacitly implied) consent. And this is easiest achieved through false consensus: an ingenious but ultimately unreal state of manufactured consent through the founding principle of E Pluribus Unum

The etymology of these words are as follows:

CONSENSUAL (adj.) – 1754, “having to do with consent,” from stem of Latin consensus (see consensus) + -al (1). Meaning “by consent” is attested from 1800.

CONSENSUS (adj.) from 1854 as a term in physiology; 1861 of persons; from Latin consensusagreement, accord,” past participle of consentire (see consent). There is an isolated instance of the word from 1633.

CONSENT (v.) – from early 13c. from Old French consentir (12c.) “agree, comply,” from Latin consentirefeel together,” from com-with” (see com-) + sentireto feel” (see sense (n.)). “Feeling together,” hence, “agreeing, giving permission,” apparently a sense evolution that took place in French before the word reached English. Related: Consented; consenting. (noun.) c.1300, “approval,” also “agreement in sentiment, harmony,” from Old French consente, from consentir (see consent (v.)). Age of consent is attested from 1809.

–=–

Black’s Law 2nd edition reveals how we in the general population are tricked into said harmonious group agreement and false consensus through the use of implied consent, as doled out by the committees, conferences, and consensus opinions of the syndicate.

CONSENTA concurrence of wills. Express consent is that directly given, either lira voce (in voice) or in writing. Implied consent is that manifested by signs, actions, or facts, or by inaction or silence, which raise a presumption that the consent has been given. Consent in an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation, the mind weighing as in a balance the good or evil on each side.

–=–

With the implied consent of the entire population unum, Black’s 2nd explains what are the direct implications of this uninformed (unacknowledged) consent and how this falsely formed consensus creates the  implied authority of dictatorship:

IMPLIED POWERS – This term applies to the authority that a public official has due to the nature of their duties.

IMPLIED AUTHORITY – A term given to the power that an agent has or the authority under certain circumstances.

GENERALLY IMPLIEDTypical understanding or definition in an industry, organization, or trade of a common, customary practice, or meaning of a term.

OBLIGATION IMPLIED – This is the term given to an obligation that is inferred to be a duty due to the nature of the agreement.

IMPLIED ASSENT – Applied to the assent that is agreed to but has not been stated expressly.

IMPLIED CONTRACT – An agreement that is agreed upon but has not been put into words.

IMPLIED AGREEMENT – One inferred from the acts or conduct of the parties, instead of being expressed by them in written or spoken words; one inferred by the law where the conduct of the parties with reference to the subject-matter is such as to induce the belief that they intended to do that which their acts indicate they have done.

–=–

In short, we have an implied government, which uses an implied consent to an implied constitution to command implied authority and implied assent to its own statutes and opinions – all because of your own implied agreement (silence) to all of these implications. Your silence and lack of action is your tacit consent. This double-speak of ways to induce a false sense of agreement and thus consensus, is all based on one very fragile concept – faith. The syndicate can only continue in perpetuity if it has the belief of the people it dominates, suggesting its permissive and consensual authority of those same subjected and dominated people, and implying that the syndicated de facto government has legitimacy. Amazingly, government admits openly that it indeed is not legitimate – that it is a de facto (illegitimate/only by force) fiction of law. This is quite verifiable on your own. And yet the voter turn out shows very well that the religion of the state and its sovereignty doctrine reigns supreme.

There’s just one little problem with that word sovereignty. And thanks to the syndicate, the “educated” masses worship its meaning incorrectly and without understanding of its ultimate implied authority…

SOVEREIGN, adjective suv’eran. [We retain this babarous orthography from the Norman sovereign. The true spelling would be suveran from the Latin supernes, superus.] 1. Supreme in power; possessing supreme dominion; as a sovereign ruler of the universe. 2. Supreme; superior to all others; chief. God is the sovereign good of all who love and obey him. 3. Supremely efficacious; superior to all others; predominant; effectual; as a sovereign remedy. 4. Supreme; pertaining to the first magistrate of a nation; as sovereign authority. – (noun) suv’eran. 1. A supreme lord or ruler; one who possesses the highest authority without control. Some earthly princes, kings and emperors are sovereigns in their dominions. 2. A supreme magistrate; a king. 3. A gold coin of England, value (of) $4.44 (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

MAG’ISTRATE, noun [Latin magistratus, from magister, master; magis, major, and ster, Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the principal director.] A public civil officer, invested with the executive government or some branch of it. In this sense, a king is the highest or first magistrate as is the President of the United States. But the word is more particularly applied to subordinate officers, as governors, intendants, prefects, mayors, justices of the peace, and the like. The magistrate must have his reverence; the laws their authority. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

Hmm… so our president, governors, mayors, and judges are all magistrates, which translates to masters. And all these fall under the notion of sovereignty as supreme rulers without control.

Dare we examine further the etymology of these words…?

In fact, isn’t to declare something supreme and sovereign actually to deify that thing as a god?

Surely not…

Well, first, how does Webster’s 1828 Dictionary define the word “god”?

GOD, noun 1. The Supreme Being; Jehovah; the eternal and infinite spirit, the creator, and the sovereign of the universe. GOD is a spirit; and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:24. 2. A false god; a heathen deity; an idol. Fear not the gods of the Amorites. Judges 6:10. 3. A prince; a ruler; a magistrate or judge; an angel. 4. Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good. Whose god is their belly. Philippians 3:19. GOD, verb transitive To deify.

–=–

Uh-oh. This isn’t looking good… it seems Webster just hit the nail painfully on the head. Whereas he defines a magistrate as a president, governor, mayor, or judge, at the same time he defines a god as a magistrate. Of course the meaning is of a false god in idol worship, honored by a completely and deliberately dumbed down population under implied god-headedness. And so thanks to the combined efforts of the syndicate, the people don’t even know they are worshiping and supporting heathen false gods as their government officials with supreme and sovereign authority over them. This alone is proof of the power of the syndicate and its system of re-education.

It was Voltaire who said, “I want my lawyer, my tailor, my servants, even my wife to believe in God, because it means that I shall be cheated and robbed and cuckolded less often. … If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.”

Well, the gods are re-invented every election cycle!

Etymologically speaking, we can see how this invention of a fictional state-god actually happened, and how it is used to make “patients” out of otherwise God-fearing men, who bend on one knee to the god that is government and its magistrates…

DEIFY – (v.)  mid-14c., from Old French deifier (13c.), from Late Latin deificare, from deificus “making godlike,” from Latin deus “god” (see Zeus) + -ficare, from facere “to make, to do” (see factitious). Related: Deified; deifying.

DEITY – (n.) c.1300, “divine nature;” late 14c., “a god,” from Old French deité, from Late Latin deitatem (nominative deitas) “divine nature,” coined by Augustine from Latin deus “god,” from PIE *deiwos (see Zeus).

GOD – (n.) Old English god “supreme being, deity; the Christian God; image of a god; godlike person,” from Proto-Germanic *guthan (cognates: Old Saxon, Old Frisian, Dutch god, Old High German got, German Gott, Old Norse guð, Gothic guþ), from PIE *ghut- “that which is invoked” (cognates: Old Church Slavonic zovo “to call,” Sanskrit huta- “invoked,” an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- “to call, invoke.”

MAGISTRATE – (n.) late 14c., “civil officer in charge of administering laws,” from Old French magistrat, from Latin magistratus “a magistrate, public functionary,” originally “magisterial rank or office,” from magistrare “serve as a magistrate,” from magister “chief, director” (see master). Related: Magistracy.

MASTER – (n.) late Old English mægester “one having control or authority,” from Latin magister (n.) “chief, head, director, teacher” (source of Old French maistre, French maître, Spanish and Italian maestro, Portuguese mestre, Dutch meester, German Meister), contrastive adjective (“he who is greater“) from magis (adv.) “more,”

FACTITIOUS – (adj.) 1640s, “made by or resulting from art, artificial,” from Latin factitius “artificial,” from factus “elaborate, artistic,” past participle adjective from facere “do” (source of French faire, Spanish hacer), from PIE root *dhe- “to put, to do” (cognates: Sanskrit dadhati “puts, places;” Avestan dadaiti “he puts;” Old Persian ada “he made;” Hittite dai- “to place;” Greek tithenai “to put, set, place;” Lithuanian deti “to put;” Polish dziać się “to be happening;” Russian delat’ “to do;” Old High German tuon, German tun, Old Saxon, Old English don “to do;” Old Frisian dua, Old Swedish duon, Gothic gadeths “a doing;” Old Norse dalidun “they did”). Related: Factitiously; factitiousness.

–=–

“Much in you is still man, and much in you is not yet man,
but a shapeless pigmy that walks asleep in the mist searching for its own awakening.”

–Kahlil Gibran, “The Prophet”

–=–

It is perhaps best to reveal the origin and etymology of such words rather than utilizing dumbed-down definitions from modern dictionaries offered to the students of that very system. For ironically, education is one word they don’t teach you in school!!!

To truly understand the purpose of education, we must cross over to and temporarily attempt to empathize with the elitist dark side of the syndicate so as to view this subject through the warped disposition of our controllers and handlers. Perhaps a better question than our initial title here would be:

What kind of education would a slave-master wish to impart upon his slaves, knowing that they can be made to love and yet perceive not the nature of their enslavement?

–=–
Programming The Matrix:
Examining The Language Code Of The Syndicate
–=–

And so we arrive back to our original question… How do you define what education really is?

Etymology, the study of the origin of words (http://etymonline.com), will best help us in our lofty endeavor:

EDUCATION (n.) – From the 1530s, “childrearing,” also “the training of animals,” from Middle French education (14c.) and directly from Latin educationem (nominative educatio) “a rearing, training,” noun of action from past participle stem of educare (see educate). Originally of instruction in social codes and manners; meaning “systematic schooling and training for work” is from 1610s.

–=–

Ok then… the training of animals it is. But who and what exactly do these elitist syndicate-men consider to be animals?

ANIMALISM (n.) – “the doctrine that man is a mere animal,” 1857, from animal + ism. Earlier, “exercise of animal faculties; physical exercise” (1831).

ANIMAL (n.) – From early 14c. (but rare before c.1600, and not in KJV, 1611), “any living creature” (including humans), from Latin animaleliving being, being which breathes,” neuter of animalisanimate, living; of the air,” from animabreath, soul; a current of air” (see animus, and compare deer). Drove out the older beast in common usage. Used of brutish humans from 1580s.

BEAST (n.) – c.1200, from Old French besteanimal, wild beast,” figuratively “fool, idiot” (11c., Modern French bête), from Vulgar Latin *besta, from Latin bestiabeast, wild animal,” of unknown origin. Used to translate Latin animal. Replaced Old English deor (see deer) as the generic word for “wild creature,” only to be ousted 16c. by animal. Of persons felt to be animal-like in various senses from early 13c. Of the figure in the Christian apocalypse story from late 14c.

ZOON (n.) – “animal form containing all elements of a typical organism of its group,” 1864, from Greek zoion “animal” (see zoo-).

POLITICAL (adj.) – From the 1550s, “pertaining to a polity, civil affairs, or government;” from Latin politicusof citizens or the state” (see politic (adj.)) + -al (1). Meaning “taking sides in party politics” (usually pejorative) is from 1749. Political prisoner first recorded 1860; political science is from 1779 (first attested in Hume). Political animal translates Greek politikon zoon (Aristotle, “Politics,” I.ii.9) “an animal intended to live in a city; a social animal.”

ZOO – word-forming element meaning “animal, living being,” from comb. form of Greek zoionan animal,” literally “a living being,” from PIE root *gwei-to live, life” (source also of Greek bioslife,” Old English cwiculiving;” see bio-).

–=–

The best of students are often called the “teacher’s pet”. Is this an endearment or merely the sign of an animal with an ultra-trainable mentality?

PET – “tamed animal,” originally in Scottish and northern England dialect (and exclusively so until mid-18c.), of unknown origin. Sense of  “indulged child” (c.1500) is recorded slightly earlier than that of “animal kept as a favorite” (1530s), but the latter may be the primary meaning. Probably associated with or influenced by petty . As a term of endearment by 1849. Teacher’s pet is attested from 1890.

–=–

But wait a minute! Education creates smart people does it not?

In actuality, the population is so dumbed down that it doesn’t even know the meaning of that word!

SMART – (n.) “sharp pain,” c.1200, from sharp (adj.). Cognate with Middle Dutch smerte, Dutch smart, Old High German smerzo, German Schmerzpain.”

SMART – (adj.) From late Old English smeartpainful, severe, stinging; causing a sharp pain,” related to smeortan (see smart (v.)). Meaning “executed with force and vigor” is from c.1300. Meaning “quick, active, clever” is attested from c.1300, from the notion of “cutting” wit, words, etc., or else “keen in bargaining.” Meaning “trim in attire” first attested 1718, “ascending from the kitchen to the drawing-room c.1880″ [Weekley]. For sense evolution, compare sharp (adj.). In reference to devices, the sense of “behaving as though guided by intelligence” (as in smart bomb) first attested 1972. Smarts “good sense, intelligence,” is first recorded 1968. Smart cookie is from 1948.

SMARTEN – (v.) “to make smart, to spruce up, to improve appearance,” 1786, from smart (adj.) in its sense of “spruce, trim” + -en (1). Related: Smartened; smartening.

–=–

Education places more importance on dress attire and proper artful etiquette than knowledge. It’s sole purpose is to produce trained animals that have the appearance of professionalism, that in reality have no foundational legitimacy to profess anything at all.

The syndicate doesn’t just employ advocates, it absorbs them into its matrix. Admittance isn’t just acceptance, it is the creation of a new creature; the bestowing of flattering title and privilege through registration, education, and finally subscription into the establishment. One’s entire lifestyle must change to fit the world view of their chosen profession. The syndicate becomes the surrogate mother of all its conscripted advocates, whom in turn are vested in the syndicate for their very surrogate existence – totally dependent on its continuity in order to prove their own credentials. They are literally by necessity of their titles plugged-in to the matrix…

For the word matrix is not some science fiction creation. It is in reality the creation of fiction. A matrix is the birth origination of an artificial person into the syndicate.

MATRIX – From late 14c., “uterus, womb,” from Old French matrice “womb, uterus,” from Latin matrix (genitive matricis) “pregnant animal,” in Late Latin “womb,” also “source, origin,” from mater (genitive matris) “mother” (see mother (n.1)). Sense of “place or medium where something is developed” is first recorded 1550s; sense of “embedding or enclosing mass” first recorded 1640s. Logical sense of “array of possible combinations of truth-values” is attested from 1914. As a verb from 1951.

MATRIXIn civil law, the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. (Downing v. Diaz, 80 Tex. 436, 16 S.W. 53.)

MATRIXWomb. A place where anything is generated or formed. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary 1755)

–=–

MATRICULATE – From the 1570s, “to admit a student to a college by enrolling his name on the register,” from Late Latin matriculatus, past participle of matriculareto register,” from Latin matriculapublic register,” diminutive of matrix (genitive matricis) “list, roll,” also “sources, womb” (see matrix).

ADMIT – (v.) From late 14c., “let in,” from Latin admittereto allow to enter, let in, let come, give access,” from ad- “to” (see ad-) + mittere “let go, send” (see mission). Sense of “to concede as valid or true” is first recorded early 15c. Related: Admitted; Admitting.

CONSCRIPTION – From late 14c., “a putting in writing,” from Middle French conscription, from Latin conscriptionem (nominative conscriptio) “a drawing up of a list, enrollment, a levying of soldiers,” from conscribereto enroll,” from com- “with” (see com-) + scribereto write” (see script (n.)). Meaning “enlistment of soldiers” is from 1520s; the sense “compulsory enlistment for military service” (1800) is traceable to the French Republic act of Sept. 5, 1798. Technically, a conscription is the enrollment of a fixed number by lot, with options of providing a substitute.

