Is it at all possible for the government to run out of money?
This seems to be the talking point in the media lately, from the financial cliff to the financial crisis to the debt ceiling. And yet, is any of this even close to a reality?
To comprehend this falsely projected fear campaign, we must first understand the difference between today’s “modern” monetary structure and that of what used to be called the “gold standard” model. (Note: gold not necessary – the “standard” happened to be gold, but could have been seashells, sticks, stones, silver, cadmium, playboy magazines, or any animate or inanimate object with intrinsic “value”).
In the yesteryear of gold-backed currency, the government was restricted in its issuance of currency based upon two things:
1) the amount of gold it had acquired (in ounces) and designated to back each physically printed single denomination of note, and
2) the value of each unit of currency ($1 dollar) assigned as collateral for each ounce of gold in holding based on a stable (unchanging) price of gold as set in statute.
In other words, the government technically could not spend money it did not have. As gold reserves increased, more gold-backed currency could be printed.
This is the only reason that I would ever support a “backed” standard currency, though I do not believe gold is the correct form of collateral for currency – for today’s printed dollars are indeed printed with over 261,000,000 ounces of gold as collateral set at a statutory value of $42.2222 dollars. The only difference is that today’s dollars cannot be traded in for that gold, for today’s dollar is considered a “fiat” currency.
On page 62 of the 2010 Federal Government CAFR, we read:
“Gold is valued at the statutory price of $42.2222 per fine troy ounce. The number of fine troy ounces was 261,498,900 as of September 30, 2010, and 2009. The market value of gold on the London Fixing was $1,307 and $996 per fine troy ounce as of September 30, 2010, and 2009, respectively. Gold totaling $11.1 billion as of September 30, 2010, and 2009, was pledged as collateral for gold certificates issued and authorized to the FRBs by the Secretary of the Treasury.
Page 453 and 490 of the 2009 Annual Financial Report of the Federal Reserve (CAFR) also states that this gold is collateral held against Federal Reserve Notes by government.
You see, even with our current dollar based on but not redeemable in gold, the monetary system is completely whacked! For it is not the gold that makes the monetary system stable and strong, it is the laws, rules, and men in charge of that system – the congress and its organized criminal creation called the Federal Reserve System. Simply placing gold as collateral for a fiat currency does not make a good currency, even if its value is fixed by statutory law, as stated above at $42.2222 per troy ounce.
A commodity that is unstable in its value, especially one that is fixed daily by the London Fixing in the City of London banking collaboration of Rothschild’s and other banks, is not something I would wish to see backing my currency. A foundation must be strong, non-interpretable, it must retain its value, it must not be able to be manipulated by corporations, it must not be used as collateral for other investments, and it must be stable. A commodity with fluctuating value based on some corrupt banker’s whims is not ideal in any way, but especially when the “gold certificates” that represent the physical gold are traded for their market value of over $15oo, despite the fact that the statutory fixed price of that physical gold is only $42 and 2/9 dollars.
The important aspect of this old monetary system was that government was required to collect money and taxes before it could print money or spend those taxes. In other words, government could not create debt today that would be paid by future taxation or revenue, because it was necessary to attach gold to the printed gold or silver certificate (dollar).
But all of this has changed in the last 100 years.
We now live in a monetary system that is based upon debt, despite this wealthy collateral.
Whereas before the currency was created after the acquirement of wealth (taxes), today the currency is created before any wealth is created. So, the government spends money before it actually has it, in a system based on future taxation (debt).
Strangely, this means that government is creating new money into the system that is backed only by the pitiful cooperation of the indebted and ignorant people and all their property before the revenue to pay for that money is ever even conceived. For the taxes that will pay for the monies that are being spent today will not be available until the money created today is spent by government . What is not understood, is that this money is not only created at the point of inception of legislative appropriation and debt, but that the money to pay for that creation of money does not exist until it is first created through appropriation, spent, and then re-collected as taxation for this past spending.
This paradox is the norm in government. The government created debt cannot be paid until the money spent to fund that debt by government is issued and circulated. Spending takes place before taxation happens – which simply means that the taxes used to pay that new debt have not been collected yet! This in turn is referred to as the “national debt”.
Perhaps an easy way of looking at this is to say that if government paid off all of its debt yesterday, then all taxation collected today would be purely a surplus in tax revenue, since today’s taxation would not already be spent as debt on past things. So today’s taxation would be unnecessary, and it would sit in an investment fund or account as unappropriated tax until it was needed in the future. And really this would be the ideal governmental disposition – where congress would not spend taxpayer money until it actually had the money to spend – by collecting that tax before it spent money instead of after.
With a gold-standard currency, new spending was dependent upon the acquiring of taxation before that spending took place.
But today, spending happens before taxation is collected.
If we ponder the meaning of this, it breaks the fallacy that taxation pays for government. For government can at any time spend as much or as little as it wishes by creating more debt. And this means also that government cannot and will not ever run out of money if it wished not to. In other words, there is no fiscal cliff. And the only “debt ceiling” is an imaginary line in the sand that can be crossed by government at any time it votes to.
Of course, this also means that the money created by government is purely fictional. By this I mean that money is created out of nothing by a signed appropriations bill by Congress. To this bill is attached a “promise to pay” on behalf of all citizens as taxpayers. And the debt keeps getting higher and higher and higher…
So is there a limit to this debt that can be created by government?
The answer in truth is no, for the “debt ceiling” is again just an imaginary total that can and has been changed to meet new debt. There is certainly no set in stone limit to how much our irresponsible bureaucracy can spend except the statutory restrictions placed by the very body who is appropriating this new debt to be created.
Imagine if your son or daughter had the power to create his or her allowance money by pre-funding their piggy bank… It would go something like this:
Mom, I’m going to take a blank check out of your checkbook so that you can sign it. I’ll be creating future allowance today of $10,000 for which I pledge your future wage earnings to pay that debt back to yourself. Oh, and I’ll be charging you interest for the privilege of allowing me to screw you over and put you in debt. Love ya!
Is this not what government does by creating new money as debt instead of waiting to spend money it earns as revenue through past and current taxation? Is there some reason that the people seem perfectly OK with this insane allowance given to government at the expense of their livelihood? Can someone tell me why these men and women of Congress with child-like mentalities get away with screwing the collective taxpayer base every year for more and more debt?
Seriously though… if your child is misbehaved and irresponsible, the last thing you should do is give him or her an advance on their future allowance. And yet taxpayers allow trillions of their dollars at a time to be spent without government actually earning that money first. And no, extortion is not what I mean by earn!
The reality is that our fiat currency is not based on anything but the good faith and credit of the United States. Of course this should be translated as the people and their collective property and wealth pledged to back the dollar, no matter how many are printed. And more importantly, the gold that is held as collateral for this currency has nothing to do with the assigned value of each unit of currency. So the value of each dollar is not set, which means that at no time can the value of each dollar actually be defined by the collateral held. For instance, with over 261 million troy ounces of gold held as collateral against the printed Fed Res Notes, $1 dollar may be worth $.20 cents one day and then $.15 cents the next compared to the gold held as collateral, because the gold is not the “standard” by which the dollar is based. And so whether there are billions or trillions or quadrillions of dollars in circulation, there is no tangible thing to base the actual value of each dollar.
Why is this important?
Because there is no real limit as to what can be spent by government. If all the money created by government is purely representative of a single object, no matter how much money is created and circulating, then that money has no real value other than the fact that it is ALL based on one single object – in this case a pile of gold and some other listed things.
What does this mean?
If government can create new money as debt based on future taxation, it can just as easily un-create all of its debt based on any reason it wishes.
Let me explain… Since government is the creator of money, it is also the law and rule maker of that money. As far as money creation and destruction goes, government is as God. When government creates money, at no point does that money ever cease to be the property of government. All dollars are property of the United States Mint and are copyrighted as such. So even if you currently have some dollars in your wallet, you are only in possession of those dollars as a user. You have the privilege of being a user of government property just as you have the privilege of paying that money back in taxation. And if you stop and consider for a moment, you realize that for every dollar printed by government, that dollar by necessity must eventually be paid back to government through taxation to pay for the creation of that dollar. You only have it on loan as an IOU. The “national debt” is just that – all money formally created that must be paid back with interest to the very government who created it – even if that money hasn’t been created yet!
In case you missed the point here, this means that government is in debt to nobody but itself.
Yes, that means that government is borrowing from itself too. It funds its own debt.
Now if I was to borrow money from myself I could do one of two things: I could create a chaotic system of debt and credit to pay myself back the money I owe to myself while charging myself interest that I can probably never pay back in my lifetime, or I can simply forgive myself of that debt that I created in the first place for myself and never go back into debt again… because I have plenty of money to never need to create more debt with what I already gave to myself.
So let’s ask the obvious question: if government defaults on its own self-created debt, how can this possibly harm anyone at all?
Answer: It can’t!
After all, government did not go out and get credit from some other entity in order to create its own money. That’s ridiculous! The maker of money (God) doesn’t need permission to create money, nor does it need to borrow from anyone else to create its own currency. Remember, it owns all currency no matter who is holding it. And it can call in that currency any time it wishes, which is why it can be taken right out of your bank account at any time. Banks are simple whores of the Federal Reserve System, who are allowed to also create government money out of the ether under Federal Reserve rules. This is why banks join the Federal Reserve. For without this privilege of money creation, banks could not make loans. They cannot loan the money in other peoples accounts because that money is a liability to the bank. Banks only risk money that is not their own, and government allows them to do so through the Federal Reserve.
So if government were to write off $7 trillion dollars in public debt tomorrow, as well as to put a halt to the interest and Seigniorage charged on the creation of its own currency, would this in anyway effect “creditors”? Would this act harm any other entities that may be holding the government’s debt?
The answer is a surprising one.
Let’s see who is holding the debt of government…
Listed as the #1 holder of government debt, just as Walter Burien of CAFR1.com has been proclaiming for 20 years… The U.S. Government! Here listed as:
1. Federal Reserve and Intragovernmental Holdings
Total U.S. debt holdings: $6.328 trillion
(From the article)
“That’s right, the biggest single holder of U.S. government debt is the Federal Reserve system. The Fed’s system of banks and other U.S. intragovernmental holdings accounted for a stunning $6.328 trillion in U.S. Treasury debt in Sepetember 2011 (the most recent number available). The amount is an all-time high as the Federal Reserve continues to expand its balance sheet, partially to purchase U.S. government debt securities.
“About a decade ago, the total government holdings were “only” $2.5 trillion.”
.
7. State and Local Governments
U.S. debt holdings: $484.4 billion
(From the article)
“U.S. state and local governments have nearly a half-trillion dollars invested in American debt, according to the Federal Reserve. The level of investment has remained stable since 2006, moving within the range of $484 billion and $576 billion. The current debt holdings, however, represent the lowest aggregate level for state and local governments since December 2005, when they stood at $481.4 billion.”
Oh, so the Federal Reserve is holding the debt of the United States government?
But wait a minute, the Federal Reserve is the United States government!!!
Of course the mythology surrounding the origins and nature of just what the Federal Reserve is has created a fallacy from within the population that the Fed is somehow not a government entity. Of course, this is absolutely absurd when you do just a token bit of research about the Federal Reserve and how it was created. Yet the fallacy persists despite the fact that the Federal Reserve was created by Congress and can at any time be ended by Congress. I have written extensively on this subject, and for those who base their beliefs about the Federal Reserve on what they’ve heard around the way, I suggest you correct your mistake. For government wishes nothing more than for you to think that the Federal Reserve is not part of government, and that government owes the Federal Reserve all this money listed above. This is nothing but slight of hand, proven in triplicate through my previous research (2 links):
Once we understand that the Federal Reserve is just a sub-corporation of the main United States corporation, we understand that government is funding its own debt – meaning that it owes money to nobody but itself – which means it owes money to nobody but uses this scam to fool the people into an illusion of indebtedness.
The creator of money can simply un-create the debt attached to that money; and the only victim would be government itself and its embezzlement scheme to acquire higher and higher tax revenues to pay a debt that for all intents and purposes does not actually exist.
The purpose of this rant is simply to put an end to the fallacy that a government as powerful as ours can possibly be in debt, especially to itself. The power of money creation is both the disease and the cure for this debt issue, and the solution is as simple as writing off that portion of the debt that is self-funded. While we did not cover other debt holders, we must consider that all municipal cities, counties, districts, and states are also all holders of Federal debt. Public pension funds as “institutional holders” of debt are also a large part of this equation, with debt holding in the 100′s of billions. And this leaves a fractionally small portion of debt that is held by foreign governments, most of which are heavily built up by American investments in their infrastructure and manufacturing base.
The reality is that most of this debt can be disappeared as easily as it was created. For most of this debt has never even been represented by physical dollar bills. Most of it is purely a fictional digital entry in some financial database somewhere. A beam of negative energy scaler or a an EMP pulse would easily wipe out all records of these digital transactions just as easily as an action by Congress and the president. (Yes, I’m a Fight Club fan!)
But unfortunately, the reality as well is that the people will continue to pay their taxes to support more and more debt money created by a purposefully irresponsible government. And ironically, they will do so without ever realizing that the money they spend in taxation today will be used to pay for the spending of the past, without any hope for the future.
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Tuesday, April 23, 2013
I often hear complaints from the well-to-do about how their hard-earned taxpayer money is drained from their paychecks so as to pay for the welfare system of government. Ironically, many of these middle and upper middle-class people are on a public pension system of some sort as government workers, from military to police and firefighters, judges to teachers, and mayors to laborers.
This irony stems from the fact that these public pensioners never comprehend that their pensions are in fact set up in the same way as the Federal welfare system. So let’s compare these two investment schemes…
1) Welfare is paid for by Federal and State taxes collected from all taxpayers and placed into an investment fund.
1) Public pensions are partially or wholly paid for by all taxpayers of the State, local, and Federal governments as “matching funds” and placed into an investment fund. Government employers are taxpayer funded, thus “matching funds” is taxpayer money.
2) The people (taxpayers) have no equity in the employer (taxpayer) contributions (taxation) to the Welfare system. That tax money is property in the trust of government.
2) The people (taxpayers) have no equity in the employer (taxpayer) contributions (taxation) to the Public pension system. That tax money is property in the trust of government.
3) Welfare pays benefits to people who qualify for it under certain criteria.
3) Pensions pay benefits to people who qualify for it under certain criteria.
4) Welfare is a trust run by government.
4) Pension funds are a trust run by government.
5) The taxpayers who never claim welfare benefits never get a return on their investment.
5) Taxpayers cannot claim pension benefits and therefore can never get a return on their investment.
6) Taxpayers are funding the benefits paid to welfare recipients with no benefit to themselves.
6) Taxpayers are funding the benefits paid to public pensioners with no benefit to themselves.
7) Welfare benefit recipients contribute their own tax money into the welfare system.
7) Pension benefit recipients contribute their own tax money into the pension system.
8) People who use welfare system benefits are knowingly mooching from the public tax-base.
8) People who use the pension system are either knowingly or unknowingly mooching from the public tax-base.
9) Welfare is an insurance pension investment fund that pays benefits for a certain amount of time for “un-employment”.
9) Pensions are insurance pension investment funds that pay benefits for a certain amount of time for “post-employment”.
10) The welfare system can be shut down and liquidated at any time by its owner, which is government, and pay no future benefits.
10) The pension system can be shut down and liquidated at any time by its owner, which is government, and pay no future benefits.
11) Benefits paid in both systems are a way to collect revenue as “contributions” for government that no longer belongs to the people, which is taken from the entire taxpayer base and invested in stocks, bonds, derivatives, foreign currencies, real estate, commercial paper, toxic debt contracts, mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, and everything else that is ruining the financial structure of the world, its markets, and the livelihood of all the people.
–=–
So what is the difference between the public pension system and the welfare system?
Perhaps the illusion and false-paradigm of integrity is the only thing that comes to mind…
For while welfare recipients (who paid for this insurance through taxation) collect benefits without pride and feel no certainty about their future, public pensioners brag about being on public welfare at the expense of taxpayers and feel justified in their arrogance and future financial security. Ironically, the average pensioner has no idea of his or her disposition of being on welfare at others expense. They believe that just because they themselves paid some of their own money into the pension system (though some do not contribute and these pension schemes are fully funded by taxpayers), this gives them entitlement to receive benefits without even a fleeting consideration that they are actually collecting welfare at their retirement or disability (post-employment).
While welfare recipients get the worst kind of horrific taxpayer-funded health care, pensioners enjoy the benefits and choices of mostly taxpayer funded private insurance-based health care.
While pensioners enjoy buying food, welfare recipients enjoy redeeming food stamps. The difference here is not palpable when considering that both are taxpayer funded and that food stamps represent tax dollars or debt funded by taxpayer debt. Either way you look at it, the taxpayers are feeding both welfare recipients and public pensioners.
All of this pride is based on the illusion that these benefits are based solely on years of personal contributions and savings by pensioners, while not comprehending (or not knowing) that most of their benefits are indeed publicly paid for.
And to be quite frank… I personally have much more resentment that for my whole working life I have been paying for the pensions of government workers while knowing that I will never receive any benefit for doing so, and that at my own retirement I will only have what I saved myself and anything I can scrounge from Social Security. In fact, I really have no problem contributing to the welfare system because some day it might actually save myself, a friend, or a family member from becoming homeless and totally destitute – I may actually receive a benefit from my own tax if I need it. And the fact that complete strangers that would otherwise suffer and starve without this subsistence certainly doesn’t create the same feeling that it does to think of public pensioners living high on the hog after taking early retirement and receiving monthly stipends for life simply for not working as long as all the taxpayers funding that pension fund.
And for those pensioners who just cannot comprehend that what I am saying here is true; that pensioners are welfare receivers based on the collection of taxpayer money, I would like to show you just how much money is spent on the welfare system by all taxpayers and how much is spent on the public pension system by all taxpayers…
I was happy to find that someone else had actually done the research to break down how much taxpayer money is paid for welfare and public pensions by government. Of course, the term “paid for by government” means paid for by taxpayer money. And when this is reported in the financial reports of public pension funds, it is stated as being paid for by “employers” or by the “state”. The employer is government, and again government is funded by taxpayer money. Never forget this, pensioners.
Whenever you see a pie graph that is meant to represent all government spending, you will probably see a graph like the one at US Government Spending or the one at Wikipedia which shows that “Welfare” spending is 12% of the federal budget. The problem with that is that the government has no spending category called “Welfare”. Therefore, what somebody calls “Welfare” is somewhat subjective and undefinable.