TAX – c.1300, “impose a tax on,” from Old French taxer “impose a tax” (13c.) and directly from Latin taxareevaluate, estimate, assess, handle,” also “censure, charge,” probably a frequentative form of tangereto touch” (see tangent (adj.)). Sense of “to burden, put a strain on” first recorded early 14c.; that of “censure, reprove” is from 1560s. Its use in Luke ii for Greek apographeinto enter on a list, enroll” is due to Tyndale. Related: Taxed; taxing.

ENROLLMENT – (n.) also enrolment, mid-15c., “act of enrolling,” from Anglo-French enrollement, from Middle French enrollement, from Old French enrollerrecord in a register” (see enroll). Meaning “total number enrolled” is from 1859, American English.

ENROLL – From mid-14c. (transitive), from Old French enrollerrecord in a register, write in a roll” (13c., Modern French enrôler), from en-make, put in” (see en- (1)) + rolle (see roll (n.)). Related: Enrolled; enrolling.

ROLL – From early 13c., “rolled-up piece of parchment or paper” (especially one inscribed with an official record), from Old French rolledocument, parchment scroll, decree” (12c.), from Medieval Latin rotulusa roll of paper” (source also of Spanish rollo, Italian ruollo), from Latin rotulasmall wheel,” diminutive of rota “wheel” (see rotary). Meaning “a register, list, catalogue” is from late 14c., common from c.1800…

REGISTER  (v1)- late 14c. (transitive), “enter in a listing,” from Old French registrernote down, include” (13c.) and directly from Medieval Latin registrare, from registrum (see register (n.)). Intransitive sense, of instruments, from 1797; of persons and feelings, “make an impression,” from 1901. Meaning “to enter one’s name in a list” for some purpose is from 1940. Related: Registered; registering. Registered nurse attested from 1879.

REGISTER – (n.1) late 14c., from Old French registre (13c.) and directly from Medieval Latin registrum, alteration of Late Latin regestalist, matters recorded,” noun use of Latin regesta, neuter plural of regestus, past participle of regerereto record; retort,” literally “to carry back, bring back” from re- “back” (see re-) + gererecarry, bear” (see gest). Also borrowed in Dutch, German, Swedish, Danish. Some senses influenced by association with Latin regereto rule.” Meaning in printing, “exact alignment of presswork” is from 1680s… Sense “device by which data is automatically recorded” is 1830, from the verb; hence Cash register (1875).

REGISTER – (n.2) “assistant court officer in administrative or routine function,” 1530s, now chiefly U.S., alteration of registrar (q.v) due to influence of register.

ACTUARY – (n.) 1550s, “registrar, clerk,” from Latin actuariuscopyist, account-keeper,” from actuspublic business” (see act (n.)). Modern insurance office meaning first recorded 1849.

CATALOGUE – (n) from the early 15c., from Old French cataloguelist, index” (14c.), and directly from Late Latin catalogus, from Greek katalogosa list, register, enrollment” (such as the katalogos neon, the “catalogue of ships” in the “Iliad”), from katadown; completely” (see cata-) + legeinto say, count” (see lecture (n.)).

SUBSCRIBE – (v.) From the early 15c., “to sign at the bottom of a document,” from Latin subscriberewrite, write underneath, sign one’s name; register,” also figuratively “assent, agree to, approve,” from subunderneath” (see sub-) + scriberewrite” (see script (n.)). The meaning “give one’s consent” (by subscribing one’s name) first recorded mid-15c.; that of “contribute money to” 1630s; and that of “become a regular buyer of a publication” 1711, all originally literal. Related: Subscribed; subscribing.

SIGNATURE – (n.) 1530s, a kind of document in Scottish law, from Middle French signature (16c.) or directly from Medieval Latin signaturasignature, a rescript,” in classical Latin “the matrix of a seal,” from signatus, past participle of signareto mark with a stamp, sign” (see sign (v.)).  Meaning “one’s own name written in one’s own hand” is from 1570s, replacing sign-manual (early 15c.) in this sense… Meaning “a distinguishing mark of any kind” is from 1620s.

ESTABLISHMENT – From the late 15c., “settled arrangement,” also “income, property,” from establish + -ment. Meaning “established church” is from 1731; Sense of “place of business” is from 1832. Meaning “social matrix of ruling people and institutions” is attested occasionally from 1923, consistently from 1955. The connection of senses in the Latin word seems to be via confusion of Greek metra “womb” (from metermother;” see mother (n.1)) and an identical but different Greek word metra meaning “register, lot” (see meter (n.2)). Evidently Latin matrix was used to translate both, though it originally shared meaning with only one. Related: Matriculated; matriculating.

–=–

Of course we must train our young to be patriotic, thus defending the slave-master’s territory as if it were our own, preserving continuity of the syndicate that makes us all its unwitting patients. And so the education system has institutionalized and instilled in its patients (students), as animals, a strict territorial protectionism. Each school day begins with the saying of an enchantment pledge to the sovereign god of government via its symbol of authority, the United States war flag. I pledge allegiance, to the flag…

TERRITORIAL (adj.) – From the 1620s, “of or pertaining to a territory,” from Late Latin territorialis, from territorium (see territory). In reference to British regiments, from 1881. In reference to an area defended by an animal, from 1920. Territorial waters is from 1841. Territorial army “British home defense” is from 1908. Territorial imperativeanimal need to claim and defend territory is from 1966.

–=–

Territory and jurisdiction go hand in hand. A flattering title in the matrix of the syndicate only exists in that fictional jurisdiction, not in reality. Therefore the territorial imperative must be instilled into each generation in order to legitimize the syndicate. The birth certificate is the matrix, the initial legal document, which creates the bond and surety of the surname to the given name. Only upon that legal surname can the syndicate bestow titles and credentials – upon the artificial person (name).

Perhaps we are all victims here? Perhaps we have all received the mental mark of the government beast without contemplation, enchanted by our very own pledge of allegiance to a complete fiction. Perhaps this represents our being branded like cattle, as chattel within invisible paper borders educated to love our servitude and to hate true freedom…

MARK (n.) – “Trace, impression,” Old English mearc (West Saxon), merc (Mercian) “boundary, sign, limit, mark,” from Proto-Germanic *marko (cognates: Old Norse merki “boundary, sign,” mörk “forest,” which often marked a frontier; Old Frisian merke, Gothic marka “boundary, frontier,” Dutch merk “mark, brand,” German Mark “boundary, boundary land”), from PIE *merg- “edge, boundary, border” (cognates: Latin margo “margin;” Avestan mareza- “border,” Old Irish mruig, Irish bruig “borderland,” Welsh brodistrict“).  The primary sense is probably “boundary,” which had evolved by Old English through “sign of a boundary,” through “sign in general,” then to “impression or trace forming a sign.” Meaning “any visible trace or impression” first recorded c.1200. Sense of “line drawn to indicate starting point of a race” (as in on your marks …) first attested 1887. The Middle English sense of “target” (c.1200) is the notion in marksman and slang sense “victim of a swindle” (1883). The notion of “sign, token” is behind the meaning “numerical award given by a teacher” (1829). Influenced by Scandinavian cognates.

VICTIM (n.) – Late 15c., “living creature killed and offered as a sacrifice to a deity or supernatural power,” from Latin victimaperson or animal killed as a sacrifice.” Perhaps distantly connected to Old English wigidol,” Gothic weihs “holy,” German weihenconsecrate” (compare Weihnachten “Christmas”) on notion of “a consecrated animal.” Sense of “person who is hurt, tortured, or killed by another” is recorded from 1650s; meaning “person oppressed by some power or situation” is from 1718. Weaker sense of “person taken advantage of” is recorded from 1781.

–=–

And just where is it that we are collectively taken advantage of, receiving the mark of work training to ensure our future labor capacity to be used in commercial activities as employees of the human trafficking (commerce) syndicate?

SCHOOL (n.) - “Place of instruction,” Old English scol, from Latin scholaintermission of work, leisure for learning; learned conversation, debate; lecture; meeting place for teachers and students, place of instruction; disciples of a teacher, body of followers, sect,” from Greek skhole “spare time, leisure, rest ease; idleness; that in which leisure is employed; learned discussion;” also “a place for lectures, school;” originally “a holding back, a keeping clear,” from skheinto get” (from PIE root *segh-to hold, hold in one’s power, to have;” see scheme (n.)) + -ole by analogy with bole “a throw,” stole “outfit,” etc. The original notion is “leisure,” which passed to “otiose discussion” (in Athens or Rome the favorite or proper use for free time), then “place for such discussion.” The Latin word was widely borrowed (Old French escole, French école, Spanish escuela, Italian scuola, Old High German scuola, German Schule, Swedish skola, Gaelic sgiol, Welsh ysgol, Russian shkola). Translated in Old English as larhus, literally “lore house,” but this seems to have been a glossary word only. Meaning “students attending a school” in English is attested from c.1300; sense of “school building” is first recorded 1590s. Sense of “people united by a general similarity of principles and methods” is from 1610s; hence school of thought (1864). School of hard knocks “rough experience in life” is recorded from 1912 (in George Ade); to tell tales out of schoolbetray damaging secrets” is from 1540s. School bus is from 1908. School days is from 1590s. School board from 1870.

SCHEME (n.) – From the 1550s, “figure of speech,” from Medieval Latin schemashape, figure, form, appearance; figure of speech; posture in dancing,” from Greek skhema (genitive skhematos) “figure, appearance, the nature of a thing,” related to skheinto get,” and ekheinto have,” from PIE root *segh-to hold, to hold in one’s power, to have” (cognates: Sanskrit sahatehe masters, overcomes,” sahahpower, victory;” Avestan hazah “power, victory;” Greek ekheinto have, hold;” Gothic sigis, Old High German sigu, Old Norse sigr, Old English sigevictory“). The sense “program of action” first is attested 1640s. Unfavorable overtones (selfish, devious) began to creep in early 18c. Meaning “complex unity of coordinated component elements” is from 1736. Color scheme is attested from 1884. – (v.) – to “devise a scheme,” 1767 (earlier “reduce to a scheme,” 1716), from scheme (n.). Related: Schemed; scheming.

–=–

To put this into terms of common understanding, schools now teach students how to learn to be a part of the end result of the scheme of education, how to be good little victims and patients, how to fit into the syndicate, and how to bear (carry) the mark and impression of unwarranted authority and oppression (a degree of crime) over apparently less “educated” persons. For an official education is not knowledge, merely learned behavior. By learning to believe in the territorial imperative – as trained animals – the pedagogical sophist (graduate with a degree) then intellectually feels the need to claim and defend the territorial scheme as a forceful government jurisdiction. For without a territory that recognizes the degree of crime (diploma) bestowed upon his or her name, the sophist would never succeed in his selfish claim of master and graduate, nor have title and status over others. The graduate is thus an automatic advocate of the syndicate. For without the authority of the University institution, his or her credentials (diploma) would be worthless.

–=–
Degrees Of Crime
–=–

The average ego-centric person is very proud of their little piece of parchment that states the degree to which they have been “educated”. The conceptual actualization of the credentialist model through education allows for a criminal syndicate based on mere export of specifically trained animals, where the worst crimes against humanity are imagined and perpetrated. This ranking system of schools and universities when brought into the light reveals origins much more imaginative than the best science fictions available. Basing its ladder of approval and license via the issuance of a state-sanctioned diploma, the true nature of this system boils down to mere monopolistic syndicalism.

To comprehend what the education system truly represents, we must first discover where these words originated and how they describe just what an “educated” man is. Receiving your high school, college, and university diploma has been engrained into our societal norm as one of the great achievements of a young person’s life. But what is the etymology of that word?

It is interesting to note that the etymology of the word degree, referring to the movement or position of some thing in relation to its master:

DEGREE - (n.)  “a grade of crime“, early 13c., from Old French degré (12c.) “a step (of a stair), pace, degree (of relationship), academic degree; rank, status, position,” said to be from Vulgar Latin *degradusa step,” from Late Latin degredare, from Latin de- “down” – (see de-) + gradus “step” (see grade (n.)).

–=–

In reality, a earn a degree is to “degrade”, which is why you receive grades (a degree of measurement) on your efforts, becoming legally limited and bound by the syndicate. Acceptance of artifice and title is the acceptance of one’s place diminished within the syndicate as a lesser subject – a cog in the wheel. This is not an honor, for the giver of that honer is not lawful or honorable, and in fact is literally criminal (confederation) in nature. The syndicate can only lower one’s standing, never raise it. For standing is mere legalese, and title requires subjection to the rules and regulations of the syndicate through the use of the surname, which again is an artificial person and property of government. In exchange for the extinguishing or free thought by students and laborers, the syndicate dispenses degrees, which represents one’s relationship and status within the syndicate, and rewards the silent with money and benefits. For the diploma and degree are of the state, not the school. This, again, is voluntary slavery. And the benefits for volunteers are quite enticing…

You could say that an education degree is a way of measuring the criminal degree of a person, in the form of his or her status assigned by the criminal syndicate government.

The word “graduation” in essence refers to temperature, as in refining or tempering the mind like crude oil and like a trained dog:

GRADUATION – From early 15c., in alchemy, “tempering, refining of something to a certain degree; measurement according to the four degrees of a quality,” from graduate (n.). General sense of “dividing into degrees” is from 1590s; meaning “action of receiving or giving an academic degree” is from early 15c.; in reference to the ceremony where a degree is given, from 1818.

GRADUATE – From early 15c., “one who holds a degree” (with man; as a stand-alone noun from mid-15c.), from Medieval Latin graduatus, past participle of graduarito take a degree,” from Latin gradus “step, grade” (see grade (n.)). As an adjective, from late 15c.

UPGRADE (v.) – “increase to a higher grade or rank,” 1904 (transitive); 1950 (intransitive), from up (adv.) + grade (v.). Related: Upgraded; upgrading.

GRADE (v.) – 1650s, “to arrange in grades,” from grade (n.). Related: Graded; grading.

GRADE (n.) – From the 1510s, “degree of measurement,” from French grade “grade, degree” (16c.), from Latin gradus “step, pace, gait, walk;” figuratively “a step, stage, degree,” related to gradito walk, step, go,” from PIE *ghredh- (cognates: Lithuanian gridiju “to go, wander,” Old Church Slavonic gredoto come,” Old Irish in-greinnhe pursues,” and second element in congress, progress, etc.).  Replaced Middle English gree “step, degree in a series,” from Old French grei “step,” from Latin gradus. Railway sense is from 1811. Meaning “class of things having the same quality or value” is from 1807; meaning “division of a school curriculum equivalent to one year” is from 1835; that of “letter-mark indicating assessment of a student’s work” is from 1886 (earlier used of numerical grades). Grade A “top quality, fit for human consumption” (originally of milk) is from a U.S. system instituted in 1912.

–=–

And of course to temper something is to assign a temperature (degree) to it:

TEMPERATURE  (n.)    mid-15c., “fact of being tempered, proper proportion;” 1530s, “character or nature of a substance,” from Latin temperatura “a tempering, moderation,” from temperatus, past participle of temperare “to be moderate; to mingle in due proportion” (see temper (v.))

TEMPORATE  (adj.)   late 14c., of persons, “modest, forbearing, self-restrained, not swayed by passion;” of climates or seasons, “not liable to excessive heat or cold,” from Latin temperatus “restrained, regulated, limited, moderate, sober, calm, steady,” from past participle of temperare “to moderate, regulate” (see temper (v.)). Related: Temperately; temperateness. Temperate zone is attested from 1550s.

–=–

To be idealistically trained by the syndicate is to be of moderate degree:

MODERATE (n.)    “one who holds moderate opinions on controversial subjects,” 1794, from moderate (adj.). Related: Moderatism; -moderantism. (adj.) “within bounds, observing moderation;” figuratively “modest, restrained,” past participle of moderari “to regulate, mitigate, restrain, temper, set a measure, keep (something) within measure,” related to modus “measure,” from PIE *med-es-, from base *med- (see medical (adj.)). The notion is “keeping within due measure.” In English, of persons from early 15c.; of opinions from 1640s.

–=–

So what happens at the end of the tempering of animals and quelling of free thought?

The diploma is bestowed as a literal license to do what is otherwise illegal, and still often unlawful despite it.