The Office of Management and Budget(OMB) does have a spending category called “Income Security”. The two pie graphs I linked to in the introduction just take that entire category and divides it by total spending to get 12%. In 2009 accounts categorized as “income security” accounted for 533$ billion in spending. According to the government printing offices’ historical tables, table 3.2: Oulays by Function and Subfunction, that spending is broken down into 6 distinct subfunctions.
The 3 remaining subfunctions cost a combined 284$ billion dollars, but even that doesn’t tell the whole story. Over the last week I’ve taken a more detailed look at each of these subfunctions to get an idea of how that money is spent. What I found was that even in the remaining subfunctions, Food and Nutrition, Housing Assistance, and Other that not all of that spending was spent on the poor.
When I analyzed the “Other” income security subfunction, I graphed how that money was spent by categorizing that spending into 4 different categories:
Not Directed at Poor\Earned: Welfare not targeted to poor. The poor may use these programs, but just being poor will not qualify you for these programs.
Direct: Welfare that’s Direct money to the poor
In-direct: Money paid to 3rd parties on behalf of the poor
Poor & Middle Class: These are tax rebates that poor and most middle class people qualify for and use.
I would now like to extend that analysis to the entire 533$ billion that the U.S. government spent on “income security”. Here’s how the numbers break down.
(Click chart for Larger Image. See The Numbers for this Chart)
As you can see the vast majority of the money spent in the “Income Security” function of the government is spent on programs not directed at the pooror programs where the income must be earned. If you want to know how I categorized everything, here’s how I did it:
Unemployment and Pensions are classified as not-directed at poor\Earned.
For Food & Nutrition, WIC & SNAP(Food Stamps) are “Direct”, School lunches are “non-direct”, the rest are “not-directed at poor”
For Housing Assistance, I categorized the temporary “new homeowner” credit as “Poor & Middle Class” and the rest as non-direct
For the rest you can read my previous post on how I broke down “Other Income Security“
If you total up the direct and non-direct spending categories which are all the programs that are meant to help the poor, you will see that the federal government only spent 191$ billion on “welfare” for the poor. That would be 5.5% of the unified budget. I counted off-budget programs since the pie graphs in the beginning counted social security and other “off-budget” accounts. If you only want to go with on-budget expenditures it’s 6.4%, still a far cry from the 12% that most internet graphs will show you. Just for fun I decided to graph those numbers. Feel free to copy these graphs to show anyone who thinks we actually spend 12% of the federal budget helping the poor.
Now, this is certainly not a complete picture of the amounts contributed to public pensions.
Cristopher Chantrill states on his website that:
“Government pensions spending started out at the beginning of the 20th century at zero percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It increased very slowly during the first half of the century. It was only in 1931 that government pension expenditure reached 0.12 percent of GDP. By the beginning of World War II pension expenditure had doubled–all the way to 0.22 percent of GDP.
After World War II pension expenditures began to accelerate, reaching 1 percent of GDP by 1953 and doubling to 2.1 percent of GDP by 1958. Pension expenditure reached 3 percent of GDP by 1970 and 4.22 percent by 1974. Pension expenditure breached 5 percent of GDP in 1980.
The ramp-up in pensions expenditure began to moderate after 1980, reaching 5.3 percent of GDP in 1990 and 5.5 percent in 2000. Pension spending breached 6 percent of GDP in the recession year of 2009, hitting 6.56 percent of GDP in that year. Pensions expenditure is expected to stay in the area of 6.6 percent of GDP for the next few years.”
Total Government Spending
in the United States
Federal, State, and Local
Fiscal Year 2013
Government Pensions
$1.1 trillion
Government Health Care
$1.1 trillion
Government Education
$0.8 trillion
National Defense
$0.9 trillion
Government Welfare
$0.6 trillion
All Other Spending
$1.6 trillion
Total Government Spending
$6.2 trillion
Federal Deficit
$1.0 trillion
Again, this is translated as taxpayers from all over the United States are paying taxpayer money to fund pensions.
The GDP for the United States for 2012, according to the IMF, was $15,684,750,000,000 or $15.68 trillion dollars.
At 6.6%, pensions made up approximately $1,035,193,000,000 or $1.035 trillion dollars of taxpayer expenditures to fund pension funds.
So who is on welfare?
Are pensioners 3-4 times more angry with themselves for collecting post-employment benefits than with the poor who collect un-employment benefits? Can it be that this collective delusion by pensioners is self-induced? Are they the first to step up and complain that legal requirements for pre-funding of public pensions is literally driving Cities like Stockton, Ca and so many other governments to declare bankruptcy based on that pre-funding requirement? Does it bother public pension welfare receivers that the United States Post Office has had to borrow money every year to cover this legal requirement of pre-funding pension funds with taxpayer money, and has now reached its debt borrowing limit while Congress sits back and watches it happen without changing the law?
Can it be that pensioners refuse to bite the hand that feeds them because it would mean they would not receive welfare payments for post-employment? And they think welfare recipients and unemployed are the bad guys?
CalPERS responded to false rumors that pensions were funded solely by taxpayers by stating:
Myth: The State of California and taxpayers pay the total cost of public pensions.
January 26, 2011
Fact: Investment earnings pay the majority of the costs of public pensions. For every dollar paid in pensions, 64 cents comes from investments.
Public employees pay for pensions as well. Each month State employees contribute a percentage of their paychecks toward their pension. Through agreements so far, State employees are paying 2-5 percent more out of their paychecks toward pensions for a total of 8-10 percent each month. This has saved California up to $400 million. In addition, more than 175 local governments have decreased pensions for new hires.
In this very clever response, CalPERS has just stated that California taxpayers used to pay $400 million more in taxpayer money than it does today. This is like a store telling you that you just save money on your purchase instead of spending it – the latest selling point of grocery stores. Spending is saving; in true Orwellian style.
Of course, if the over $240 billion that is being held by CalPERS in liquid assets were cashed in (liquidated) today for their market value, this would pay for the total costs of this public pension for the next 10-15 years without ever collecting another employee or taxpayer dollar. And if that money stayed invested, for which the return on that investment is stated above to pay 64% of all pension costs, this public pension would likely last 20-30 years depending on investment return without ever having to collect another dollar from employees or taxpayers (employers). Trust me when I say that employees alone could never have built this fund up to this value without California and Federal taxpayer contributions.
Last year, taxpayers of California paid $7,834,616,000 dollars into the CalPERS fund, while employees paid $3,727,600,000 (according to the 2012FY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for CalPERS, Page 41).
I constantly ask myself why the taxpayers of California – the entire base of taxpaying citizens – would agree to pay so much money for the sole purpose of supporting the lavish retirements of just a small percent of that population? And my only conclusion is that this information is simply not comprehended by the vast majority of people who have no idea that their government is spending their tax money on pension funds for its employees. And this goes for all States and the Federal government, which means all taxpayers in America. Why do you allow this to happen… even as the result of this spending is financially ruining your well-being and creating the need for more taxation that is ultimately being created through DEBT???
At some point, even those benefiting form these public pension funds as welfare recipients must see the folly of this madness. But most fall into temptation and will not be delivered from evil. The haves very seldom give up what they have to the have nots, even to save themselves or to save the very system that makes them the haves.
For government is raiding these public funds as we speak, and placing more indebtedness on the taxpayer base to support this looting for “future pension payments”.
In truth, the Federal Government pays more taxpayer money for public pensions than it does for the National Defense budget. More for pensions than for Education. And a lot less for public welfare than we think to support a whole lot more people that need it.
In conclusion, the difference between welfare and public pensions is just one – everybody pays for welfare and everybody qualifies for it. But while everybody pays for public pensions, only a few qualify to withdraw it at all others expense.
The public pension system is the worst kind of welfare subsistence because it is based on privilege, not need.
So why don’t you public pensioners fund your own damn retirement and quit being such parasites on the taxpayer’s back? Isn’t that what you continuously demand of welfare recipients?
.
–Realitybloger.wordpress.com
–Sunday, April 21, 2013
I realize now that I was guilty of exactly what I blame people for today.
Cognitive Dissonance…
It was a constant mental battle with my ego; an effort to compensate for those scraps of carnal knowledge, like many uncomfortable splinters incrementally digging deeper into my skin, that told me what I was working on and therefore condoning as “just a job” was morally and ethically wrong.
You see, I was a professional Hollywood sound designer – the guy who made war scenes and civil war reenactments sound so incredibly real. I was the guy who used “foley” recordings of squeezed fruit and veggies to produce realistic blood and guts for total aural stimulation in the entertainment experience. I was the guy who made monsters and dragons come to life, designing the roars and squeals that hopefully made the audience recoil with excitement; accepting for just that brief interactive experience the death and dismemberment, murder and rape, torture and sadism that goes into the making of many of Hollywood’s movies and games; Jewish torture porn as I now know it to be called. I knew, for instance, that some of the best screams and squeals of shear terror, pain, and agony emanating out from my massive sound library at Soundelux studios was that of the castration of pigs in slaughter yards. And yet the sincerity of these sounds are what made such evil creatures, created through some sick, twisted, and perverted artist somewhere, come to life and make my audiences skin crawl.
And I quite enjoyed my work. For I was an artist myself, unaware of my own dissonance and denial that what I was doing may very well be harming others and myself.
I had listened to the arguments. I had even considered them briefly; like a starving man considers a day old uneaten hamburger, weighing the dangers and consequences of the very sustenance that would end the pangs of his hunger. But with me it was my ego that was hungry. I strived to be the best at what I did, and received acknowledgements and awards for my work and work ethic. I considered the horror that I was promoting and creating, and my ego only wanted more – more notoriety, more respect, more money, and more credits for my now worthless resume’.