Stemming from the word “diplomacy”, which is just another form of advocacy, we can further understand just what a diploma truly represents:

DIPLOMA (n.) – From the 1640s, “state paper, official document,” from Latin diploma, from Greek diploma “license, chart,” originally “paper folded double,” from diploun “to double, fold over,” from diploos “double” (see diploid) + -oma. Specific academic sense is 1680s in English.

DIPLOMACY (n.) – From 1796, from French diplomatie, formed from diplomatediplomat” (on model of aristocratie from aristocrate), from Latin adjective diplomaticos, from diploma (genitive diplomatis) “official document conferring a privilege (see diploma; for sense evolution, see diplomatic).

DIPLOMATIC (adj.) – From 1711, “pertaining to documents, texts, charters,” from Medieval Latin diplomaticus, from diplomat-, stem of diploma (see diploma). Meaning “pertaining to international relations” is recorded from 1787, apparently a sense evolved in 18c. from the use of diplomaticus in Modern Latin titles of collections of international treaties, etc., in which the word referred to the “texts” but came to be felt as meaning “pertaining to international relations.” In the general sense of “tactful and adroit,” it dates from 1826. Related: Diplomatically.

REPORT (n.) – From late 14c., “an account brought by one person to another, rumor,” from Old French reportpronouncement, judgment” (Modern French rapport), from reporterto tell, relate” (see report (v.)). Meaning “resounding noise, sound of an explosion” is from 1580s. Meaning “formal statement of results of an investigation” first attested 1660s; sense of “teacher’s official statement of a pupil’s work and behavior” is from 1873 (report card in the school sense first attested 1919).

–=–

A diploma is then really nothing more and nothing less than the conferment of State privilege and license, so that one may be judged officially as tame and trainable enough to join the syndicate monopoly within its institutions. The candidate must be employable (able to be used as a commodity) within the various government regulated industries, and must be entrusted with its  secrets, not the least of which is its own fraudulent nature.

I wonder where the word “university” came from?

UNIVERS’ITYnoun An assemblage of colleges established in any place, with professors for instructing students in the sciences and other branches of learning, and where degrees are conferred. A university is properly a universal school, in which are taught all branches of learning, or the four faculties of theology, medicine, law and the sciences and arts. (–Webster’s 1828)

UNIVERSITAS - Latin. In the civil law. A corporation aggregate. Literally, a whole formed out of many individuals. (–Black’s 1st)

UNIVERSUS - Latin. The whole; all together. (–Black’s 1st)

UNIVERSAL AGENT - One who if appointed to do all the acts which the principal can personally do, and which he may lawfully delegate the power to another to do. (–Black’s 1st)

UNI – word-forming element meaning “having one only,” from Latin uni-, comb. form of unus (see one).

–=–

E Pluribus Unum…

The only competition between Universities is with their sports teams. The teaching of misinformation and doctrine is universal throughout. For teachers and professors are advocates too, whose credentials demand conformity to syllabus and syndicalism.

A diploma really represents a permission bestowed by the syndicate through universal (university) control of information that one may be of a certain vocation. This is no different than a priest telling you that you have a calling. It is the very definition of syndicalist education: work training.

VOCATION (n.) – early 15c., “spiritual calling,” from Old French vocacioncall, consecration; calling, profession” (13c.) or directly from Latin vocationem (nominative vocatio), literally “a calling, a being called” from vocatus “called,” past participle of vocare to call” (see voice (n.)). Sense of “one’s occupation or profession” is first attested 1550s.

CALLING (n.) – “vocation,” mid-13c., verbal noun from call (v.). The sense traces to I Cor. vii:20.

CALL (v.) – Sanskrit garhati meaning to “bewail, criticize;” and from Old High German klaga, German Klage “complaint, grievance, lament, accusation;” etc… From 13th Century call meaning “to give a name to.”

CALLER (n.) – Circa 1500, “one who proclaims,” agent noun from call (v.)

VOUCH (v.) – From early 14c., “summon into court to prove a title,” from Anglo-French voucher, Old French vocher to call, summon, invoke, claim,” probably from Gallo-Roman *voticare, metathesis of Latin vocitare to call to, summon insistently,” frequentative of Latin vocare “to call, call upon, summon” (see voice (n.)). Meaning “guarantee to be true or accurate” is first attested 1590s. Related: Vouched; vouching.

GUARANTEE (n.) – From the 1670s, altered (perhaps via Spanish garante), from earlier garrant warrant that the title to a property is true,” early 15c., from Old French garantdefender, protector,” from Germanic (see warrant (n.)). For form evolution, see gu-. Originally “person giving something as security;” sense of the “pledge” itself (which is properly a guaranty) developed 17c.

WARRANT (v.) – From late 13th Century “to keep safe from danger,” from Old North French warantir safeguard, protect; guarantee, pledge” (Old French garantir), from warant (see warrant (n.)). Meaning “to guarantee to be of quality” is attested from late 14c.; sense of “to guarantee as true” is recorded from c.1300. Related: Warranted; warranting; warrantable.

SURETY (n.) – c.1300, “a guarantee, promise, pledge, an assurance,” from Old French seurté “a promise, pledge, guarantee; assurance, confidence” (12c., Modern French sûreté), from Latin securitatem (nominative securitas) “freedom from care or danger, safety, security,” from securus (see secure (adj.)). From late 14c. as “security, safety, stability; state of peace,” also “certainty, certitude; confidence.” Meaning “one who makes himself responsible for another” is from early 15c. Until 1966, the French national criminal police department was the Sûreté nationale.

BORROW (v.) – From Old English borgianto lend, be surety for,” from Proto-Germanic *borgpledge” (cognates: Old English borgpledge, security, bail, debt,” Old Norse borgato become bail for, guarantee,” Middle Dutch borghento protect, guarantee,” Old High German boragen “to beware of,” German borgen “to borrow; to lend”), from PIE root *bhergh- (1) “to hide, protect” (see bury). Sense shifted in Old English to “borrow,” apparently on the notion of collateral deposited as security for something borrowed. Related: Borrowed; borrowing.

PLEDGE (n.) – From mid-14c., “surety, bail,” from Old French plege (Modern French pleige) “hostage, security, bail,” probably from Frankish *pleganto guarantee,” from *pleg-, a West Germanic root meaning “have responsibility for” (cognates: Old Saxon pleganvouch for,” Middle Dutch pliento answer for, guarantee,” Old High German pflegan “to care for, be accustomed to,” Old English pleon “to risk the loss of, expose to danger;” see plight (v.)). Meaning “allegiance vow attested by drinking with another” is from 1630s. Sense of “solemn promise” first recorded 1814, though this notion is from 16c. in the verb. Weekley notes the “curious contradiction” in pledge (v.) “to toast with a drink” (1540s) and pledge (n.) “the vow to abstain from drinking” (1833). Meaning “student who has agreed to join a fraternity or sorority” dates from 1901.

–=–

Advocates are heavily protected by the syndicate so that they may act in its interest, under its name, no matter how unlawful (yet legalized by the syndicate against the law) those actions may be. Doctors, for instance, must take extreme amounts of liability and malpractice insurance in order to protect their “practice.” The normalcy of this fact is quite frightening, as the common folk never seem to grasp that a Doctor’s whole “practice” is fraud in the first place. Every action, in other words, by a doctor is indeed malpractice and done so under a pseudonym protected by the syndicate.

This shirking of personal responsibility is key to the atrocities taking place within these institutions. Representing massive combinations of syndicalists, monopolies and trusts rule the day.

Do you have the right to work in the syndicate? Only if you can show permission from the animal training university center you attended and if your name is marked with a degree of crime. You must be confirmed into the syndicate due to your corroboration and willingness to commit legalized crime (crime by permission of the state). For you are thus forbidden to enter a specialty field while having your own opinions…

CREDENTIAL (n.) “that which entitles to credit,” 1756, probably a back-formation from credentials. Earlier in English as an adjective, “confirming, corroborating” (late 15c.). As a verb, “provide with credentials,” by 1828 (implied in dredentialed).

CREDENTIALS (n.) “letters entitling the bearer to certain credit or confidence,” 1670s, from Medieval Latin credentialis, from credentia (see credence). Probably immediately as a shortening of letters credential (1520s, with French word order); earlier was letter of credence (mid-14c.).

CREDIT (n.) – From the 1520s, from Middle French crédit (15c.) “belief, trust,” from Italian credito, from Latin credituma loan, thing entrusted to another,” from past participle of credereto trust, entrust, believe” (see credo). The commercial sense was the original one in English (creditor is mid-15c.). Meaning “honor, acknowledgment of merit,” is from c.1600. Academic sense of “point for completing a course of study” is 1904. Movie/broadcasting sense is 1914. Credit rating is from 1958; credit union is 1881, American English.

ACCREDIT (v.) – From the 1610s, from French accréditer, from à “to” (see ad-) + créditerto credit” (someone with a sum), from créditcredit” (see credit (n.)). Related: Accredited; accrediting.

CONFIDENCE – (n.) From early 15c., from Middle French confidence or directly from Latin confidentia, from confidentem (nominative confidens) “firmly trusting, bold,” present participle of confidereto have full trust or reliance,” from com-, intensive prefix (see com-), + fidereto trust” (see faith). For sense of “swindle” see con (adj.).

CON – (adj.) “swindling,” 1889, American English, from confidence man (1849), from the many scams in which the victim is induced to hand over money as a token of confidence. Confidence with a sense of “assurance based on insufficient grounds” dates from 1590s.

CON – (n.) “study,” early 15c., from Old English cunnanto know, know how” (see can (v.1)).

CON- – word-forming element meaning “together, with,”

DREAD (v.) – late 12c., a shortening of Old English adrædan, contraction of ondrædancounsel or advise against,” also “to dread, fear, be afraid,” from on-against” + rædanto advise” (see read (v.)). Cognate of Old Saxon andradon, Old High German intraten. Related: Dreaded; dreading. As a noun from 12c.

MASTER’S DEGREE (n.) From late 14c., originally a degree giving one authority to teach in a university; from master (n.) in its general sense of “man of learning” (early 13c.), “a teacher” (c.1200).

MASTER (n.) – From late Old English mægesterone having control or authority,” from Latin magister (n.) “chief, head, director, teacher” (source of Old French maistre, French maître, Spanish and Italian maestro, Portuguese mestre, Dutch meester, German Meister), contrastive adjective (“he who is greater“) from magis (adv.) “more,” from PIE *mag-yos-, comparative of root *meg-great” (see mickle). Form influenced in Middle English by Old French cognate maistre. Meaning “original of a recording” is from 1904. In academic senses (from Medieval Latin magister) it is attested from late 14c., originally a degree conveying authority to teach in the universities. As an adjective from late 12c.

DOCTRINE (n.) – From late 14c., from Old French doctrine (12c.) “teaching, doctrine,” and directly from Latin doctrinateaching, body of teachings, learning,” from doctorteacher” (see doctor (n.)).

DOCTOR (n.) – c.1300, “Church father,” from Old French doctour, from Medieval Latin doctorreligious teacher, adviser, scholar,” in classical Latin “teacher,” agent noun from docereto show, teach, cause to know,” originally “make to appear right,” causative of decerebe seemly, fitting” (see decent).  Meaning “holder of highest degree in university” is first found late 14c.; as is that of “medical professional” (replacing native leech (n.2)), though this was not common till late 16c. The transitional stage is exemplified in Chaucer’s Doctor of phesike (Latin physica came to be used extensively in Medieval Latin for medicina). Similar usage of the equivalent of doctor is colloquial in most European languages: Italian dottore, French docteur, German doktor, Lithuanian daktaras, though these are typically not the main word in those languages for a medical healer. For similar evolution, see Sanskrit vaidya- “medical doctor,” literally “one versed in science.” German Arzt, Dutch arts are from Late Latin archiater, from Greek arkhiatroschief healer,” hence “court physician.” French médecin is a back-formation from médicine, replacing Old French miege, from Latin medicus.

LEECH (n.1) – “bloodsucking aquatic worm,” from Old English læce (Kentish lyce), of unknown origin (with a cognate in Middle Dutch lake). Commonly regarded as a transferred use of leech (n.2), but the Old English forms suggest a distinct word, which has been assimilated to leech (n.2) by folk etymology [see OED]. Figuratively applied to human parasites since 1784.

LEECH (n.2) – obsolete forphysician,” from Old English læce, probably from Old Danish læke, from Proto-Germanic *lekjazenchanter, one who speaks magic words; healer, physician” (cognates: Old Frisian letza, Old Saxon laki, Old Norse læknir, Old High German lahhi, Gothic lekeis “physician”), literally “one who counsels,” perhaps connected with a root found in Celtic (compare Irish liaigcharmer, exorcist, physician“) and Slavic (compare Serbo-Croatian lijekar, Polish lekarz), from PIE *lep-agiconjurer,” from root *leg-to collect,” with derivatives meaning “to speak” (see lecture (n.)). For sense development, compare Old Church Slavonic balijidoctor,” originally “conjurer,” related to Serbo-Croatian bajatienchant, conjure;” Old Church Slavonic vrači, Russian vračdoctor,” related to Serbo-Croatian vračsorcerer, fortune-teller.” The form merged with leech (n.1) in Middle English, apparently by folk etymology. In 17c., leech usually was applied only to veterinary practitioners. The fourth finger of the hand, in Old English, was læcfinger, translating Latin digitus medicus, Greek daktylus iatrikos, supposedly because a vein from that finger stretches straight to the heart.

LEECHCRAFT (n.) – “art of healing,” Old English læcecræft; see leech (2) + craft (n.).

BACCALAUREATE (n.) – 1620s, “university degree of a bachelor,” from Modern Latin baccalaureatus, from baccalaureusstudent with the first degree,” alteration of Medieval Latin baccalariusone who has attained the lowest degree in a university, advanced student lecturing under his master’s supervision but not yet having personal license” (altered by folk etymology or word-play, as if from bacca lauri “laurel berry,” laurels being awarded for academic success).

SOPHOMORE (n.) – 1680s, “student in the second year of university study,” literally “arguer,” altered from sophumer (1650s, from sophume, archaic variant form of sophism), probably by influence of folk etymology derivation from Greek sophos “wise” + morosfoolish, dull(a wise fool). The original reference might be to the dialectic exercises that formed a large part of education in the middle years. At Oxford and Cambridge, a sophister (from sophist with spurious -er as in philosopher) was a second- or third-year student (what Americans would call a “junior” might be a senior sophister).

SOPHISM (n.) – From early 15c., earlier sophime (mid-14c.), “specious but fallacious argument devised for purposes of deceit or to exercise one’s ingenuity,” from Old French sophimea fallacy, false argument” (Modern French sophisme), from Latin sophisma, from Greek sophismaclever device, skillful act, stage-trick,” from stem of sophizesthaibecome wise” (see sophist).

SOPHISTRY (n.) “specious but fallacious reasoning,” mid-14c., from Old French sophistrie (Modern French sophisterie), from Medieval Latin sophistria, from Latin sophista, sophistes (see sophist). “Sophistry applies to reasoning as sophism to a single argument” [Century Dictionary].

PUPIL (n.1) – “student,” late 14c., originally “orphan child, ward,” from Old French pupille (14c.) and directly from Latin pupillus (fem. pupilla) “orphan child, ward, minor,” diminutive of pupus “boy” (fem. pupa “girl”), probably related to puerchild,” possibly from PIE *pup-, from root *pu-to swell, inflate.” Meaning “disciple, student” first recorded 1560s. Related: Pupillary.

MONITOR (n.) – 1540s, “senior pupil at a school charged with keeping order, etc.,” from Latin monitorone who reminds, admonishes, or checks,” also “an overseer, instructor, guide, teacher,” agent noun from monereto admonish, warn, advise,” related to memini “I remember, I am mindful of,” and to mens “mind,” from PIE root *men-to think” (see mind (n.)).  The type of lizard so called because it is supposed to give warning of crocodiles (1826). Meaning “squat, slow-moving type of ironclad warship” (1862) so called from name of the first vessel of this design, chosen by the inventor, Swedish-born U.S. engineer John Ericsson (1803-1889), because it was meant to “admonish” the Confederate leaders in the U.S. Civil War. Broadcasting sense of “a device to continuously check on the technical quality of a transmission” (1931) led to special sense of “a TV screen displaying the picture from a particular camera.”