A demon’s hiss? No problem.
The Devil’s vocals? Ok. I can do it.
Zombies, gremlins, dragons, goblins, and just pure evil? Great. Bring it on!!!
One day, as I had increasingly been listening to internet radio and talk shows in my windowless and soundproof studio, I heard an interview with a United States soldier. This young man, barely out of high school, was in charge of flying the drones that were dropping bombs in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and wherever else the United States government asked him to. For him, this was just a job – dropping bombs on men, women, and children. He referred to the flight controls as being very similar to a video game booth. And for some reason, this boy struck a nerve with me.
As he explained the details of each mission, sitting comfortably in an underground bunker with joystick in hand and an approximately three-second delay between the drone camera and his digital reconstruction of that feed thousands of miles away in the deserts of New Mexico, he proceeded to explain that the kill ratio was not very accurate. He explained that for every suspected “terrorist” that he would attempt to kill by dropping bombs from a pilotless drone across the world, the collateral damage was expected and accepted to be around 95% in civilian casualties.
In other words, 95 innocent men, women, and children would needlessly die for every actual target that was hit by these drone attacks.
Perhaps this would have been enough to set things into motion for me; to squash my ego and realize what later became so loud and clear… but there was more to this story.
As this boy soldier, a corporal, went on with his daily routine, he commented that his wife and children also lived on the military base with him. And like any 9-5 job in any corporation in America, this boy went home to his family each night as if all was right in the world; as if what he was doing was perfectly normal.
But it was his final clutches into my ego that were the most haunting…
As a young kid, he continued in that interview, this deliverer of unmanned death and destruction was a video game fanatic. Thus, comparing this weapons and flight simulator to an arcade video game booth was just a forgone conclusion in his head. This was literally just like his favorite games. This really was “Modern Warfare”.
For whatever reason, it was this one event in my short-lived career as a Hollywood sound editor that shattered my ego into many pieces. It made all of those Christian fundamentalist’s and concerned parent’s incessant ranting about violence in video games and movies become a reality. It was right in front of my face; for the first time spoken to me by an eye-witness of his own self-subversion and social media conditioning. Perhaps it was the singularly disturbing lack of empathy in his voice as he referred to flesh and blood people, including children, as targets, assets, and collateral. Or perhaps it was his lack of conscious in the contradiction of his own disposition – coming home to his wife and children after a day of killing real wives and children for a living, without the irony or absolute mental illness of that situation being readily apparent through his confident and militarily trained responses.
This was a turning point in my life – one of those defining moments that either makes or breaks a man; instilling an undoubting and permanent morality that can not be shaken or washed away by the tides of time. It was the destruction of a large chunk of my own cognitive dissonance.
Over the next year or so, I went room to room and asked my fellow and more experienced co-workers if the years of design of demonic images and bloody sound effects had yet created a sense of dread in them. The answers were sporadic, mostly depending upon their age. However, overwhelmingly those answers were of the opinion that with the advent of newer and better technologies to create more terrifying and graphically superior and disgusting monsters, the more the constant visualization of these images were effecting the well-being of these designers. Some wished to quit but had families and so couldn’t. Some prayed every night in the hopes that this would somehow make their involvement in this gross promotion of gore and violence more acceptable to God, for which I was equally disturbed. And yet the youngest of these people; those who had grown up in the modern advanced video game generation, seemed to assess my questions as ridiculous - as if I was one of those crazy fundamentalists or parent groups out there trying to take away their fun. This delicious irony only further solidified my distaste for what I was doing as a job. I was literally helping to disassociate whole generations of children and adults from reality – creating dissonance in promotion of ego, destroying empathy, and causing what would otherwise be shunned as perverse and morally wrong to be accepted as perfectly normal and in fact wonderful.
I was the media. I was the bad guy. And yet, until the end, I could not see this job as anything but cool… with my name 2×10 feet in brightly lit movie credits.
And sadly, when I left, my naturally Jewish boss made no illusions. There were 1,000′s of people out there that wanted my job. And I gave him no delusions that I wanted to come back some day. For I made the conscious decision to quit Hollywood and to move far away. As he was interviewing a young and impressionable kid to take my place, he insincerely wished me luck.
As I finished up with my work on the ultimate zombie-gore-fest entitled “Resident Evil 5″, I vowed to never participate in this type of media again. I quit Hollywood!!!
–=–
I have told this story many times on various radio interviews, attempting to instill in people not only the crisis of conscious that I myself went through, but also the fact that there is life outside of the established guidelines of what is considered “normal”. My job was normal. And yet, normal is a sickening participation in debauchery.
This brings to mind one of my favorite quotes:
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
–Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe–
I believe that no truer words have ever been spoken, than those of this quote. In one complexly simple sentence, this quote defines exactly the truth of this life and this consciousness. And yet everything out there, including my former profession, is designed to disassociate people from that consciousness; to numb the mind and excite the body, and to absolutely adjust whole generations to a profoundly sick society.
Take it from someone who’s been there…
Finally, as you likely did not get the opportunity to hear what I did, I was recently sent this video that has the same type of situation. Here, a group of soldiers shows you the video game booths and their controls for which they use to fly these unmanned drones and kill families in distant foreign lands.
“The U.S. Air Force is in the midst of radical change, now training more drone pilots than fighter pilots.”
This, you see, with the help of the video game, movie, and other digital entertainment media, is now becoming normal. And before you know it, these soldiers will be flying over your home. And somebody in camouflage fatigues will be making the decision for that drone pilot as to wether or not your family is acceptable collateral damage or not while texting his wife to cook a steak that night. Expect to see predictive programming reality television shows about these domestic drones and how normal they are, and more “toys” that can be flown through your so-called “smart-phones” – you know, the surveillance device carried around by most not-so-smart people who have been conditioned to believe that these smart-grid technologies placed into their phones and pads are for fun, entertainment, and for making a simple phone call.
At around 6:30 in this video, we see these military drone pilots acting normally:
“So, I have the opportunity to go to work, fly a mission, ah- no matter where it is, do the job, and then I put on a different hat and I come home to my wife and kids.”
–Unknown soldier in video, coming to a town near you, “no matter where it is”.
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com) –Saturday, January 5th, 2013
So you think you, the People, elected the president of the United States?
–=–
“In reality, when the voters of North Carolina voted this past November, they were actually voting to pick this slate of electors instead of voting directly for the president and the vice-president.”
–Elaine Marshall, Secretary of State of North Carolina,
speaking at the 2012 Electoral College ceremony
–=–
After all of the pomp and circumstance of the 2012 “popular” vote of the “people” of the United States; including the wasted billions upon billions in campaign coverage, donations, PAC’s, Super-PAC’s, advertising, public relations, buttons and brochures, the media coverage of baby kissing, and everything else that went into the carefully planned charade of the fallacious popular election of the president and vice-president of the United States, the president was finally “formally” and indirectly elected by the Electors of the Electoral College on December 17th, 2012.
That’s right, folks. I’m here again to tell you that you “the People” do not elect your president.
This time, however, I’ve got a little help from my good friend the Secretary of State of North Carolina. In the following video coverage, she actually tells the truth: that the majority of United States citizens (people) do not know that the Electors, not the people (voters), elect the president.
It is not as if this is a secret, though it could be called a very open secret per the void of comprehension existing within the country. It’s just that the procedural and true indirect election process is not talked about openly at any other time of the election process. Instead, the popular vote and all that is involved with it takes over the limelight and the media specifically promotes the fallacy that the people have a direct effect on the actual election of the president. This is not the truth, yet it is what most American voters believe. And every four years the question arises amongst the masses – Who are you going to vote for as president of the United States?
Some of those people, whom without reading their constitution or knowing that this 4-year election process is indeed an indirect election without consideration of their individual vote, actually wait over 7 or more hours in line just to cast their popular vote, as is the case in the State of Florida. They truly believe that this sacrifice will actually make a difference in the outcome of the presidential election. And to me, this is such a sad spectacle.
Despite the billions of dollars pumped into the popular election process that is then broadcast on every major news station in the world, we find that comparatively, the electoral college is lucky if it even gets mentioned at all on the main television stations, and is generally barely even broadcast on C-SPAN over a month after the popular election takes place – just enough time for the people to get over their win or loss and stop giving a rat’s ass until the next rigged election.
So un-hyped is the actual election of the president and vice-president each year, that this year apparently C-SPAN felt that the importance of the actual real constitutional election of the president of the United States was just about important enough to be broadcast to the public on C-SPAN’s Channel #3 – not even the main C-SPAN channel.
Here is the C-SPAN website where just two of the actual electoral college elections (happening simultaneously in all 50 States) was broadcast and is available for re-viewing. It states:
WASHINGTON, DC Monday, December 17, 2012
The 538 members of the Electoral College met on Monday in their respective states where they cast their votes for President and Vice President. 270 electoral votes are required to elect the President. C-SPAN coverage included two of these meetings, Ohio and North Carolina.
Last month, President Obama won the popular vote in Ohio, which has 18 electoral votes. Governor Romney won the battleground state of North Carolina, which has 15 electoral votes.