TEACHER (n.) – “one who teaches,” c.1300; agent noun from teach (v.). It was used earlier in a sense of “index finger” (late 13c.). Teacher’s pet attested from 1856.

INSTRUCTOR (n.) – mid-15c., from Old French instructeur and directly from Medieval Latin instructorteacher” (in classical Latin, “preparer“), agent noun from instruere (see instruct).

INSTRUCT (v.) – early 15c., from Latin instructus, past participle of instruerearrange, inform, teach,” literally “to build, erect,” from in- “on” (see in- (2)) + struereto pile, build” (see structure (n.)). Related: Instructed; instructing.

INFORM (v.) -  early 14c., “to train or instruct in some specific subject,” from Old French informerinstruct, inform, teach,” and directly from Latin informareto shape, form,” figuratively “train, instruct, educate,” from in- “into” (see in- (2)) + formare “to form, shape,” from forma “form” (see form (n.)). Varied with enform until c.1600. Sense of “report facts or news” first recorded late 14c. Related: Informed; informing.

PEDAGOGUE (n.) – From late 14c., “schoolmaster, teacher,” from Old French pedagogeteacher of children” (14c.), from Latin paedagogus, from Greek paidagogosslave who escorts boys to school and generally supervises them,” later “a teacher,” from pais (genitive paidos) “child” (see pedo-) + agogosleader,” from ageinto lead” (see act (n.)). Hostile implications in the word are at least from the time of Pepys (1650s). Related: Pedagogal.

PEDAGOGIC (adj.) – From 1781, from Latin paedagogicus, from Greek paidagogikossuitable for a teacher,” from paidagogosteacher” (see pedagogue).

MISTRESS (n.) – early 14c., “female teacher, governess,” from Old French maistressemistress (lover); housekeeper; governess, female teacher” (Modern French maîtresse), fem. of maistremaster” (see master (n.)). Sense of “a woman who employs others or has authority over servants” is from early 15c. Sense of “kept woman of a married man” is from early 15c.

PRECEPTOR (n.) – From early 15c., “tutor, instructor” (earliest reference might be to “expert in the art of writing“), from Latin praeceptorteacher, instructor,” agent noun from praecipere (see precept). Medical training sense attested from 1803.

PRECEPT – From late 14c., from Old French percept, percet (12c.), from Latin praeceptummaxim, rule of conduct, order,” noun use of neuter past participle of praeciperegive rules to, order, advise,” literally “take beforehand,” from praebefore” (see pre-) + capere (past participle captus) “to take” (see capable). For change of vowel, see biennial.

PROFESSOR (n.) – From late 14c., “one who teaches a branch of knowledge,” from Old French professeur (14c.) and directly from Latin professorperson who professes to be an expert in some art or science; teacher of highest rank,” agent noun from profiterilay claim to, declare openly” (see profess). As a title prefixed to a name, it dates from 1706. Short form prof is recorded from 1838. Professor: One professing religion. This canting use of the word comes down from the Elizabethan period, but is obsolete in England. [Thornton, "American Glossary," 1912]

PEDAGOGY (n.) – 1580s, from Middle French pédagogie (16c.), from Latin paedagogia, from Greek paidagogiaeducation, attendance on boys,” from paidagogosteacher” (see pedagogue).

INSTRUCTOR (n.) – mid-15c., from Old French instructeur and directly from Medieval Latin instructorteacher” (in classical Latin, “preparer“), agent noun from instruere (see instruct).

GOVERNESS (n.) – mid-15c., “female ruler,” shortening of governouressea woman who rules” (late 14c.), from Old French governeressefemale ruler or administrator” (see governor + -ess); in the sense of “a female teacher in a private home” it is attested from 1712.

MAGISTERIAL (adj.) – 1630s, from Medieval Latin magisterialisof or pertaining to the office of magistrate, director, or teacher,” from Late Latin magisteriushaving authority of a magistrate,” from magisterchief, director” (see master (n.)). Related: Magisterially.

–=–
The Magic Spell
–=–

Stories of witchcraft and magic (magi-c) may be grandiose and over the top in the fiction and fantasy of syndicated media, but their practical application towards the education system can be readily defined within the etymology of words. Witches and warlocks cast spells. They do so with incantations of words and through the use of mythical symbols. For the spell to work the student must be taught spelling, and be graded in such art. But the education system never reveals to its students and descended “masters” of learning degrees just what spelling truly represents, for the student becomes the object of the spelled out words of approved textbooks, thus leaving an “educated” person under the spell of the syndicate. So let’s examine the origin of the spell, both in the spoken and in the written word:

SPELL (v.) – early 14c., “read letter by letter, write or say the letters of;” c.1400, “form words by means of letters,” apparently a French word that merged with or displaced a native Old English one; both are from the same Germanic root, but the French word had evolved a different sense. The native word is Old English spellianto tell, speak, discourse, talk,” from Proto-Germanic *spellam (cognates: Old High German spellonto tell,” Old Norse spjalla, Gothic spillonto talk, tell“), from PIE *spel- (2) “to say aloud, recite.” But the current senses seem to come from Anglo-French espeller, Old French espelirmean, signify, explain, interpret,” also “spell out letters, pronounce, recite,” from Frankish *spellonto tell” or some other Germanic source, ultimately identical with the native word.  Related: Spelled; spelling. In early Middle English still “to speak, preach, talk, tell,” hence such expressions as hear spellhear (something) told or talked about,” spell the windtalk in vain” (both 15c.). Meaning “form words with proper letters” is from 1580s. Spell outexplain step-by-step is first recorded 1940, American English. Shakespeare has spell (someone) backwardsreverse the character of, explain in a contrary sense, portray with determined negativity.”

–=–

“No one will enter the New World Order
unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer.
No one will enter the New Age
unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN Initiation.” 

–David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

–=–

Thus the legal language as a “term of art” could certainly be said to be a magic spell, a spell foisted upon the common people by using the common (vulgar) vernacular spelling of word,s which in fact are defined quite opposite of the character of that common language. Other spells as art-form languages include the medical and biological spelling as well as that of other educated magi-cians, each with their own terms of art. In other words, each institution of the syndicate has its own language (terms of art), and so each animal that ascends through the education system is destined to be caught up in the paradigm of his chosen profession, never to understand the many other professions offered, each with their own use of “spelling”. In this way, the trained (educated) animals are kept institutionalized within their own chosen professions. They profess the language of their own dialectic, separated devisively by all others through the use of language as terms of art.

And through this word magic that is cast as a spell upon the education of students, the belief in the spell creates credentialed men of degree and diploma, who will each defend their education and the titled status it creates and vests upon their person literally to the death and detriment of their fellow species. For they are spellbound by the spells of spelling and the prestige they believe (be-LIE-ve) it creates…

SPELLBOUND (adj.) – “to be bound by or as if by a spell,” 1742, from spell (n.1) + bound (adj.1) “fastened,” past participle of bind (v.).

SPELLING (n.) – From mid-15c., “action of reading letter by letter,” verbal noun from spell (v.1). Meaning “manner of forming words with letters” is from 1660s; meaning “a way a word has been spelled” is from 1731. Spelling bee is from 1878 (see bee; earlier spelling match, 1845; the act of winning such a schoolroom contest is described 1854 as to spell (someone) down).

SPELLER (n.) – c.1200, “a preacher;” mid-15c. apparently in the sense “a person who reads letter by letter;” 1864 of a book to teach orthography. Agent noun from spell (v.1).

SPELL (n.) – Old English spellstory, saying, tale, history, narrative, fable; discourse, command,” from Proto-Germanic *spellam (see spell (v.1)). Compare Old Saxon spel, Old Norse spjall, Old High German spel, Gothic spillreport, discourse, tale, fable, myth;” German Beispielexample.” From c.1200 as “an utterance, something said, a statement, remark;” meaning “set of words with supposed magical or occult powers, incantation, charm” first recorded 1570s; hence any means or cause of enchantment. The term ‘spell’ is generally used for magical procedures which cause harm, or force people to do something against their will — unlike charms for healing, protection, etc. ["Oxford Dictionary of English Folklore"] – Also in Old English, “doctrine; a sermon; religious instruction or teaching; the gospel; a book of the Bible;” compare gospel. – (n.2) – 1620s, “a turn of work in place of another,” from spell (v.2); compare Old English gespeliaa substitute.” Meaning shifted toward “continuous course of work” (1706), probably via notion of shift work (as at sea) where one man or crew regularly “spelled” another. Hence “continuous stretch” of something (weather, etc.), recorded by 1728. Hence also, via the notion in give a spell (1750) “relieve another by taking a turn of work” came the sense “interval of rest or relaxation” (1845), which took the word to a sense opposite what it had at the start.

SPELLBIND (v.) – “to bind by or as if by spell,” 1808, probably a back-formation from spellbound. Related: Spellbinding; spellbinder.

SPELL (v.2) – “work in place of (another),” 1590s, earlier spele, from Old English spelianto take the place of, be substitute for, represent,” related to gespeliasubstitute,” of uncertain origin. Perhaps related to spilianto play” (see spiel). Related: Spelled; spelling.

PINYIN (n.) – system of Romanized spelling for Chinese, 1963, from Chinese pinyinto spell, to combine sounds into syllables,” from pinput together” + yinsound, tone.” Adopted officially by the People’s Republic of China in 1958. Outside China gradually superseding the 19c. Wade-Giles system (Mao Tse-tung is Wade-Giles, Mao Zedong is pinyin).

SENTENCE (n.) – c.1200, “doctrine, authoritative teaching; an authoritative pronouncement,” from Old French sentencejudgment, decision; meaning; aphorism, maxim; statement of authority” (12c.) and directly from Latin sententiathought, way of thinking, opinion; judgment, decision,” also “a thought expressed; aphorism, saying,” from sentientem, present participle of sentirebe of opinion, feel, perceive” (see sense (n.)). Loss of first -i- in Latin by dissimilation. From early 14c. as “judgment rendered by God, or by one in authority; a verdict, decision in court;” from late 14c. as “understanding, wisdom; edifying subject matter.” From late 14c. as “subject matter or content of a letter, book, speech, etc.,” also in reference to a passage in a written work. Sense of “grammatically complete statement” is attested from mid-15c. “Meaning,” then “meaning expressed in words.” Related: Sentential.

–=–

“All the world’s indeed a stage
And we are merely players,
Conformers and portrayer’s;
Each another’s audience
Outside the guided cage.”

–Rush, lyrics to  “Limelight”

–=–

Acceptance of accreditation (a-credit/title-bestowed by the State) by the Magistrates (gods) of government through its education syndicate is indeed the representation of man as player upon the stage. And when the spell is cast and recognition realized, the morals and ethics of natural man fall to the side of what the syndicate gives license for as the re-presentation of man as a doctor, lawyer, professional, and so-called “master”. Presto! With an imaginary corporate costume change the man becomes an agent of government controlled by the syndicate through the “degree of crime” diploma bestowed. His or her actions become those of an enchanted puppet, doing the bidding of those who pull his or her fictional strings and pay pensions, while the illusion of living in the limelight corrupts and defects. And through this re-presentation of man as a spellbound victim of the degree scheme, the most unconscionable accomplishments against man and nature can be accomplished under the doctrine of the syndicate’s occult and magical spell.

ENCHANTMENT (n.) – c.1300, “act of magic or witchcraft; use of magic; magic power,” from Old French encantementmagical spell; song, concert, chorus,” from enchanterbewitch, charm,” from Latin incantareenchant, cast a (magic) spell upon,” from in- “upon, into” (see in- (2)) + cantareto sing” (see chant (v.)). Figurative sense of “allurement” is from 1670s. Compare Old English galdorsong,” also “spell, enchantment,” from galanto sing,” which also is the source of the second element in nightingale.

FASCINATE (v.) – 1590s, “bewitch, enchant,” from Middle French fasciner (14c.), from Latin fascinatus, past participle of fascinarebewitch, enchant, fascinate,” from fascinusspell, witchcraft,” of uncertain origin. Possibly from Greek baskanosbewitcher, sorcerer,” with form influenced by Latin farispeak” (see fame (n.)). To fascinate is to bring under a spell, as by the power of the eye; to enchant and to charm are to bring under a spell by some more subtle and mysterious power. [Century Dictionary]. The Greek word might be from a Thracian equivalent of Greek phaskeinto say;” compare also enchant, and German besprechento charm,” from sprechento speak.” Earliest used of witches and of serpents, who were said to be able to cast a spell by a look that rendered one unable to move or resist. Sense of “delight, attract” is first recorded 1815. Related: Fascinated; fascinating.

INCANTATION (n.) – late 14c., from Old French incantacionspell, exorcism” (13c.), from Latin incantationem (nominative incantatio) “art of enchanting,” noun of action from past participle stem of incantarebewitch, charm,” literally “sing spells” (see enchantment).

MANTRA (n.) – 1808, “that part of the Vedas which contains hymns,” from Sanskrit mantrassacred message or text, charm, spell, counsel,” literally “instrument of thought,” related to manyatethinks,” from PIE root *men-to think” (see mind (n.)). Sense of “special word used for meditation” is first recorded in English 1956.

CONJURATION (n.) – late 14c., coniuracioun, “conspiracy” (now obsolete), also “a calling upon something supernatural,” from Old French conjuracionspell, incantation, formula used in exorcism,” from Latin coniurationem (nominative coniuratio) “a swearing (oath) together, conspiracy,” noun of action from coniurare (see conjure).

CONJURE (v.) – late 13c., “command on oath,” from Old French conjurer “invoke, conjure” (12c.), from Latin coniurareto swear together; conspire,” from com-together” (see com-) + iurareto swear” (see jury (n.)). Magical sense is c.1300, for “constraining by spella demon to do one’s bidding. Related: Conjured; conjuring. Phrase conjure upcause to appear in the mind” (as if by magic) attested from 1580s.

CHARM (v.) – c.1300, “to recite or cast a magic spell,” from Old French charmer (13c.) “to enchant, to fill (someone) with desire (for something); to protect, cure, treat; to maltreat, harm,” from Late Latin carminare, from Latin carmen (see charm (n.)). In Old French used alike of magical and non-magical activity. In English, “to win over by treating pleasingly, delight” from mid-15c. Related: Charmed; charming. Charmed (short for I am charmed) as a conventional reply to a greeting or meeting is attested by 1825.

–=–

“I pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America…” is one quite familiar enchantment perpetrated upon youngsters in all grades of education, creating the religiously patriotic doctrine of unthinking yet unwavering support of said state and nation – a necessity for the syndication of education and its design of pedagogy. This pledge (oath) is even invoked as a spell in the name of God, which fascinates even the most staunch of self-proclaimed atheists. The language of education is the lore of the syndicate, harvesting and training young minds into a delightfully rendered incapacity to think and feel anything that would disrupt the spelled-out doctrine of the syndicate.

LORE (n.) – Old English larlearning, what is taught, knowledge, science, doctrine, art of teaching,” from Proto-Germanic *laizo (Old Saxon lera, Old Frisian lare, Middle Dutch lere, Dutch leer, Old High German lera, German Lehreteaching, precept, doctrine“), from PIE *leis- (1) “track, furrow” (see learn).

FOLKLORE (n.) – From 1846, coined by antiquarian William J. Thoms (1803-1885) as an Anglo-Saxonism (replacing popular antiquities) and first published in the “Athenaeum” of Aug. 22, 1846, from folk + lore. Old English folclar meant “homily.”  This word revived folk in a modern sense of “of the common people, whose culture is handed down orally,” and opened up a flood of compound formations, as in folk art (1892), folk-hero (1874), folk-medicine (1877), folk-tale/folk tale (1850; Old English folctalu meant “genealogy“), folk-song (1847), folk singer (1876), folk-dance (1877).

MYTHOLOGICAL (adj.) – From the 1610s, from Late Latin mythologicus, from Greek mythologikosversed in legendary lore,” from mythologia (see mythology). Related: Mythologically.

MYTH (n.) – In 1830, from French Mythe (1818) and directly from Modern Latin mythus, from Greek mythosspeech, thought, story, myth, anything delivered by word of mouth,” of unknown origin. Myths are “stories about divine beings, generally arranged in a coherent system; they are revered as true and sacred; they are endorsed by rulers and priests; and closely linked to religion. Once this link is broken, and the actors in the story are not regarded as gods but as human heroes, giants or fairies, it is no longer a myth but a folktale. Where the central actor is divine but the story is trivial … the result is religious legend, not myth.” [J. Simpson & S. Roud, "Dictionary of English Folklore," Oxford, 2000, p.254]. General sense of “untrue story, rumor” is from 1840.

MYTHIC (adj.) – From the 1660s, from Late Latin mythicuslegendary,” from Greek mythikos, from mythos (see myth).

MYTHOPOEIC (adj.) – “pertaining to the creation of myths,” 1846, from Greek mytho-, comb. form of mythos (see myth) + poieinto make, create” (see poet).

MYTHOLOGY (n.) – In early 15c., “exposition of myths,” from Middle French mythologie and directly from Late Latin mythologia, from Greek mythologialegendary lore, a telling of mythic legends; a legend, story, tale,” from mythosmyth” (of unknown origin) + -logy “study.” Meaning “a body of myths” first recorded 1781.

–=–

One might call the “student body” a “body of myths”, as they are literally engaged in the study (-logy) of modern myths (mythos).

Each individually titled character in American history, from presidents portrayed as fabled legends instead of frail old men, to philanthropists who steal from the poor only to partially give back to the poor in order to maintain the” welfare system”, are granted this modern mythological stature in the government’s educational lore called “textbooks”. For only from within the syndicate of the controllers of education is the lore chosen to be prescribed upon its studious victims. Thus, the purely patriotic (religious) myth of the “founding fathers” were born; known not as the masonic secret society it was but as the romanticized good guys that created this nation through a compact of indebtedness (constitution).

This doctrine is necessary to keep generation after generation as worshipers of their fathers; a fallacious title placed on a dark history in order to hide the true nature of the centralized syndicate that was berthed by those masonic founders. This historical lie is ingrained into the population thanks to government-required education. It is the institution of learned ignorance.

LEARN (v.) – Old English leornianto get knowledge, be cultivated, study, read, think about,” from Proto-Germanic *liznojan (cognates: Old Frisian lernia, Middle Dutch leeren, Dutch leren, Old High German lernen, German lernento learn,” Gothic laisI know“), with a base sense of “to follow or find the track,” from PIE *leis- (1) “track, furrow.” Related to German Gleis “track,” and to Old English læst “sole of the foot” (see last (n.)). The transitive sense (He learned me how to read), now vulgar, was acceptable from c.1200 until early 19c., from Old English læranto teach” (cognates: Dutch leren, German lehrento teach,” literally “to make known;” see lore), and is preserved in past participle adjective learned “having knowledge gained by study.” Related: Learning.

TEACH (v.) – Old English tæcan (past tense tæhte, past participle tæht) “to show, point out, declare, demonstrate,” also “to give instruction, train, assign, direct; warn; persuade,” from Proto-Germanic *taikijanto show” (cognates: Old High German zihan, German zeihento accuse,” Gothic ga-teihanto announce“), from PIE *deik- “to show, point out” (see diction). Related to Old English tacen, tacnsign, mark” (see token). Related: Taught; teaching. The usual sense of Old English tæcan was “show, declare, warn, persuade” (compare German zeigento show,” from the same root); while the Old English word for “to teach, instruct, guide” was more commonly læran, source of modern learn and lore.

BAD-MOUTH (v.) – “abuse someone verbally,” 1941, probably ultimately from noun phrase bad mouth (1835), in Black English, “a curse, spell,” translating an idiom found in African and West Indian languages. Related: Bad-mouthed; bad-mouthing.

SKILLED – (adj.) 1550s, past participle adjective from skill (v.) “to have personal and practical knowledge” (c.1200), from Old Norse skiljaseparate, part, divide; break off, break up; part company, take leave; discern, distinguish; understand, find out; decide, settle,” from the source of skill (n.).

–=–

Teaching particular skills as subjects has the design of separation, where deep knowledge is hidden in light of a particular subject matter. In this way, highly-skilled professionals are extremely low-skilled in everything else, and so never learn past what subject they are educated in. This creates specialists, which are perhaps the worst kind of advocate. For a specialist practices only his or her specialty, remaining purposefully blind to all other avenues of knowledge even when it co-relates to that specialty. In truth, knowledge knows no boundaries or subjection (subjects). But the best way to control a person is to limit their perspective, like placing blinders upon a horse.

Even physical education, hard work, and sleep for the common animals is part of the spell curriculum in school, where students can be recessed from mental education only to be breathed, slogged, and then napped:

BREATHE (n.) – c.1600, “a living creature, one who breathes,” agent noun from breathe. Meaning “spell of exercise to stimulate breathing” is from 1836; that of “a rest to recover breath” is from 1901.

SLOG (n.) – 1846, “a hard hit,” from slog (v.). Sense of “spell of hard work” is from 1888.

NAP (n.) – “short spell of sleep,” c.1300, from nap (v.). With take (v.) from c.1400.

–=–

Later in life or in adolescence, other profitable spells can be cast in the form of addiction or pointless habit to support the redundant commerce of the corporate state and syndicate:

SMOKE (n.2) – “cigarette,” slang, 1882, from smoke (n.1). Also “opium” (1884). Meaning “a spell of smoking tobacco” is recorded from 1835.

WORKOUT (n.) – 1909, “boxing bout for training,” from work (v.) + out (adv.). General sense of “spell of strenuous physical exercise” is attested by 1922. Verbal phrase work outsolve” (a problem, etc.) is from 1848. Sense of “succeed” attested by 1909.

–=–

Perhaps you will study and learn the magic of being a pharmacist… or perhaps a pharmaceutical advocate and expert witness?

PHARMACY (n.) – From late 14c., “a medicine,” from Old French farmaciea purgative” (13c.), from Medieval Latin pharmacia, from Greek pharmakeiause of drugs, medicines, potions, or spells; poisoning, witchcraft; remedy, cure,” from pharmakeus (fem. pharmakis) “preparer of drugs, poisoner, sorcorer” from pharmakondrug, poison, philter, charm, spell, enchantment.” Meaning “use or administration of drugs” is attested from c.1400; that of “place where drugs are prepared and dispensed” is first recorded 1833. The ph- was restored 16c. in French, 17c. in English (see ph).

PUNDIT (n.) -  From the 1670s, “learned Hindu,” especially one versed in Sanskrit lore, from Hindi payndita learned man, master, teacher,” from Sanskrit payndita-sa learned man, scholar,” of uncertain origin. Broader application in English is first recorded 1816. Related: Punditry.

CABBALA (n.) – From the 1520s, from Medieval Latin cabbala, from Mishnaic Hebrew qabbalahreception, received lore, tradition,” especially “tradition of mystical interpretation of the Old Testament,” from qibbelto receive, admit, accept.” Compare Arabic qabalahe received, accepted.”

Or perhaps you may be a student of war and occupation under the Leiber Code, taking a career in the military and attending an academy for the purposes of receiving the ultimate credential – a license to kill!!!

CADET (n.) – c.1610, “younger son or brother,” from French cadetmilitary student officer,” noun use of adjective, “younger” (15c.), from Gascon capdet “captain, chief, youth of a noble family,” from Late Latin capitellum, literally “little chief,” hence, “inferior head of a family,” diminutive of Latin caput “head” (see capitulum). “The eldest son being regarded as the first head of the family, the second son the cadet, or little head” [Kitchin].  Apparently younger sons from Gascon noble families were sent to French court to serve as officers, which gave the word its military meaning. In English, the meaning “gentleman entering the military as a profession” is from 1650s, and that of “student at a military college” is from 1775.

–=–

Lost in this sense of unfounded superiority and honor, Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language explains that the truth about career military men and women is far less noble or honorable when put into simplistic terms of art:

SOLDIER, noun soljur. [from Latin solidus, a piece of money, the pay of a soldier ] 1. A man engaged in military service; one whose occupation is military; a man enlisted for service in an army; a private, or noe in the ranks. There ought to be some time for sober reflection between the life of a soldier and his death. 2. A man enrolled for service, when on duty or embodied for military discipline; a private; as a militia soldier 3. Emphatically, a brave warrior; a man of military experience and skill, or a man of distinguished valor. In this sense, an officer of any grade may be denominated a soldier.

MER’CENARY, adjective [Latin mercenarius, from merces, reward, wages, mercor, to guy.] 1. Venal; that may be hired; actuated by the hope of reward; moved by the love of money; as a mercenary prince or judge. 2. Hired; purchased by money; as mercenary services; mercenary soldiers. 3. Sold for money; as mercenary blood. 4. Greedy of gain; mean; selfish; as a mercenary disposition. 5. Contracted from motives of gain; as a mercenary marriage. (noun) One who is hired; a soldier that is hired into foreign service; a hireling.

VE’NAL - adjective [Latin venalis, from venco, to be sold.] 1. Mercenary; prostitute; that may be bought or obtained for money or other valuable consideration; as a venal muse; venal services. 2. That may be sold; set to sale; as, all offices are venal in a corrupt government. 3. Purchased; as a venal vote.

PROS’TITUTE, verb transitive [Latin prostituo; pro and statuo, to set.] 1. To offer freely to a lewd use, or to indiscriminate lewdness. 2. To give up to any vile or infamous purpose; to devote to any thing base; to sell to wickedness; as, to prostitute talents to the propagation of infidel principles, to prostitute the press to the publication of blasphemy. 3. To offer or expose upon vile terms or to unworthy persons. – (adjective) Openly devoted to lewdness; sold to wickedness or to infamous purposes. Made bold by want and prostitute for bread. – (noun) 1. A base hireling; a mercenary; one who offers himself to infamous employments for hire.

MILI’TIA, noun [Latin from miles, a soldier; Gr. war, to fight, combat, contention. The primary sense of fighting is to strive, struggle, drive, or to strike, to beat, Eng. moil, Latin molior; Heb. to labor or toil.] The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.

–=–

The difference between a militia man and a military person should be clear at this point. For whom could be more an advocate (whore) of the syndicate than those who would kill others for profit on its behalf and in its name? Murder, even by any other name, is the primary degree of crime bestowed upon these mercenaries. A career soldier is not honorable. And so the artifice term of art by the name of “honor” is instilled into these mercenaries; a false religious belief that their actions are not merely for personal gain with the end of spreading the syndicate’s world monopolies by their boots, bullets, and bombs.

The horrific truth is that soldiers and police are hired to protect government and the syndicate from the people – to keep the people in their place as subjects and dependents.

Where is our militia to protect us from them?

–=–
Conclusion
–=–

The education of human animals is again not to offer self-actualizing wisdom or knowledge, but to instead create a class of persons that will not question the authority of the syndicate, its rules, and most importantly its opinions. The arrogance of those who wear this tempered status upon their lapel and hang their diplomas on their office wall is only a sign of how controllable that person is and how little it takes for him or her to sell their soul to the syndicate. Doctors peddle the syndicate’s drugs. Nurses peddle the syndicate’s vaccines. Attorneys peddle the syndicate’s statutes. Judges peddle the syndicates opinion’s. Teachers and professors peddle the syndicates history. And accountants peddle the syndicates double-books.

During the learning-to-labor process of education, as we work to achieve the proper level of control-ability (brain washing), we are allotted each semester what is called progress reports.

PROGRESS (n.) – From late 14c., “a going on, action of walking forward,” from Old French progres (Modern French progrès), from Latin progressusa going forward,” from past participle of progredi (see progression). In early use in English especially “a state journey by royalty.” Figurative sense of “growth, development, advancement to higher stages” is from c.1600. To be in progress “underway” is attested by 1849. Progress report attested by 1865.

PROGRESS (v.) – 1590s in the literal sense; c.1600 in the figurative sense, from progress (n.). OED says the verb was obsolete in English 18c. but was reformed or retained in America and subsequently long regarded in Britain as an Americanism. Related: Progressed; progressing.

PROGRESSIVE (adj.) – c.1600, “characterized by advancement” (in action, character, etc.), from progress (n.) + -ive, or else from French progressif, from past participle stem of Latin progredi. Of taxation, from 1889; of jazz, from 1947. Meaning “characterized by striving for change and innovation, avant-garde, liberal” is from 1908. In the socio-political sense “favoring reform; radically liberal,” it emerged in various British contexts from the 1880s; in the U.S. it was active as a movement in the 1890s and a generation thereafter, the name being taken again from time to time, most recently by some more liberal Democrats and other social activists, by c.2000. The noun in the sense “one who favors social and political change in the name of progress” is first attested 1865 (originally in Christianity). Earlier in a like sense were progressionist (1849, adjective; 1884, noun), progressist (1848). Related: Progressively; progressiveness.

–=–

To put this into perspective, it needs to be said here that at some point the idea of progression (progressiveness) with no means to an end is a dangerous calamity being sold to each new generation, with the purposeful intent to strain the ability of future generations to keep and cherish the values, ethics, and morals of their forefathers. How can a society be in a permanent state of progress and change? If progress is perpetual, then where does progress end? What is the purpose of a political foundation if not to prevent such oxymoronic political thought? This concept of unlimited or unending progress means that any ethical code or limits due to scriptural or other historical and sacred ethics and values attained by each advancement of progression will also necessarily need to be changed to fit the new progress and the people’s opinion of that progress. In this way the idea of liberalism being “one who favors social and political change in the name of progress” does not make sense as a permanent state of thought, but instead necessarily requires at some point in time that one’s liberal political stance must reverse itself when such progressive ideas have been met in one’s lifetime. Thus a political conservative must be created out of the satiated liberal who has attained his limited sensibility of what progress is in his lifetime based on defeating his own fathers morals, ethics, and values.

If progress is never-ending and seeks no limit, so too must be the degradation of all that is sacred and ethical.

For example, the medical practice of cloning has now jumped from of the pages of science fiction’s apocalyptic warnings into the hands of the industrialized syndicalists of the medical and scientific “progress” machine. It’s moral implications of yesterday must therefore also be progressed in the minds and beliefs of the new generations of mankind, or else such progress is just not possible as a publicly acceptable entity. Since there is no end to the  liberal (progressive) possibilities regarding progress, both in mind and in reality, we have just opened a perpetual paradox that includes ultimately such concepts as the opening of Pandora’s Box just to scientifically prove what is inside. All of this is ironically based upon the newer generations being “educated” with progressive ideals, which necessarily must go against the old ideals in order to have progress from them. The education syndicate is teaching ever more liberal progressive sentiments to every new generation. Eventually those ideals that seemed progressive as a student become reality in the life of the “graduated” student in his or her chosen career, essentially creating generational morals and ethics that can only be described as temporary in nature. And at some time in his or her life, that former student of education will ultimately become conservative (a waning to conserve) of his or her once liberal ideals, for they eventually will come to fruition in the progression of that lifetime. This is the way of unhindered progress. This is how the antiquated notion of evil is being effectually bred into cultural society through the washing of young brains with “education” at an ever quickening pace. The young animals are being corralled, conditioned, and credentialed as with the brand of a farmer upon his cattle. And the older, more refined, already credentialed and experienced former liberal-turned-conservative animals are too vested in this ever-progressing machine to stand up for their more mature values, for they will be retiring soon and bestowed with fat pensions for which making a risky stand this late in life is said to be left to the younger generations. So there is no one experienced left to make a stand, except for the un-credentialed, un-enfranchised, un-respected men like myself, whom reside outside of the box looking in while warning those inside that the seems of the box are about to break.

But alas, with no credentials, who will listen to the likes of me? The disenfranchised? The impoverished? The critical patients? Before they can curtail the progression that will make their life’s work obsolete, the elder conservatives can only watch helplessly as their modernly established and decaying ethics and their now conservative values crumble under progress’s charge, and a new generation takes over while the older ones sell out to progress for the sake of old-age insurance and monthly pension stipends.