Thankfully we can watch this event on Youtube here for easier reference, thanks to “Voterradio.com”:
Please note that as of December 24th, this video has a total of 31 views. This indeed shows the popularity of the Electoral College and how much it is comprehended by the voting public, especially when comparing the multi-100’s-of-millions of views for a single Lady GaGa video, or if your style is Gundam…
I suggest that, after reading this entire rant, each of you who may be reading this go through this entire video so that you can actually understand how the presidential election works – and comprehend the fact that you do not vote for president in any form of direct election, and that the president is indeed elected by the 538 member Electoral College – and that in reality the office is elected via proxy by the two privately incorporated political parties who submit these electors to the government. In short, the election of the president and vice-president (a separate election process) is conducted by the Republican and Democratic parties, not by the people of the United States.
For your reference, and for those that just don’t seem to have time in their busy days to learn that their country operates as a constitutional fascist oligarchy by indirect election of its C.E.O. under private associations called political parties right under their noses – even as you Rock The Vote every four years – here are a few direct quotes from the CSPAN coverage spoken by the Secretary of State of the great State of North Carolina. Pay close attention, as these quotes tell the story of the whole election process…
–=–
As quoted from the Secretary of the State of North Carolina at the Electoral College ceremony (video above), December 17th, 2012:
“North Carolina did not participate in the very first presidential election because North Carolina did not ratify the constitution until after passage of the Bill of Rights. And only then did North Carolina officially join the Union, approximately 10 months after the election of George Washington.”
“Today, we are gathered, essentially, to certify the will of the people of North Carolina who voted in the presidential election in November of this year.”
“I will note once again that the voters of our state turned out in big numbers… I hope many of those voters have tuned in today to see their– that process reach its completion.”
“As North Carolina becomes more global we are mindful that our impact in the world is significant, as evidenced by the fact that we have so many foreign consuls now in North Carolina. Three of them are here with us today… France…Sweeden… Moldova… we welcome all three of you to this 56th meeting of the North Carolina Electoral College.”
“Now, as we prepare to begin the voting process for the North Carolina Electoral College, I would just like to take a moment to reflect on the importance of this institution. This is the 56th North Carolina Electoral College meeting and it represents a proud history of citizens (electors) peacefully passing on presidential power from one term in office to the next. Today’s activities are a combination of constitutional law, Federal law, and State law.”
“In the end, this (electoral college) system was designed for several reasons (unintelligible) rights. Those reasons included: that the meetings be held throughout the 50 states versus one convention to keep the sites separate; that electors cannot also be powerful public officials; and that every state gets a formally set number of votes in order to give it a vote in the process. That is why today people all across the United States are gathering at State capitals to conclude the 2012 presidential campaign – in a formal sense – and to move us toward the 2013 presidential inauguration in Washington D.C.”
“I am often asked: How does a citizen ever become an elector? Well the process is fairly simple. You must be a citizen who is over 21 years of age and eligible to vote. You also cannot be a Federal office holder, or certain kinds of other public official. Then you offer your name to your political party for consideration. Generally the political parties pick their slate of elector nominees pursuant to party rules at their annual political convention in each election year. Those names are submitted by the respective parties to the office of Secretary of State sometime in the summer, and they are held until the election of November. (Hesitantly) Once– We wait and see, which– candidate has been certified (by the political parties) to us we then call those electors. The elector nominees from the different political parties just simply wait to see who the voters vote for as president and vice-president – which means in reality, when the voters of North Carolina voted this past November, they were actually voting to pick this slate of electors instead of voting directly for the president and the vice-president.”
“As we move to the former meeting of Electors, I would like to introduce our electors to this gathering. The 15 Republican electors were called to Raleigh and have assembled here to cast North Carolina’s 15 electoral votes for president and vice-president. I am honored to introduce these distinguished– people…
–=–
Now, before you watch this absolutely rehearsed, staged, and predetermined stage play of a ceremony for the election of Mitt Romney as president of the United States and Paul Ryan as vice-president of the United States, I would very much like for you to read what one of these Electors had to say about this circus side-show called the Electoral College and his participation in it. And trust me when I say, this honest and candid statement by the man elected by the 15-member North Carolina Electoral College to be president of that college in the election ceremony is perhaps the most important truth about this fraud that is the presidential election process that you are ever likely to read by one of its inside players.
Sit back and hold on to your lunch…
Local Resident Elected President of N.C. Electoral College
By John Nagy As of Monday, December 17, 2012
Robert Levy, a local attorney and chairman of the Moore County Republican Party, has been elected president of North Carolina’s Electoral College.
Levy also is a political columnist for The Pilot. His column appears every Sunday.
The college on Monday will be responsible for electing the next president of the United States, but the result is not in doubt. President Barack Obama secured 332 electoral votes in November’s presidential election. The popular vote, though commonly thought to be the way the United States chooses its president, is actually a precursor. The Constitution requires the president be chosen by electors apportioned to each state.
Electors are not bound by the Constitution to cast their ballots according to their state’s popular vote, but the states themselves stipulate the way electors will vote. In all but two states, it’s winner-take-all. North Carolina has 15 electors, and its members are required to mirror the state’s popular vote for president. As such, the electors will vote for Romney on Monday.
In a Dec. 9 column on his experience as an elector, Levy wrote “It reminds me of “Gone With the Wind.” No matter how many times I see it, Scarlett still loses Rhett, and the South still loses the war.
“You see, I am one of the 538 electors who will go enact a secular passion play called the Electoral College. I know how the play ends. Obama will win. Romney will lose. Why should I go? It seems silly.
“Although the Constitution might suggest differently, North Carolina law is clear. If I do not go to Raleigh this month, I will be fined. If I do not vote for the Republican nominee, my vote will not be counted, and I will be replaced by someone who will vote as commanded. All the while, everyone knows that in other state capitals, the vote for Obama will make what I do meaningless.
“Yet I am going to vote for Mitt Romney. I am taking my daughter with me to watch me vote. No matter what I do, the candidacy of Mitt Romney will die as it died in November.
Like Billy Pilgrim in the Kurt Vonnegut novel “Slaughterhouse-Five,” I will realize that I have seen my death. I have visited it many times. It always turns out the same. But I go there anyway in order to make a statement about the principles for which I stand.”
Perhaps it is this final irrational and illogical patriotic statement that best describes the disposition of America and Americans today…
This man, even after his brutal honesty about the sham that is the Electoral College, still believes in the validity and rightousness of the very country, government, and constitution that created this blundering inferno of wretchedness called the presidential election. Perhaps this is because he is a BAR attorney, with an oath as an officer of this government and its courts. He states here that his vote will literally not be counted, that his appearance there is only for show as a character in a predetermined “play”, and that in truth he has no legal choice in who he actually votes for by the laws of the State. He even states that he will be fined if he votes for anyone aside from who he is scripted to vote for in this “secular passion play”, and then states that if he does vote for another candidate, his vote will not be officially counted and he will be replaced by someone else from within his political party who will vote according to the scripted Republican or Democratic plan as required by State law.
And so like the American people at large, this man literally enters into an oath to protect the very fraudulent system he lends credibility to, voting for a candidate even though he knows his vote doesn’t count. And the People do the same thing, voting without conscious for political parties, lending the collective “People’s” credibility and legitimacy to a completely corrupt and purposefully misunderstood Electoral College system, all because the television and their indoctrinated peers tell them it is unpatriotic not to vote. This attorney and president of the Electoral College literally and publicly pretends to believe in a system he knows is an absolute fraud against the people because he is vested in that system as its officer, and to keep the cohesion and continuity of that very fraudulent system going as its legal cog and as its beneficiary both monetarily and in the status it provides.
This, my fellow Americans, is beyond fallacy; beyond self-destructive; beyond irrational and illogical… it’s just downright stupid!!!
How can someone such as myself cause a mass of indoctrinated people to stop supporting the very system that extorts from them their wealth, liberty, happiness, prosperity, and even their knowledge of how that system even works in the first place, and to stop voting for and legitimizing these self-inflicted wounds with their consenting votes when such petulant patriotism surrounds this once-every-four-year-event? How indeed…
At this point, as I watch this charade of entangled absurdity and corruption unfold on C-SPAN channel #3, I can’t help but laugh hysterically at the wealth of stupidity involved that would create such a void in the general comprehension of the way this voting system works for the president and vice-president of the United States. My crazy “Huckleberry” style laughing borders on that of a mad-man cherishing the chaos he has created – only this scenario was created and perpetrated by the most treacherous and ultimately deceiving madmen of all: the government. And I am its hopeless victim – doomed to see this enslavement to deception with open eyes but forced to live in its clutches, watching as men with no honor among them continue this false paradigm of legal logistics merely for some false sense of honor to retain their societal and professional status. Honor, that is, among thieves…
For the true nature of this most bizarre ceremony you are witnessing here, and eternally for every four years in the future, is strictly as this disgusting attorney, head of the Republican Party, and president of the N.C. Electoral College says it is – to go through the legal motions of an act in three parts: 1st the popular vote to elect the electors, 2nd the electoral vote to elect the president, and 3rd the inauguration that really never had anything to do with anything related to either of these scripted and rigged votes. You see, this whole game of thrones is nothing more than a pretentious procession of legal chess moves by the powers that be to gain the consent of the people by deceit – through trickery and illusion of the legal language and process. The people must above all else believe in this system, though it be so blatantly transparent, in order for the people to believe in the authority of that system and its cogs. Without this perception of power, jurisdiction, presidential privilege, congressional choice, and justice for all, these men would fall back into the sewers from whence they crawled through to rise to this perceived power through falsely wrangled and manufactured collective consent. It is this illusion of legitimacy that creates and continues the illusion of authority that so enslaves us all.