In the end, we don’t ever beat them, we cooperatively join them against our best interest – in the interest of our wallets.

And the steamroller ride into the progressive unknown continues as loosely scheduled, with no schedule at all, no end, and with no inhibitions or limits. We progress purely in the name of progress, for progress’ sake, with the goal of unrepentant progress. For we do not teach our children well, and in our stead allow government to do it for us, selling our responsibility for the chance to have taxpayer funded daycare that will ensure a “common core” of progressively educated fools enjoying an educated and managed autistic epsilon workforce.

The children are being taught that their parents are way too conservative to be a part of their generation’s new progressiveness – same as the old progressiveness – just like the last generation and the ones before it and forward in perpetuity. And they are given the tools of fallacy and idealism – of progress without meaning or logical reasoning – to defeat our warnings and loving advice. It is a fitting revenge to pay us back for our own similar learned behavior towards our parents in our own liberal childhoods.

And most importantly, the media is right there to support the progression of insanity, changing subtly the meanings of words like liberal and conservative with each new election cycle, ensuring the generational gap called “progress”.

So are you educated?

Do you claim your degree (of crime) in the name of syndicalist progress?

Is your precious diploma in a frame upon your office wall?

Are your children’s progress reports hanging under magnets upon the fridge?

Are you your own worst nightmare, or are you allowing the syndicate to turn your own child into that?

–=–
The Syndicate In Action
–=–

Listed below are some of my own research projects delving into the designs and methods of the syndicate.

My research lecture (video) on Common Core, Globalization, and Agenda 21 (highly recommended):

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/12/23/common-core-agenda-21-and-global-governance/

On the origins and purpose of Common Core:

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/core-making-children-stupider-around-the-world/

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/core-our-common-enemy/

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/united-states-and-its-military-now-rotten-to-the-core/

On Social Security – now in over 130 nations! The mark of the beasts.

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/social-security-the-international-mark-of-the-beast/

On Geo-Engineering now being taught as normal in schools:

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/05/11/degrees-in-geo-engineering-and-sustainable-development/

On the financial side, the CAFR is everything, its rules created by private associations (many links inside):

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/cafr-school-week-on-the-corporation-nation-radio/

.

Again, applying your own experiences in confronting this syndicate to the above information should clarify many things.

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Thursday, November 6th, 2014

Stop The Religion Of The Fed


–=–

–=–

I remember many years ago when I sent an email to James Corbett at the Corbett Report in Japan asking him for advice on how… well, how to become more like himself! I had respect and still do for Mr. Corbett’s apparently open-mindedness and willingness to report independently the news around the world despite what the popular opinion might be. His emailed response was in hind sight a perfectly reasonable and genuine one, short and to the point, which was to advise me to simply keep on doing what I was currently doing.

And I did…

Today, in appreciation of that advice, I wish to respectfully and publicly criticize Mr. Corbett’s grammar, logic, and rhetoric when it comes to the Federal Reserve System. Logic of course is simply another word for dialectic, and apparently the common but fallacious dialectic that the Fed is a completely private banking system separate from government is prominent in James’s grammar. This is of course understandable to an extent, considering that this appeal to popular opinion permeates the alternative consciousness while amazingly not a shred of evidence supports it. And without doing the proper due diligence, pain, and suffering of countless hours of research and contemplation, it would be much easier to just go with the flow and call the Fed the enemy, while submitting to the notion that the poor little legislature has no power whatsoever over the actions of the Fed…

I can certainly attest to this notion of the power of popular belief, for when I began showing on my blog and speaking out about the primary sources that state that the Fed was certainly in no way separated from the government or completely “private” in the way that was being portrayed, I was personally attacked for my efforts. Not with fact, but with fallacious rhetoric.

But, as James suggested, I should simply keep doing what I was doing. And so I tarried through the ad hominem attacks and kept on researching and writing.

I then came out against the false Libertarian hero of the alternative media and movement, Dr. Ron Paul, showing again through only primary sources that this false prophet was not to be trusted. I went through Paul’s “End The Fed Bill” as well as his so-called “Audit The Fed Bill” and showed them to be complete frauds and completely against the rhetoric of the End the Fed crowd in that, quite logically, (1) If government (congress) can vote to end the Fed, then logically the Fed necessarily must be a part of the government, which of course created it in the first place. And (2) the audit the fed bill does nothing to actually create a new audit of the Fed or to reveal anything that can’t already be found in the CAFR audit. For the bill only modifies one of the current audits – the audits that supposedly don’t exist in the first place. This was getting ridiculous!

And so I attempted to present these facts by asking why everyone is fallaciously yelling “Audit The Fed” when it is already audited, even while that this fact is clearly stated within Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill and showing that all these audits are accessible on the Fed’s own website. More attacks!

Next, I attempted to ask Ron Paul why he never talked about the actual auditing system of government, the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) system, for which the Federal Reserve was required to fulfill its obligation to. I blogged that Ron Paul “fans” need to tell Mr. Paul to not only talk openly about the CAFR (complete audit) of the Fed but to post it on his website so that his “fans” can see that the Fed is already audited and has been since its inception.

And my demands fell on deaf ears…

Instead, I received more fallacious ad hominem attacks, still insisting that the Fed is not audited, that it is completely independent with no strings attached, and that Ron Paul was somehow the savior Christ incarnate.

I quickly figured out that I wasn’t simply up against sheer ignorance, I was up against an institution of purposefully prescribed ignorance, complete with T-shirts, bumper stickers, talking points, sales and marketing tools, and of course Ron Paul’s book sales and propaganda team. For it was much easier to blame the Fed than to admit to ourselves that we have allowed our government to become a monopoly – government as banker extraordinaire – and that men like Ron Paul are a part of that syndicate. The truther/patriot mentality would not allow proper grammar into the fold, and therefore the illogical dialectic had evolved into a sheer propaganda nightmare of epic proportions.

Yet all this time the real audit of the Fed laid in wait for its chance in the sun… and still does.

And that seems to be where it lays today, as easily accessible as ever and just a click away from realization – 500 pages of shear fact that dispels every single patriot myth alive today. But those who deal in disinformation have built an empire upon keeping the facts hidden in lieu of fallacy, and so the T-shirt and book sales keep on truckin’ while the entire world economy suffers due to a government agency that pretends to be non-governmental with the blessings of government.

But, as they say, the proof is in the pudding. And so in taking with the advice of Mr. James Corbett, I am keeping on with my efforts and thus presenting the plain proof here today, with all due respect to James, for I still think he is one of the best reporters out there. But even the best can believe in unprovable lies sometimes, especially when they are spouted around like religion and protected by grammar-less protectorates and paid shills, garnering applause and false praise at their very mention. If there is one thing about James, it is that he often goes against the norm.

I choose to believe that James is simply ignorant of the facts, that he is still able to change his mind when those primary source facts are presented to him, and that he is not so vested in the audit the Fed lie that he is still willing to publicly retract the lie and stand in truth with me, for the benefit of all. After all, it was his advice and encouragement that lead me to this point of exposing the lie.

First, we must examine the words spoken by Mr. Corbett in his recent podcast.

 

The rhetorical false dialectic ad populum made here by Mr. Corbett, promoting the institution of ignorance, goes like this:

“And for of those who continue to puppet the Fed’s own line that, “well, we already audit ourselves, it’s ok,” ah, they should be aware of 31 U.S. Code Section 714 sub-paragraph B, which lays out all of the exemptions by which, ah, the Federal Reserve does not have to be audited for transactions with central banks or foreign governments, transactions, ah, involving anything to do with monetary policy decisions including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations, the don’t aud- they are not audited for transactions made under the direction of the FOMC (Federal Open MarketCommittee), and they are not audited for communication among members of the board or employees of the Federal Reserve System. So, again, there’s all sorts of exemptions that this au- Audit The Fed ah- bill would- would eliminate, and it would also make sure that the results of the audit were made available to congress. So, those are significant steps.This is not an insignificant bill. It’s not an insignificant thing. It’s only a tiny baby step towards the way of dismantling and tearing apart the Federal Reserve beast, but it is progress of a sort, and it does let us get our foot in the door to get people aware of that bigger picture. So for people who are interested in that, and have people in their lives who still don’t understand the Federal Reserve, or why it should be opposed, may I humbly suggest my own documentary, “Century of Enslavement: History of the Federal Reserve,” to get people aware of the nature of this beast and why and how it must be dismantled.”

–=–

Now, in correction of these many fallacious comments, I wish to do the service of dispelling them with the primary sources and logical rhetoric based on those sources (proper grammar that is) while showing how James Corbett is so easily misled by the dialectical that has been set up to purposefully push him and other well-intended folks into that irrational thought process. And so let’s break down each logical fallacy as we break down each erroneous statement above.

I wish to disclaim here once again that I have the full respect and admiration for Mr. Corbett and that this is in no way intended to disparage his name or reputation for otherwise wonderful insight and reporting. But I will say that the facts provided here demand a retraction and restatement of the facts surrounding the Federal Reserve System to his “fans” so that, in the future, the correct course of action may be taken and so that ridiculous bills like that of Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill don’t continue to fool the masses into pointless distraction. As I have learned along the way, one must be responsible with their opinions, and I only respect those who may change their opinion even when they are invested in the lie with documentaries and past statements. The ego has no place in a movement designated with the word truth. And to forgive is divine…

–=–
The Reality
–=–

I have come to the conclusion after so many years of attempting disclosure of the facts that comprehension is not possible because of the religious-like faith and belief that even the most staunch activists have in their government. This seemingly unavoidable conditioning is ensured via the “waking up” process, which unerringly leads to shock jocks and disinfo agents selling the story. That is to say that there is a firm belief that the government and its creation, the Federal Reserve Board and System, are actually competing against each other; that government is somehow just another victim of the Federal Reserve. This holy misunderstanding creates the foundation for the dialectic (logic) which leads to false rhetoric and mythos about the Fed. And so we must be clear as we delve into reality that there is no real competition here and that government is all one entity, including it’s many “independent agencies”.

One of the most important Maxim’s of law is simply that the creator controls.

When applied to the Federal Reserve System, we can simply read the Federal Reserve Act (primary source) and come to no other conclusion than that the Federal Reserve Board and system was indeed created by Congress. Thus, it is patently incorrect to state that the Federal reserve is independent or separate from government, without first stating that such forms (titles) of independence and separation are only what Congress (the creator) allows in its statutes. Under no circumstances does the Fed act “outside of the law”, for in law the creator always controls.

Inversely, there stems confusion by the fact that the Federal Reserve Board is allowed by its creator to make its own rules.

Our Maxim’s of law also state that a fiction of law can make no law. In other words, the law-maker (congress) creates fictions of law, which in turn being creations (fictions) of law, have no power to make laws themselves. This is the role of the Federal Reserve.

–=–

“There is no fiction without law”

“Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.”

–=–

Bouvier’s 1856 Dictionary of Law defines what a Fiction Of Law is:

FICTION OF LAW - The assumption that a certain thing is true, and which gives to a person or thing, a quality which is not natural to it, and establishes, consequently, a certain disposition, which, without the fiction, would be repugnant to reason and to truth. It is an order of things which does not exist, but which the law prescribe; or authorizes. It differs from presumption, because it establishes as true, something which is false; whereas presumption supplies the proof of something true…The law never feigns what is impossible – fictum est id quod factum non est sed fieri potuit. Fiction is like art; it imitates nature, but never disfigures it it aids truth, but it ought never to destroy it. It may well suppose that what was possible, but which is not, exists; but it will never feign that what was impossible, actually is. Fictions were invented by the Roman praetors, who, not possessing the power to abrogate the law, were nevertheless willing to derogate from it, under the pretense of doing equity. Fiction is the resource of weakness, which, in order to obtain its object, assumes as a fact, what is known to be contrary to truth: when the legislator desires to accomplish his object, he need not feign, he commands. Fictions of law owe their origin to the legislative usurpations of the bench. 4. It is said that every fiction must be framed according to the rules of law, and that every legal fiction must have equity for its object. To prevent, their evil effects, they are not allowed to be carried further than the reasons which introduced them necessarily require. The law abounds in fictions

–=–

The Federal Reserve is nothing more or less than a fiction of law – an association of persons incorporated within the law to act under the law. It deals in mostly imaginary currency (non-paper or coin) called credit, in a purely imaginary fictional realm. It is the banker in a pretend monopoly game. It is the creator of currency, which it thus controls via the powers and laws granted by Congress and the very limited independence that congress allows one of its own created corporations.

This independence is no different than the independence bestowed by the creator congress to the board of the Postal Service, the board of Social Security Administration (investment insurance scheme), or any other board of any other corporation or institution created by congress. They are all creatures of law, allowed to make their own rules to govern themselves in the absence of daily oversight by congress itself. It’s really quite simple and logical. Yet we are not bothered by the independence of say the the Post Office, while at the same time we would not expect to see a member of congress behind each Post Office desk in-taking letters and packages.

Why not? Stamps are also considered money, are they not?

According to its own data, The USPS employed 626,764 workers (as of January 2014) and operated 211,654 vehicles in 2013. So how do we think that the Post Office would exist without a certain bit of political independence from Congress?

There can’t be a congressman posted at every post office in America now can there?

This word independence has been tweaked and twisted by authors and radio shock jocks so as to mean something other than what it actually does in politics (fiction). But everything Congress creates is created with independence. And honestly unless this is the case, Congress would have no time to do anything but run its own creation.

From WhiteHouse.Gov we read:

“There are hundreds of federal agencies and commissions charged with handling such responsibilities as managing America’s space program, protecting its forests, and gathering intelligence. For a full listing of Federal Agencies, Departments, and Commissions, visit USA.gov.”

And from that link on USA.gov we read:

“The Federal Reserve is the central bank of the United States. It formulates and administers credit and monetary policy.”

The word of, in law, means “belonging to”. The popular or common concept of independence does not refer to ownership, only to operation.

The word policy is not law. Webster’s 1828 defines policy as “In common usage, the art, prudence or wisdom of individuals in the management of their private or social concerns… Stratagem; cunning; dexterity of management… Art, prudence, wisdom or dexterity in the management of public affairs; applied to persons governing. The word policy is used also for the writing which insures against other events, as well as against loss of property.”

Policies are simply the internal rules of the agency, not the laws of the United States. Only the legislature can create laws, and those laws govern the fictions created within, like the Federal Reserve System and Board. But the board is allowed to make some rules governing its institution, since congress cannot babysit every one of its created agencies. I’m sorry to say that there is nothing more to the word independence than that, and that there is really no conspiracy here at all, just normal governance through the creation of independent agencies of government to manage the affairs of government. So stop blaming the agencies of government for government’s actions. The creator controls!!!

Listed under that heading “independent agencies of government” is all of these agencies of government allowed to act independently under their boards and commissions, including the “Federal Reserve System”. And it gives the website (http://www.federalreserve.gov/) for more information, which is where the Federal Reserve CAFR and other audits are housed for public utilization.

To give you an idea of just how many independent agencies of government there are, here is just a partial selection of the listings starting with only the letter F. Notice that no special place is given to the Federal Reserve System, for it is simply just another of hundreds of associations that Congress creates to manage the affairs of the United States Corporation. Clicking on any of these independent agencies of government brings you to its prospective website, including the Federal Reserve.

–=–

Now, do you honestly take issue with this perfectly logical and reasonable list of independent agencies? Do you honestly think that the Congress with its 538 or so members could possibly run all of these agencies from the halls of congress? Is there a reason that you don’t hold up a sign, for instance, that says END THE FTA?

Understandably, the concept of ending what is the 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto – “Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and exclusive monopoly” – is a perfectly reasonable endeavor for a people that can only be described today as debt slaves to that system. However, while callously parading around such a notion in felt tip pen and cardboard, the thought of a replacement never seems to cause concern to most armchair activists. For the Fed is just part of the government, remember. So while the Fed system and banks might disappear, the central government remains perfectly intact, and still holds patent on the monopoly money. And the government has instituted all 10 planks of the communist manifesto by law, not just this one. And the other 9 planks don’t need the Federal Reserve to exist!