And all of this because we participate in a fake election, unknowingly granting all of our powers of consent to one of two political parties, which ultimately were set up to do exactly what we have uncovered here – to carry on the perpetual, illegitimate theft of elections via the relentless popularity and commercialism of the celebrity vote for president.
What we have here, my fellow American Idiots, is literally the perfect crime. It is organized crime, and it is legal crime. It is as politically correct as it is morally and ethically defunct. It is the power of the people, stripped, raped, and transformed into the power of the legal consent of the people – to be represented without having a choice of who that representative really is.
The true power of the people has literally been extracted and funnelled into the hands of the two major political parties, who in turn vote for party loyal electors, whom then elect the president of this illegitimate corporate structure colloquially called the United States government.
–=–
Explaining this process is nightmarish, as it does not make sense to most people. That’s because most people believe in the system, and cannot believe that it is a false belief. Unfortunately, this is the religion of the statist.
To attempt an easy explanation is an impossibility, but I will try to attempt it here:
The people, according to the constitution, are called voters. They do not vote for president. Instead, they have been fooled into casting their votes in political party elections called primary elections. This primary election narrows the many specific party candidates that are running as party representatives down to one person as the official party candidate. Thus, the first vote is nothing more than a popularity contest within these two parties, and has nothing to do with actually electing a president of the United States. For instance, an independent candidate with no party affiliation would not have a primary election, and only run in the actual election called the general election. In the general election, the voters (people) vote for which ever candidate they like. But in actuality, they are only voting for the party that they like. If the vote for the independent candidate, in many States, they must also vote for the elector of that candidate. So the people, without quite understanding this process, actually vote for the electors of the president. There are 538 electors, one for each congressman in Washington D.C. The office of president, as well, is an office in Washington D.C. You see, the president of the United States is not the president of the people, for the people do not elect him. The president is the president of the government, not the people, which is why the people do not elect him. They instead elect representatives, 538 of them, who then delegate according to the constitution one vote for each office to the political party chosen electors. The vice-president is as well the president of the Senate, and has the controlling or “tie-breaking” vote in that office. He literally presides over the senate. Thus, the vice-president is a very important office as well, and not just a wanna be president who could be president if the president dies. The voters (the people) do not actually even vote for who the electors will be, for this is done within the political party itself despite the people. Once the general election is complete, refered to as the popular vote, this event creates a certain legitimate public consent to the Electoral College members to then cast their votes for president as the official electors of that office. In truth though, the Electoral College is just a formality – a necessary legal step in the constitutional process to create the legal transference of office to either the same or different persons as president and vice-president. In other words, the Electoral College is all but ceremonial in its power, since the vast majority of its members must vote according to what State laws dictate, making their vote not an actual free vote, but a legal action predetermined by the government. In the end, the true elector of the president and vice-president of the United States is actually the political parties themselves, which are private associations with limited governance and limited relationships with the people or “citizens”. In the end, the whole election process is literally a scheme to legally and with manufactured consent take the power from the people and shift it into the political party system. Thus, the people do not vote for president, they vote for which political party they wish to rob them of their right to vote, generally without knowing this scheme is even happening. And that is the easiest I way I can explain how the word democracy in America is nothing but a cruel hoax played every four years on the people of this country.
–=–
In conclusion, I’d just like to point out a few incongruities in this Electoral College speech for those who might have missed them.
1) It is unclear to me why the Secretary of State of North Carolina stated in her opening speech that “North Carolina did not participate in the very first presidential election because North Carolina did not ratify the constitution until after passage of the Bill of Rights. And only then did North Carolina officially join the Union, approximately 10 months after the election of George Washington.” But I would note that if this little tidbit of North Carolina history is true, then the very constitutional legitimacy of the presidency of one George Washington as the first president of the United States of America must come into question. For as one of the original thirteen colonies, how could the president have been properly elected to rule the “nation” of States without this State’s electoral and popular vote? In this first presidential election, only slightly over 1% of the population voted, and the idea of even having a popular vote was ridiculous, especially by black men and women. 6 of the States had limited popular votes, but these were mere formalities to allow for upper classes to choose their electors that would in turn elect the president. Washington ran uncontested, receiving 100% of the electoral vote (minus North Carolina).
2) In her speech, the Secretary of State pointed to foreign consuls attending the ceremony as she refered to the global status of the State of North Carolina. Of this, I wonder, do I even need to make a comment? I’ll simply ask the question: Why?
3) Also in her speech, the Secretary of State for North Carolina stated that the Electoral College was organized and ratified in order to prevent the possibility “that electors cannot also be powerful public officials”. When this iteration escaped her mouth, I chuckled out of both ends in amazement and surprise, slightly splattering my mouth full of freshly sipped coffee onto my computer screen.
To nip this fallacy in the butt, let’s just take a cursory look at just one of the group of Electors from one State:
North Dakota had three (3) electors in 2012:
The current Governor, the current Lieutenant Governor, and the current State District Attorney.
Are we to believe that these are not “powerful public officials”?
4) Notice that after this speech is over, the Electoral College members are introduced and sworn to take an oath before the ceremony can actually begin. You should listen to the words of this spoken promise. Perhaps the most interesting thing about this oath is that these 15 political-party-elected members of the Electoral College must swear to uphold the entire structure of government and the constitution that supports this entire scam in the first place. So this is not so much an oath to the good people of America as it is a legal compact that ensures that these 15 Electoral College members will obey under penalty of perjury and fine the laws that govern the whole corrupt election and Electoral College process in the first place. In other words, by taking an oath to uphold the constitution and Federal and State laws, these 15 electors just gave away any freedom of choice that they might have had to actually choose anything other than the Republican candidate for president – for the laws they just swore to obey state clearly that they can only vote for one candidate and not the other. Another way to examine this phenomenon is to imagine taking an oath before a court case that states that you will lie about any testimony you give in that case before the court, and that if you tell the truth you agree to be fined and punished for telling the truth – which would be breaking the law you swore to uphold in your oath. Think about it…
5) Finally, it is important to note that the Electoral College in each State is either Democrat or Republican, and never a mixed group from both parties or other independent candidates. Logic would dictate that in a fair and balanced election, this Electoral College membership would be split according to the actual popular vote statistics. So it would be reasonable to conclude that if the popular vote were cast at 30% of people voting for the Democrat Party candidate, 60% of the popular vote for the Republican Party candidate, and 10% of the popular vote for say the Libertarian (3rd party) candidate, we should see a North Carolina Electoral College that has 15 electors with 9 Republican electors, 4-5 Democrat electors, and 1-2 Libertarian or 3rd party electors. But this is not how the College works. Instead, the popular vote determines the total domination of the Electoral College regarding its popularly voted political party. So all 15 electors in the State of North Carolina are Republican Party members. This means that in each State, the entire election is decided by electors that MUST BE PARTY MEMBERS. And this means that ultimately, the election process is completely done within the political party system, without the involvement of the people in any way. If in the unlikely event that a 3rd party or independent candidate were actually to win the popular election process, then the electors of that State by law would also all be chosen by that political party, no different from other two main parties, which would not change anything at all about this corrupt system. The whole Electoral College of each State will be members of whatever single party won the popular vote. Alternatively, if the independent candidate won, the men and women for whom the people voted for as electors when they voted for that independent candidate would by law be required to vote for that candidate, and not for those in the other parties.
So if Obama, for instance, commited unethical or publicly unacceptable acts between the time of the popular vote and the electoral vote, the electoral college would still be required to vote according to thier party.
If you get nothing else out of this presentation, please get this:
Political parties are the problem with this country! They steal by manufactured consent any semblance of a true lawful election and kill any competition by not allowing other regular people to run for president. State laws prevent any true competition. And the people and the State governments are beholden to these party’s choices of electors.
The moral of this true story is a simple one.
BOYCOTT POLITICAL PARTIES!!!
Insist that candidates run as men, not as party members who represent the party, not the people. And don’t vote for them if they run under a party – any party. Boycott groups and businesses that promote this con. And teach your children well…
Act as individual free men, not as group mentality idiots. Vote as men, not parties, or don’t vote at all. End your membership in parties, and demand that the Electoral College system be reformed or abolished.
And the next time you get on someone’s case for not voting in an election, perhaps you should think twice about it. After all, it is you, the voter, that is responsible for your own ignorance of where the power of your own vote is granted. And it is you who lend legitimacy to this corrupt system with every vote you cast to the two-party political system.
Cheers and happy holidays…
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, December 24th, 2012
I will be abandoning the creature comforts of my warm insulated basement, phone line, and digital Skype connection to do the unthinkable – public speaking. No confrontations with corrupt politicians, no guerrilla journalism… just me and my irrational fear of public scrutiny and failure.
But the message is too important for fear’s familiar and reassuring repression…
I’ll be in New York City this Sunday to speak and then screen my “Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination” movie, starting at 4pm. If you live in or have friends in or near NYC, or can post this on local NY/NJ activist sites like We Are Change, please do so.
This is a free event. RSVP is requested to the bellow host, but not required.
The success of this event will reflect the success of future events by this venue, which has generously offered this space for this activism.
New York and all people in this country are in need of vaccine awareness and exemption/withdrawal of consent now more than ever, as the Federal Government now believes that its powers overrule the decision of States and district courts – which means it can, will, and has already vaccinated you and your children without your permission. Consent is implied, because nobody knows how to legally withdraw consent.
“…as it stands, this decision states that the Federal Government can trump any State Law during what it considers a “public health emergency” and then inoculate or give pharmaceuticals to children as young as kindergarten age, with no consent from the parents, all in the name of ‘public health safety’.”
And if you’re one of the approximately 7.058 billion people out there who haven’t yet seen Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination, don’t worry, it’s free and always will be!
When we consider the revenue generation scheme called taxation, we have been generally manipulated into believing that these 100′s of taxes on our daily lives and the way we live them are necessary for the greater good, and that government in its altruistic disposition would never raise those taxes if it didn’t need that revenue to corporately function for the benefit of the “people”.
What a joke!
Government has allowed the addiction of the nation to nicotine, alcohol, MSG, and corn syrup, with its own blessed regulations.
Then, once the addiction sets in, in come the taxes. Let’s face it… the cigarette and alcohol tax is a tax on the purchasing of addictive drugs. Meanwhile, hemp/cannabis is still federally banned, even for its medicinal and manufacturing uses. While in several of the States, pot is now being sold and taxed legally.
The moral of the story: somehow, marijuana is only dangerous if government cannot regulate and tax it? And so government gives permission to the people to consume pot products and plants via a license or permit for people to conduct an illegal activity legally. And for this privilege of conducting the illegal act made legal by permission, the government creates bureaucracy and needs taxation to fund it.
Of course, government has also regulated the use of alternative fuels and energies, forcing the population into a collective dependency (addiction) upon oil and gasoline. California, for instance, among other taxes charges 2 cent per gallon state UST fee (gasoline and diesel), and a 2.25% state sales tax for gasoline, a 9.42% state sales tax for diesel, including local taxes, for an average total of $.32 per gallon.
In California, anywhere from 7-9 million gallons of gasoline are used on average per day. The taxation potential here is obviously great, at over $2 million in “gas-sales-tax” per day for governments.
Who pays the taxes?
Hint: It’s not the oil companies or the gas stations…
And now, the government has the audacity to tax people who are sick and need medical treatment, with the “pharmacuitical and medical device tax“, which will be passed on to sick and dying consumers by these corporations:
As part of the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“PPACA”) – known to most as Healthcare Reform Legislation, new taxes will be imposed on manufacturers of “branded prescription drugs” and most medical devices. These taxes are in addition to the fees already charged by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for review of full new drug applications for drugs and 510(k)’s and Premarket Approval Applications for medical devices. And unlike user fees, the taxes will not be paid to FDA but assessed by the Department of Treasury and paid to support health insurance coverage.
The Pharmaceutical Tax
Unlike the medical device tax, the new tax on pharmaceuticals is complicated at best, and convoluted at worst. It applies only to “branded prescription drugs”, which are defined as any product approved under Section 505(b) of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FFDCA”) that bears an Rx legend required by Section 503(b) of the FFDCA; the only exception is an orphan drug approved only for orphan indications. Generic drug sales are excluded, as those drugs are approved under Section 505(j) of the FFDCA; Rx products approved under Section 505(b)(2), of FFDCA, although quasi-generic in nature, are, however, subject to the tax.
These fees will not be paid to FDA, but will be transferred by Treasury Department to the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund set up by PPACA to support health insurance coverage. The tax will first be paid in 2012 for the year 2011. The law requires the payment date be no later than September 30th of each year, which is the Federal Government fiscal year end.
The fee computation is convoluted. It goes like this. The fee is calculated by determining first “the percentage of sales taken into account.” If the aggregate sales of a company’s “branded prescription drugs” are less than $5 million, the percent is 0%. If between $5 million and $125 million, then it is 10%. If between $125 million and $225 million, then it is 75%. If more than $400 million, then it is 100%. See Section 9008(a)(2) of the PPACA. The fee is then calculated based on a company’s percent amount of all manufacturers “sales taken into account”, as that percent of an “applicable amount” for each year-which is as follows:
2011 – 2.5 billion
2012 – 2.8 billion
2013 – 2.8 billion
2014 – 3 billion
2015 – 3 billion
2016 – 3 billion
2017 – 4 billion
2018 – 4 billion
2019 – after – 2.8 billion.
See Section 9008(a)(4) of PPACA. The “sales taken into account” are based on reporting by government agencies (HHS, Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense) to the Department of Treasury and by any other source available to them. There are no new reporting obligations on pharmaceutical manufacturers. The fees are considered excise taxes treated under Section 275(a)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. The law requires the Treasury Department to publish guidance “necessary to carry out the purpose of this Section”. Section 9008(i)…
There are numerous potential issues raised by the scheme, foremost among them is how a pharmaceutical company can verify the validity of the information on which the tax is based, since it is not self reported – but reported to Treasury by HHS, Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense. In addition, the law states that if more than one person is liable for payment of a tax, all such persons are jointly and severally liable for payment of the tax. See Section 9008(d)(3).
It’s bad enough that corporations purchase and manufacture goods at what are called “wholesale” prices without paying any taxation on those purchases. But this insult gets turned into injury when these same corporations then “resell” those goods to the people – and charge the people what is officially called a “sales tax”.
But in reality, a more accurately descriptive word for this so-called “sales tax” would be a “seller’s tax”.
You see, corporations have been dodging taxes for decades, utilizing the government approved forced collection of these “sales taxes” that they (the corporations, not the consumers) owe to federal, state, and local governments as the seller of products in exchange for U.S. Dollars, making the sales tax more of an “income tax” to be paid by the corporation selling the good or service, which is then legally passed along to the consumer.
It isn’t the tangible goods sold in these retail stores that are being taxed – it is the legal tender transaction; a tax for the “right” (privilege) to use the government’s (Federal Reserve’s) printed and copyrighted money (notes). For example, 10% of the metal or plastic that makes up the body or motor of an automobile cannot be taken for the tax of purchasing and acquiring the car. The same goes for an apple, a house, or any other product that gets bought or traded. Likewise, a “service” cannot be taxed, leaving only 90% of the service for the purchasers use. A home, for instance, cannot logically be left 10% unpainted to pay for taxation.
And so the usurious bankers we call government had to develop an alternative…
Thus, a currency in the form of U.S. Dollars (legal tender) was created to be used in all transactions, and a tax could then be applied when that monopolized currency was exchanged for the product or service. Since the product or service, as a tangible thing, cannot be quartered and picked apart to pay the tax, it should be obvious to anyone reading this that the “sales tax” only applies to the legally owned and bound currency that is used in the transaction to acquire the tangible product or service.
This means that the sales tax is actually a “seller’s” tax, as the entity that sold the tangible product or service is the entity receiving an income of U.S. Dollars – a taxable income based on copyrighted notes that require a fee in the form of a tax for their use. It’s kind of like the music industry, where record companies receive a royalties from the people for using its copyrighted songs. Every time the song is played (dollar is spent) a royalty (tax) is paid. And in less than one week, one single dollar bill can produce double or triple its face value in taxation. Think about that for a moment…
To make this even more clear, we can compare sales tax to the income or capital gains taxes…
Income or capital gains, as defined by the IRS code, is the gain of assets that are valued in legal tender – the U.S. Dollar. For instance, a 25% income tax of your wages of $50,000 will equal $12,500 in income tax. This is a tax on the dollars that were payed to you for your contracted services to someone or something else. And because corporations really have no other legal choice but to use the dollar as a wage, the monopolistic forced use of this legal tender comes with a price; a tax. Again the music industry can be compared to this system, where radio stations will only play certain songs and promote certain bands, creating a monopoly on whose product (songs) get played mainstream, thus insuring that only a select few record companies will receive those royalties. There is no real competition. Likewise, a capital gains tax on the sale of a stock is calculated by the value of U.S. Dollars earned upon the selling (cashing in) of your corporation stock in exchange for (valued in) legal tender U.S. Dollars – even if you never put your hands on those actual physical dollar bills.
The “sales tax” is levied upon the legal tender U.S. Dollar amount earned by the seller. In contrast, a tax is not levied upon the purchaser of that stock or product you sold, just as your original purchase of that stock or product before selling it was not a taxable transaction – because the stock certificate, product, or service itself cannot be cut in portions to pay tax, and the stock certificate itself and taking possession of it is not what was being taxed. The legal tender that was paid for that stock or product was taxed by government to the seller of the stock that you bought, paid in U.S. Dollars or their foreign equivalent valued in U.S. legal tender. This, again, is a “seller’s” tax.
No legal tender earned = no taxation.
This is why making gold, silver, or any other form of trade or a bartering tool a “legal tender” is one of the stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard in the “patriot” movement. The last thing anyone (but government) should want is to be forced to pay taxes on gold and silver.
Imagine buying gold bars or coins with U.S. dollars when gold is also considered a “legal tender”. The government could then tax both the gold and the U.S. Dollars used to pay for that gold as a double sales tax. So the gold would be taxed for the buyer and receiver of the gold, and the seller would be taxed for the receivership of U.S. Dollars.
Which “patriot” thought of that idea? I’d watch out for that dude…
So what about the regular old sales tax at a department store?