In fact, it is my own speculation that the collapse of the Federal Reserve would lead to one and only one thing – takeover by the world bank via loans and collateralization – which in my opinion is the goal of the government-bankers who run the Fed in the first place. Let the people believe they have defeated a small subsection of evil within the greater unseen evil by ending the Fed, and then watch helplessly as the United States is handed over to the United Nations and World Bank like every other nation, creating the ultimate manifestation of a world central bank; a bail-out like no other. But that’s merely my own opinion.

Back to the facts…

I present this information here for only one purpose, which is to show the reader that the conspiracy is not the independent agency, but the controller of that agency. For the agency has no power without its mother corporation. By promoting the patriot myth that these entities are separate in any other way than operationally creates a false dialectic that they are also in conflict or competition with each other. And in the stage-play of congressional hearings and meetings, we watch as this notion is played out for the benefit of the masses. But indeed, all they are doing is playing the parts assigned to them as agents (actors).

And here is the most important thing to contemplate…

The only reason that the chairman of the Federal Reserve can tell Congress “no” to the requests for information by Congress while in session is because the Congress voted on a bill to allow that power to the chairman.

These are nothing more than actors; agents of the government. By creating the appearance of competition and the tying of hands the illusion is set to make the audience believe the fictional tale being presented. Good guy vs. bad guy. Left vs. right. Democrat vs.Republican. House vs. Senate. Congress vs. Fed.

Its the classic rhetoric of organized crime. Many fingers of the same hand pretending to be different and opposing one another, all the while controlled by the same hand.

Ironically, if anything, the bill introduced by Ron Paul entitled “End The Fed”  stands as a very clear acknowledgement that Congress can end the fed (its own creation) at any time it wishes, through a simple vote. This is because of the fact that it is a federal agency of congress, and is its master no matter how much independence is bestowed upon it by its creator. And yet this simple logic is not acknowledged for some reason when speaking of the independence concept. But it shows that Congress the creator has ultimate power over what it created, including the invoking of the Fed’s immediate demise at the stroke of a pen. After all, the Fed is just a fiction of law, and therefore has no standing against law. This elegant truth stands as a perfect example of how a false dialectic (logic) has been built not from proper grammar, but from sheer word-of-mouth nonsense; usually from those selling products, storable food, gold and silver, and other commodities while using this fictional tale of independence and competition as its backbone of fear.

Well I have nothing to sell… And as history shows, it is usually the retail outfitters that supply goods and services that make out like bandits, not those searchers of the thing coveted or the cowards of the thing feared, and not the gold-diggers and hoarders of those goods. Strange, unreasonable, fear-based commerce indeed…

–=–
Breaking Down The Fallacies
–=–

Let us break down the fallacious statement by Mr. Corbett, piece by piece, by offering the opposing factual and primary information as its counter.

To start, let me provide you here with the primary resources that I referred to above, including the very long, full audit of the Federal Reserve called the Annual Report of the Board of Governors, otherwise known as the CAFR, as well as that of the individual banks – the audit of the Federal Reserve System and Banks:

From the Fed Board’s Website:

CAFR Annual Reports for the Board and the Individual Federal Reserve banks:

Federal Reserve Board CAFR (back to 1995) –> http://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/annual-report/default.htm

CAFR’s for individual banks –> http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_fedfinancials.htm

New York Fed Bank CAFR –> http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/annualreports.html

Quarterly Reports on Balance Sheets –> http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/quarterly-balance-sheet-developments-report.htm

For our purposes, we will use the most recent CAFR for fiscal year (fy) 2013.

You may also view my previous research articles here, thoroughly exposing this fraud, and presenting any facts not re-presented herein:

The Incontrovertible Conundrum Of Dr. Ron Paul –> http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/the-incontrovertible-conundrum-of-dr-ron-paul/

Today’s Creatures From Jekyll Island –> http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/todays-creatures-from-jekyll-island/

–=–

And so that there is no confusion here, the above links are for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which is the full audit of the Fed. This is not to be confused with the completely separate, purposefully incomplete and misleading GAO audit of the Comptroller General of the United States, which is the only subject of the Audit the Fed bills from Ron Paul and the current version spoken about above by Mr. Corbett. These two audits are completely different and separate from each other. They should not ever be confused as being the same audit report, except by the fact that both are requirements of the creator (Congress) and its prescribed laws. It is this false notion that is at the heart of the confusion. The Fed has no choice but to comply with those laws because it is a creation of that Congress and subservient to it.

Unfortunately, part of Mr. Corbett’s dialectic as presented is that the audit produced by Title 31, Section 714 is the only audit available, or at least the only one to take into consideration. Both of these notions are false. For the CAFR is just as available to the public as it is to Congress, and it has nothing to do wit Title 31, Section 714. The reality is that Congress, including former congressman Ron Paul and his son, purposefully ignore and remain silent about the full audit of the Fed – the CAFR. If I can link it to you here, do you honestly think it’s that hard to find by the Congress itself, who requires the Fed to create the CAFR under its own laws BUT NEVER SPEAKS OF IT IN CONGRESSIONAL SESSION?

As far as the actual act in question presented within the Audit The Fed bill(s), it only refers to the other incomplete audit of the GAO and not the CAFR. In regards to this seemingly strange notion, please understand that Congress passed this restrictive act – Title 31, Section 714 – the subject of the entirety of the “Audit The Fed” bill(s) – in the first place, in order to restrict itself!!! In other words, Congress itself limited the audit ability of the Comptroller General as it is reported to Congress. The average person reading this most likely thinks that the Federal Reserve is a rogue agency that refuses by its own will to allow its transactions listed within Title 31, Section 714 to be audited. But this is a congressional act! The Fed is simply obeying the law set out by congress when in high Hollywood fashion it refuses the information that Congress asks for. Congress already knows that the Fed will refuse it before it asks, because congress wrote the law that requires the Fed to with-hold that same information in the first place. This is a Hollywood production you fools!

To make this ever more clear, the audit is only done in the first place because it is required by congress. The Ron Paul campaign and Audit The Fed bill(s) only served to change a rule that Congress – not the Federal Reserve or the Comptroller General – already voted into law in 1978 – called the Federal Banking Agency Audit Act (TITLE 31, Section 714). The Fed has nothing to do with this fact and has no authority whatsoever to change or deny this law. In other words, it is Congress itself [the government corporation] that is currently keeping this information off of the Comptroller General’s audit to itself, and thus out of the realm of public or legislative disclosure within public sessions of congress. Understand this, and you understand controlled opposition politics and how the Untied States legislature runs as nothing but a Hollywood production and consensus gaining company.

Now I’m willing to bet that James Corbett has not read the very subject of his rhetoric, the comptroller’s audit itself. He certainly has not read or at least comprehended the Federal Reserve Act and the laws that very clearly require the audits. And finally, it is painfully obvious that Mr. Corbett has not even looked at the index of the CAFR report, since it shows each thing not allowed in the Comptroller’s audit to be audited in the CAFR.

Firstly, he states that the Fed “audits ourselves”, referring to myself apparently as a “puppet”. Big mistake, dude!

Here we go…

#1 The auditing process of the Fed works the same way as any other auditing process works in any other government or business. The Fed creates its financial statements, called the CAFR or annual report, and then and only then does an independent auditing firm get hired to audit the financial statements themselves. Thus, to call the unaudited financial statements an audit is not technically correct, and is just another misunderstanding by the patriot folks who do not actually read the audited reports. We call the finished product post-audit an audit report simply because the financial reports are thus audited. So this first fallacy is absolutely wrong, for the Fed statements are audited by an outside company.

In it’s letter of transmittal, the CAFR states:

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, D.C.
May 2013

The Speaker of the House of Representatives:

Pursuant to the requirements of section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act, I am pleased to submit the ninety-ninth
annual report of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

This report covers operations of the Board during calendar year 2012.

Sincerely,
Ben Bernanke
Chairman

–=–

Notice that this report is presented to the Speaker of the House! Are you really going to tell me now that the Congress doesn’t have access to the CAFR (annual report)? This is not the same audited report as the GOA audit, obviously, as we are reading here from page 4 (of the pdf) of the CAFR itself – not the GAO audit.

Also notice that this report is required by congress, the creator of the Federal Reserve Act as amended. This is not a choice!

We read in the CAFR:

Federal Reserve System Audits

The Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve Banks, and the Federal Reserve System as a whole are all subject to several levels of audit and review. The Board’s financial statements are audited annually by an outside auditor retained by the Board’s Office of Inspector General. The outside auditor also tests the Board’s compliance with certain laws and regulations affecting those statements.

The Reserve Banks’ financial statements are audited annually by an independent outside auditor retained by the Board of Governors. In addition, the Reserve Banks are subject to annual examination by the Board. As discussed in the chapter “Federal Reserve Banks,” the Board’s examination includes a wide range of ongoing oversight activities conducted on site and off site by staff of the Board’s Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems.

The OIG also conducts audits, reviews, and investigations relating to the Board’s programs and operations as well as to Board functions delegated to the Reserve Banks, and Federal Reserve operations are also subject to review by the Government Accountability Office.

–=–

And on page 99 we read:

The Federal Reserve Board engaged Deloitte & Touche LLP (D&T) to audit the 2012 combined and individual financial statements of the Reserve Banks and those of the consolidated VIEs.15 In 2012, D&T also conducted audits of internal controls over financial reporting for each of the Reserve Banks,Maiden Lane LLC,Maiden Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC. Fees for D&T’s services totaled $7 million, of which $1 million was for the audits of the consolidated VIEs. To ensure auditor independence, the Board requires that D&T be independent in all matters relating to the audits. Specifically, D&T may not perform services for the Reserve Banks or others that would place it in a position of auditing its own work, making management decisions on behalf of the Reserve Banks, or in any other way impairing its audit independence. In 2012, the Banks did not engage D&T for any non-audit services. One Bank leases office space to D&T.”

–=–

And we can finally read about the very different and separate GAO audit on page 409, to see the origin and novelty of that separate and unrelated audit report:

Government Accountability Office Reviews

The Federal Banking Agency Audit Act (Pub. L. No. 95–320) authorizes the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to audit certain aspects of Federal Reserve System operations. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act) directs GAO to conduct additional audits with respect to these operations. Many of these Dodd-Frank-mandated audits have now been completed, but not all. In addition, the GAO has initiated its own review of financial regulators’ progress on implementing Dodd-Frank Act regulations.

In 2012, the GAO completed 21 projects that involved the Federal Reserve (table 1). Ten projects remained open as of December 31, 2012 (table 2). Some of the major projects that GAO has undertaken include a study of the Independent Foreclosure Review process; a review of Board and Reserve Bank offices of Minority and Women Inclusion and the diversity of the Federal Reserve System workforce; a review of enforcement of the Service members Civil Relief Act; and several studies on the costs and benefits associated with the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act.

–=–

In point of fact, the GAO audit that is referred to in the Audit The Fed bills was never intended to be a full audit of the Fed system in the first place. It is a specific targeted audit of the items and transactions that the GAO is specifically looking for. It does not need a full audit for its purposes. If it did, then it would simply use the CAFR and save its auditors the trouble and expense of re-auditing the same exact thing over again. The GAO even refers readers to the CAFR (annual report) for the full financial audits!

In reference to these bills that would lift the constraints placed on the GAO’s audit authority over the Federal Reserve, Angell stated:

“The benefits, if any, of broadening the GAO’s authority into the areas of monetary policy and transactions with foreign official entities would be small.  With regard to purely financial audits, the Federal Reserve Act already requires that the Board conduct an annual financial examination of each Reserve Bank (CAFR)… The process of conducting financial audits is reviewed by a public accounting firm to confirm that the methods and techniques being employed are effective and that the program follows generally accepted auditing standards… Further, a private accounting firm audits the Board’s balance sheet… Finally, and more broadly, the Congress has, in effect, mandated its own review of monetary policy by requiring semiannual reports to Congress on monetary policy under the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978… In addition, there is a vast and continuously updated body of literature and expert evaluation of U.S. monetary policy.  In this environment, the contribution that a GAO audit would make to the active public discussion of the conduct of monetary policy is not likely to outweigh the disadvantages of expanding GAO audit authority in this area.”

–=–

Mr. Corbett and so many others are simply victims of a slight of hand game. The various audits that take place within the Fed are stated clearly here, and yet the “Audit The Fed” bills always only refer to the single audit of the GAO, which is the least important audit of all with respect to the budgetary purposes of congress. For the GAO audit is meant to be specialized and incomplete by design!!!

No wonder the bill is not being passed. It’s just a redundancy of the CAFR! And again, the conspiracy is not within the Fed, it’s the government itself, and it will continue to play out these stage shows as long as you fall for their tricks. In fact, it would not surprise me at all if congress passes the bill simply to fool the End and Audit the Fed movement into believing they had a small victory. And the shock jocks and bumper-sticker suppliers will tout it as a big win, though nothing at all will become of it. Why? Because the audit is already there, and the congress ignores it already. LOL!

And so we now know that an audit is in fact done very much independently from the fed, making the true puppets in reality James Corbett and all others who puppet the notion that the Fed “audits itself”. This simply is not true, as shown above. The Fed does not audit itself any more than any other corporation out there. Instead it follows the legal process of auditing under the laws of the United States. I’m not here to suggest that this is a good or bad system, just to show how it works. Fallacy negated.

We also now know that the bill in question would not create any new audit, and would only serve to modify the already existing GAO audit, which in reality is just a redundancy, since the House receives a copy of the fully audited CAFR from the Board of Directors of the Fed – not by choice but by law of congress. And in that CAFR we can un-miraculously find everything missing from the GAO audit report…

One down, many fallacies to go…

#2 Mr. Corbett expresses the fact that as per U.S. Code Title 31, Section 714, and I quote “the Federal Reserve does not have to be audited for transactions with central banks or foreign governments, transactions, ah, involving anything to do with monetary policy decisions including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations, they don’t aud- they are not audited for transactions made under the direction of the FOMC (Federal Open Market Committee), and they are not audited for communication among members of the board or employees of the Federal Reserve System.”

But is this an accurate statement?

No. Not at all. Unless you do as he has and limit yourself to just this one restricted report from the GAO, thus creating your own fallacious dialectic. And why not, that’s the point isn’t it? To obfuscate and restrict the information presented in the real audit (CAFR) so that the people don’t know about it? The CAFR is certainly inclusive of this information, and the above items and transactions are indeed audited within.

I suppose we could say he is correct that this information is kept out of just one of the redundant audits, the one referred to as the GOA audit. But the whole point I am trying to make here is that this is mere subterfuge, because the congress receives the CAFR too, making the GAO audit report absolutely pointless… unless it’s designed and used to confuse and obfuscate, which it has done to Mr. Corbett!

So let’s go to the index and Table of Contents and see what we can find in the 2013 CAFR that is apparently not allowed to be audited…

How about the open market committees? Apparently in the mythos these meetings are secret, according to the ridiculous Audit the Fed bill, and thus must be voted upon to be included in the GAO audit report.

But is this correct? Does this mean that the information is not audited elsewhere?

Did anyone bother to check the full audit, the CAFR, for any of this information? Surely it can’t be in there, can it?

Oh, wait a minute. In the table of contents its states the following:

Minutes of Federal Open Market Committee Meetings….. 123

Meeting Held on January 24–25, 2012 ………………………. 124
Meeting Held on March 13, 2012 ………………………………. 156
Meeting Held on April 24–25, 2012 …………………………… 166
Meeting Held on June 19–20, 2012 ……………………………. 191
Meeting Held on July 31–August 1, 2012 ……………………. 216
Meeting Held on September 12–13, 2012 ……………………. 227
Meeting Held on October 23–24, 2012 ……………………….. 251
Meeting Held on December 11–12, 2012 …………………….. 261

–=–

Well then… the actual minutes of the actual meetings of the Open Market Committee, presented right in the audited financial statements of government? It can’t be, according to the myth. But there it is. Why? Because the CAFR is the full audit of the Federal Reserve, and it is not restricted by Title 31, Section 714.

Just because Congress chooses to ignore the CAFR doesn’t mean it does not exist. And that goes for you too, Mr. Corbett.

So what else can we find in the CAFR that is “not allowed to be audited” in the GAO audit?

Let’s go to the index and see, shall we?

Here’s a list of things apparently “not allowed to be audited” right here, somehow audited in the CAFR:

Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). See also: Open market operations

Annual organizational matters, 125–127
Appropriate monetary policy, 144, 150, 152, 181, 186,
188, 209, 213, 244, 248, 278, 281
Authorizations, 127–130
Consensus forecast, 225–226, 237
Domestic policy directives, 5–6
Forecast uncertainty, 155, 190, 215, 250, 285
Foreign currency operations and directives, 128–138
Meeting minutes, 123–285
Members, 416
Monetary policy strategies and communications, 44–48, 164–165, 167, 217
Notation votes, 140, 165, 176, 202, 226, 237, 260, 271
Officers, 416
Policy actions, 44–48, 138–140, 162–164, 173–176, 199–202, 223–225, 235–237, 258–260, 269–271
Policy compliance, 100
Responsibilities, 349–350
Statement on longer-run goals and strategy, 7
Summary of Economic Projections, 6, 47–48, 123, 140–154, 177–189, 203–214, 237–249, 272–284
System Open Market Account, 127–128, 150, 157, 167, 217–218, 253

Open market operations. See also Federal Open Market Committee

Open Market – Open Market Desk, 16–17, 41 ,46
Volume of transactions, 289–290

Securities credit, 74

Monetary policy

Alternative scenarios, 167
Communications, 164–165
Developments and outlook, 44–48
Expectations, 22–26, 38–39
Overview, 5–6, 180
Statement on longer-run goals and strategy, 7, 131–132

Monetary policy reports to Congress

February 2013, 5–26
July 2012, 27–48

Foreign currency operations:

Authorization, 128 –130
Denominated assets, 355–356, 372–374
Directives, 130
Liquidity swaps, 357, 374
Procedural instructions, 130–138
Foreign economies, 133–134, 158, 169, 195–196
etc…

Deposits

Depository institutions, 19–20, 359
Federal Reserve Banks, 295, 300–301, 359
Treasury, 359

Depository institutions

Deposits, 19–20, 359
Discount rates, 121–122
Reserve requirements, 292
Reserves of, 294–295, 298–301

Federal Reserve Banks

Accounting policies, 350–363
Assessments, 361
Assets and liabilities, 19–20, 294–295, 298–299
Audits, 319–341
Automated clearinghouse (ACH) services, 93
Balance sheets, 19–20, 41–42, 132, 150, 157, 167, 193,
217–218, 228, 253, 262
Branches, 293, 420–433
Capital, 348, 359
Cash-management services, 97
Collection services, 96–97
Commercial check collection service, 92–93
Commitments and contingencies, 395–396
Condition statements, 304–308, 346
Conferences, 434–435
Credit outstanding, 294–295, 298–301
Currency and coin operations and developments, 94–95
Deposits, 295, 359
Directors, 420–431
Economic growth projections, 141
Equipment and software, 393–395
Examinations, 53, 99–100
Fair value, 361–362
FedLine access to services, 98
Fedwire Funds Service, 93
Fedwire Securities Service, 93–94
Financial statements, 105–110, 342–407
Fiscal agency services, 95–97
Float, 94
Government depository services, 95–97
Income and expenses, 95, 100–101, 309–314, 347, 360, 405, 407
Information technology, 98–99
Interest rates on depository institutions loans, 292
Intraday credit, 97–98
Investments of consolidated VIEs, 102
Lending, 101–102
Loans and other credit extensions, 294, 296–297, 298–299, 363–368
National Settlement Service, 93
Notes outstanding, 20, 358–359
Officers, 316, 432–433
Open market transactions, 289–290
Operations, volume of, 315
Operations and services, 349–350
Payments services, 96
Postemployment benefits, 404
Postretirement benefits, 402–404
Premises, 102–104, 317, 358, 393–395
Priced services, 91–94
Recovery of direct and indirect costs, 91–92
Restructuring charges, 362, 405–406
Retail securities programs, 96
Retirement plans, 396–401
Risk management, 94
Salaries of officers and employees, 316 442 99th Annual Report | 2012
Securities holdings, 100–101, 291, 298–
Structure, 349
Supervisory information technology, 69
System OpenMarket Account holdings and loans, 100–102, 368–377
Taxes, 362
Thrift plans, 401
Treasury securities services, 95–96
Wholesale securities programs, 96

Foreign Assets Control, Office of (OFAC), 66

Foreign banks. See also specific banks by name

Deposits, 295, 300–301
Prudential standards, 50, 51, 111–112
Supervision of, 57–58
U.S. activities, 51, 58, 73

Foreign currency operations

Authorization, 128–130
Denominated assets, 355–356, 372–374
Directives, 130
Liquidity swaps, 357, 374
Procedural instructions, 130–138

Credit (i.e. Discount Window Operations)

Availability, 11–12, 14, 18, 159, 170, 172–173, 195, 231
Consumer credit, 31, 255, 265
Corporate, 14
Primary, 121–122
Risk, 383–385
Index 439
Seasonal, 121–122
Secondary, 121–122

–=–

Now, I could go on listing more and more detail from the index of the Fed audit, but I have provided here a place in the CAFR for each item that is supposedly “not allowed to be audited”. And so please do your due diligence, Mr. Corbett and all others, and stop fallaciously naming those of us who actually do the research and read the primary data as the “puppets”, when in fact the puppet is you, parroting patriot mythology based on no solid evidence at all.

As for your other demeaning rhetoric to “those who do not understand the nature of the beast that is the Federal Reserve System” like you supposedly do, I can only say that your ego is apparent here when in plain fact it should not be. Perhaps you need to be reminded about the difference between reporting “news” and having proper grammar to feed your rhetorical reporting?

In the end, Mr. Corbett, I have written this piece not to offend you (as you did generally to me with your referential parrot comment), or to harm your reputation. On the contrary, I am writing to you today in order that you would save your reputation with me, an admirer, who has caught you here with no clothes. I’m not only asking for but demanding a retraction of what I believe to be your own fallacious incomprehension of the Federal Reserve and its place among government and UNDER government control. I recognize you here as the victim, not the criminal, or so I hope. Just as I too fell for the lies and mythology without checking the cold hard facts not so long ago, I redeemed myself and suffered the blow-back by truly speaking to the reality of the Fed. But I took your advice after so many attacks and kept on doing what I was doing, and ironically our roads have diverged on this subject due to your advice and my diligent research. My goal is to inform our fellow man that this Fed story is a fraud, and at best a distraction into the notion of a false competitive dialectic by a completely corrupt government legislature. I simply ask that you be a beacon of what the so-called truth movement is supposed to be about by doing the right thing and exposing not only the truth about the Fed and these bogus bills, but to also confirm to your “fans” the very difficult admission that even the best and most respected of us can be fooled into a false dialectic – false logic and rhetoric caused by very well laid misinformation and false grammar. In short, I only ask that you tell the people, unlike Ron Paul has, that the CAFR is the audit of the Fed and of every other independent agency of government in existence (fiction), and to quit promoting the notion that an audit does not exist. For clearly the CAFR as revealed above and in my own research is the audit you seek. And this new bill will not change anything about this reality. And the audit of the Fed will continue as it always has…

With great respect and position comes great responsibility.

So do the right thing.

Retract immediately (or immediately after proper action in studying the grammar provided here) the fallacious rhetoric you have helped to spread about the Fed as I have, and encourage others to do the same. Be what you are meant to be, James.

Or… Somehow prove me to be in error! For the burden of proof has been fulfilled on my end in triplicate here today.

Signed, with all due respect,

The Anti-Puppet.

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, October 27th, 2014

133 Nations Join Against United States Government


I felt that this was worth repeating…

The Hegelian dialectic is alive and at play here. Notice the heavy Agenda 21 language here referring to Sustainable Development and the stripping of wealth from Americans. Of course, the thought that 133 nations around the world are plotting against the United States and calling it the center of the New World Order should be alarming in and of itself. It certainly is not an untrue accusation by any means. But this does, or at least should, mean that the United States can absolutely not participate in the United Nations any longer. To do so would literally and absolutely be treason.

But when playing the dialectic, these little nuances go unnoticed as the people do nothing, because the end game is as it always has been, a new WORLD order through the United Nations, with the United States as merely a member in a larger nation called the United Nations…

…under an international banking system called the World Bank (http://www.worldbank.org/),

…under the mark of the U.N. World Social Security program called the International Social Security Association (ISSA) (http://www.issa.int/),

…stemming from the International Labour Organization (ILO) (http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/lang–en/index.htm),

…overseen and improved by the World Congress (https://www.safety2014germany.com/),

…with the General Assembly forcing Obamacare for the entire marked world population (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/12/united-nations-universal-healthcare/),

…and so on and so forth.

This is a repost from “Whiteout Press” – link – http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/2014/q2/133-g77-nations-vow-destroy-americas-new-world-order/

UPDATE: Germany just signed on, making the count 134!!!

–=–

June 17, 2014

133 G77 Nations vow to destroy America’s New World Order

 

June 17, 2014. Bolivia. The American and European media are doing everything they can to black this news out. But it’s not going to stay a secret for long. As of this weekend, there’s a new New World Order on Earth and its enemy is the United States, the EU, the UN Security Council and the world’s shadow government led by the IMF and WTO. This new alliance of poor countries wouldn’t be much of a threat, except it includes two-thirds of the world’s nations including China and India.

–=–

UN Sec. Gen. Ban Ki-moon (center) with host country
Bolivia’s President Evo Morales and 133 other world leaders
this weekend. Image courtesy of the UN.

–=–

It’s a sad day for the American people when their government and state-sponsored news industry blacks out such an important news story. Americans actually have to rely on outlets like the Havana Times in Cuba, The Times of India, and United Nations press releases. There’s a reason this news is being censored across the West. And it’s only the latest global news story over the past two weeks on this subject blacked out from the American people.  Read on to find out why.

End of the New World Order

When the richest and most powerful nations on Earth formed the G7, G8, G20 and the like, they united to combine their dominance over the remaining 175 countries that make up humanity. And for decades, the wealthiest 20 countries led by the US have gotten exponentially more wealthy at the expense of the poorest 175 nations, who in turn have gotten even poorer. That’s been the result of the West’s ‘New World Order’, led mainly by self-appointed global governments like the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.

133 of those 175 countries have had enough of the New World Order’s rigged global financial system based in New York and London. They’ve seen their economies destroyed by corrupt corporations and global governments that create a cycle of never-ending dependence and poverty.  They’ve seen their nations’ vast resources stolen by multinational corporations. Their agriculture landscape has been poisoned. Their citizens bankrupted by the IMF and Wall Street. And their democratically elected leaders overthrown by foreign agents from countries like the US.

They’ve had enough of the New World Order. And an alliance of 133 countries, two-thirds of the nations on Earth, signed an agreement this weekend to end the West’s New World Order and replace it with a fair, honest and legitimate World Order – one that lets everyone participate and benefit, not just the super rich.

The Next World Order

The organization is officially called the ‘Group of 77 and China’, but the alliance actually includes 133 nations. Showing just how much influence they have, their meeting this weekend in Bolivia was opened with a keynote speech by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. In the audience were over 30 heads of state from around the world and official representatives from over 100 more governments. Also illustrating the organization’s growing influence, China isn’t even a member of the G77, but insisted on participating anyway in a show of unity with the globe’s Next World Order.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro participated, telling the gathered nations they had to unite to, “fight for fair and sustainable economic growth and for a new world economic order.” Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa went one step further, telling the gathered national leaders and representatives, “Only when we are united across Latin America and united around the world will we be able to make our voice heard and change an international order that is not just unfair, it is immoral.”

A report from AFP on Yahoo News, about the only report found in Western media, describes how Cuban President Raul Castro also participated, but reserved his comments for a call to help their top ally Venezuela. Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and a number of South American countries have insisted they are currently under attack by the United States and the CIA, who they insist are desperately trying to orchestrate coups to overthrow their democratically elected, pro-socialist governments the same way they are accused of doing in the Ukraine recently.

Iran and the UN

An announcement published by the United Nations this weekend touts UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s enthusiastic participation in the G77 meeting. It discusses how important this massive alliance is to the goals of the UN, particularly with regard to reversing the world’s growing economic inequality among nations. Moon and the UN are also sponsoring a separate but related meeting of nations in September to draft new climate resolutions to be enacted in 2015.

The announcement describes a private meeting between the UN Secretary General and Iran’s Vice President, ‘On the margins of today’s summit, Mr. Ban met with the First Vice President of Iran, Eshaq Jahangiri, to discuss development issues, as well as the potential role that Iran could play in restoring stability in Iraq and Syria. The Secretary-General added that he looked forward to Iran’s positive involvement on climate change and said he very much hoped that President Hassan Rouhani would attend the climate summit this September.’ The report also says the two leaders discussed Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the coming July deadline for compliance with past mandates.

Threats of America’s “second Vietnam”

Many of the government leaders in attendance took the opportunity to strike a blow against what they consider to be the biggest enemy of world peace, democracy and economic freedom – the United States. One leader even went as far as calling out President Obama by name and threatening the United States with a second Vietnam.

As reported by the Times of India, the G77 conference’s host this weekend – Bolivian President Evo Morales – threatened the United States and the American President telling the gathered heads of state, “If Mr. Obama keeps assailing the people of Venezuela, I am convinced that, faced with provocation and aggression, Venezuela and Latin America will be a second Vietnam for the United States. Let us defend democracy, natural resources, our sovereignty and our dignity.”

Cuba’s President Raul Castro was possibly the most pointed and focused in his remarks regarding the agenda of the participating countries. As reported by the Havana Times, Castro told the alliance of 133 nations, “It is necessary to demand a new international financial and monetary order and fair commercial conditions for producers and importers from the guardians of capital, centered in the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and from the defenders of neoliberalism grouped in the World Trade Organization, which are attempting to divide us. Only unity will allow us to make our ample majority prevail.”

UN Civil War – dissolving the UN Security Council

One of the more ambitious goals of the G77 and its 133 participating countries is the elimination of the United Nations Security Council. World leaders insist it is little more than a five-nation tyranny over the full UN body. With five permanent members of the UN Security Council having veto power over the rest, UN policies and actions have been dictated by those five countries – US, UK, Russia, France and China. Members of the G77 want the Security Council eliminated so the UN can go back to being a purely democratic body.

The Cuban leader went on to describe a global economic system run by American hypocrisy and financial corruption, “The principles of International Law and the postulates of the New International Economic Order are brazenly violated, concepts that attempt to legalize meddling are imposed, force is used and threats of force are made with impunity, the media are used to promote division.”

Dominoes beginning to fall

This is just the latest organized attack on a global financial system rigged by corrupt governments and the multinational corporations that control them. Just last month, Russia and China signed a long term trade alliance that represents the first major crack in the US Dollar bubble. The two countries agreed to stop using US Dollars in their transactions and instead use their own two currencies. The two largest banks from both countries immediately announced they would be dumping the US Dollar as well.

On top of that, the world’s ‘BRIC’ countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – have publicly declared their goal of replacing the corrupted US Dollar with some other global default currency. Now that Russia and China have finally taken actual steps to do that, the remaining two-thirds of the world will most likely begin making preparations to stop using the US Dollar as well. It was only this weekend that 133 of them pledged to do just that.

The scary part for Americans is that both Washington and Wall Street have promised this would never happen, because if it did, it would destroy the US economic system and possibly the US itself. Read the Whiteout Press article, ‘Russia-China Deals move US Dollar closer to Collapse’ for more information.

To view a full list of the 133 nations that make up the G77, visit the Group of 77 website.

–=–

If this doesn’t wake people up, I don’t know what will!!!

The question is, do the 133 nations blame the government…. or the people?

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Sunday, July 27th, 2014

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,411 other followers