When you give a corporation your hard earned wages to pay for “sales tax”, for which you legally contracted with the United States to receive as legal tender for payment of your “employment”; the services you provide for a wage paid in legal tender U.S. Dollars – you are giving that corporation what is left over from the income and other taxation that was automatically withheld from your paycheck by government for your convenience. You are charged this income tax because you are receiving this copyrighted currency belonging to government as “income” instead of some non-taxable thing like walnuts or coal, whereas the person or corporation paying you that legal tender pays nothing for the privilege of using those U.S. Dollars. The corporation you work for sells the products or services of your labor as an employee while passing the tax on to its customers. Then, the corporation pays you with this tax-free money and pays no taxes for receiving your services as an employee. This actually makes you (as the employee) the seller, as you have sold your services to your employer in exchange for legal tender under contract. The only difference here is that the people “employees” of these corporations don’t have the “privilege” of forcing their “employers” to pay that tax as a “sales tax” like corporations do to their customers. Quite the opposite really… as government has created a criminal punishment for “tax evaders” who lawfully do not wish to consent to that income or sales tax. Whereas, for corporations, government created laws that allow and support them in their tax evasion purposes, by “requiring” corporations to pass on and collect their own “seller’s tax” (tax on the dollars they earn) to the people (consumers of the corporation’s products). And these stores will even call the police if you refuse to pay the “sales tax” that is actually their own “seller’s tax” to pay! The people go to jail while the tax evading corporation continues to sell to consumers tax-free, by forcing its customers to pay the corporations own taxation on its income of legal tender earned.
And this is why I support “alternative” currencies and bartering…
The only way to break the stranglehold and price-fixing/over-pricing of a monopoly is to create alternative choices. If people had the choice of using a non-taxable piece of paper as opposed to a taxable piece of paper, things would be a lot different. Heck, it might even bring back that old concept of competition!
But instead, people get arrested and thrown in jail for doing that.
If for some reason this concept is lost on you, let’s prove the point.
The Web Site of the New York State Society of CPAs states:
“For example, in the Borders Online case, California required Borders Online to collect sales tax because, among other things, its customers were permitted to make returns at the separately owned and operated Borders bookstores located throughout California [Borders Online, LLC v. State Board of Equalization, 129 Cal.App.4th 1179 (2005)]. Even though the Borders bookstores were not typical sales agents and were not directly involved in the selling process, the court held that the ability of customers to make returns at physical locations in California assisted in the sales process. Accordingly, the court held that Borders bookstores were Online’s representatives for the purpose of selling goods in California. (Border’s) Online was assessed more than $150,000 in tax for prior periods based on its relationship with Borders bookstores.
Notice here that it was not each former individual consumer that was assessed a tax after they made their purchases, but was instead the true responsible party for the receiver of taxable legal tender – the corporation selling non-taxable physical products or services to consumers. Again, only the privilege of the use/acceptance of the dollar is taxed. Thus, because Borders Online received “legal tender” in exchange for its products, the “seller’s tax” was assessed to Borders Online – not the consuming people as customers – and the corporation is liable whether it “collects” the taxes from the people or not.
If Borders Online would have collected these taxes that Border’s itself owed from its sales as is usually the case, then Borders Online would have paid no taxes for its sales and for conducting business across the entire United States and indeed the world economy. So most corporations buy tax-free and then re-sell tax-free (by passing its seller’s tax onto the people and calling it sales tax).
The report also explains:
“Forty-five states and the District of Columbia impose a sales tax. If a business should have collected sales tax from its customers but did not, the business (and, in many cases, its owners) may be required to pay the tax on all taxable salesmade in the state from the inception of the business activity in such state, plus interest and penalties…”
(Source above)
Now, the protagonist argument certainly could be made that the consumer would likely end up paying higher prices for products anyway as most corporations (sellers) would probably hike up their regular every-day prices in order to meet the taxation demand put on them by government. But that same detractor just might have forgotten about the concept of competition – of alternative currencies. For if a seller accepts gold, silver, copper, brass, seashells, sticks, stones, favors, or non-governmental tax-free alternative paper currencies in the first place, then the taxation game goes away altogether.
But government doesn’t much like that idea either, for competition would destroy its power of revenue generation called taxation.
And so, government has created the trap called “incorporation”, whereby people may incorporate their businesses in order to receive special tax-breaks, write-offs, and other government “benefits” – so long as they play along with the government extortion racket and force their customers to pay for the taxation revenue generation scheme of government. The incorporated people charge the other people for the taxes that the incorporated people owe to government, becoming the worst kind of assistants to tyranny.
History shows that when considering the disposition of people in slavery, the slave that does his master’s bidding and rules over the other slaves of his master’s plantation without consciousness becomes the more privileged house-slave, able to enjoy just a few more benefits than the other slaves. And so business owners have followed suit…
And to think, all of this could simply be avoided if the people and businesses of America would simply boycott the use of government’s two enslavement tools – State incorporation and the Federal Reserve Note.
Until then, when and indeed if the people ever collectively wake up to see their own enslavement to a copyrighted currency that they don’t ever own even while they possess it in their wallets and in their bank accounts, we people shall continue to pay the taxes that rightfully should be paid by corporations. And the people will continue to believe that the “national debt” is their own, instead of the government corporation who created it through its Federal Reserve banking scheme of usury by implied consent, even though it isn’t even the people’s money in the first place!
And corporations like General Electric will continue to pay no income taxes to support the countries and people it calls customers while earning billions in profits.
P.S… This writing is dedicated to all of the oxy-morons out there that think citizenship and a national currency somehow equals sovereignty for themselves as individuals.
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, December 1st, 2012
There are many subjects that I have come across in my now decade of researching, but none are more disturbing and mentally debilitating as the severely under-reported reality of child ritual abuse, trafficking, rape, and murder.
I am ashamed to say that I stay away from this subject for this very reason, for I am cursed with what I call hyper-empathy.
I feel…
Though I do not get my hopes up that this will be the breakthrough coverage that will turn the tide and wake up the masses to what is happening within the government, its investment held corporations, and its protecting court system that never hears these cases without dismissal, I do hope it creates some momentum within even the most ardent truth-seekers.
When I talk to people and they ask me why I care so much about so much that I don’t see with my own eyes or feel with my own feelers, I can only try to enunciate my hyper-sensitivity to what is the reality of the society we live in, and its darkest, deepest bowels that go unnoticed while most people work two jobs just to survive.
My question to them is, How can you live comfortably knowing that this is happening?
And I fear the unspoken answer…
In a world where we do not stand up for others, where child ritual abuse and rape are more prevalent than anyone not in the know can imagine, I am happy to present this mainstream news interview (from Canada) that will likely not be replayed in the United States – the true hotbed for child porn, rape, and abuse.
Dare I hope that the people will rise up against this organized crime outfit called government, if only to protect the children for which government pretends to protect while doing the unthinkable?
This syndicated interview is the tip of a very large iceberg…
.
–Clint Richardson (RealityBloger.wordpress.com)
–Sunday, November 25, 2012
That’s right, folks… I lost. I will not be president of the United States.
I will not be president for one and only one reason this term:
–≈–
“The presidential candidate with the most royal genes and chromosomes has, up to now, always won the White House…”
–Burke’s Peerage researchers
–≈–
“[Bush] is closely related to every European Monarch both on and off the throne… Not one member of his family was working class, middle class, or even middle, middle class…”
“Believe it or not, Mitt Romney and George W. Bush are cousins — 10th cousins, twice removed, that is.”
“Romney is actually related to six past presidents — more than any other 2012 GOP contestant. Franklin D. Roosevelt is his eighth cousin, twice removed,and both Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover are his 10th cousins.Then there is his sixth cousin (four times removed) Franklin Pierce, and both 10th cousins Bush I and II.Three out of these six were even (gasp!) Democrats.”
“Obama and Palin are 10th cousins through a common ancestor named John Smith… As for [Rush] Limbaugh, he’s also a 10th cousin of the president – one time removed…”
“President George W. Bush? He’s related to both Obama and Palin, the site found.Obama and Bush are 11th cousins through common ancestor Samuel Hinckley,and Bush and Palin are 10th cousins one time removed, also through Hinckley -who, and stay with us now, was John Smith’s father-in-law.”
“Obama is related to investor Warren Buffett and actor Brad Pitt.”
“Palin, the former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate, is a distant cousin of both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Princess Diana.”
“In 2007, Cheney’s wife, Lynne, discovered ancestral ties betweenformer Vice President Dick Cheney and Obama while researching her book.She said the relationship was eighth cousin…”
“Palin is distant cousins with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and conservative author and pundit Ann Coulter…”
“[Bush's] royal kin include Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II, the Queen Mother,Duchess Sarah “Fergy” Ferguson and even the late Princess Diana. His most prominent ancestor may be England’s King Charles II”
“Bill Clinton and Bob Dole have more in common than wanting to be president. They are distant cousins! However, Clinton has bluer blood, giving him an election edge”
“Bill Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe, but took his stepfather’s name as a teenager.Clinton’s ancestry can be traced back, on his mother’s side, to King Henry IIIwho ruled England from 1227 to 1272. He is descended from King Robert I of France. Furthermore, he is related to every Scottish monarch to the current British royal family…Clinton is related to every ancient aristocratic family in Britain today.”
“As for John Kerry, “the 60-year-old can trace his roots back to the first Massachusetts governor,John Winthrop, to every great family in Boston and to a host of royals in Europe.Kerry can almost certainly be traced back to King James I and to the bloodlinesstraight through the Windsor and Hanover families,” Brooks-Baker said.“But both candidates have a remarkable number of royal connections
and both are related to Queen Elizabeth.”
“President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry are related. Well, sort of. They’re ninth cousins, twice removed. So what’s a little competition between family?”
“Playboy founder Hugh Hefner, who is the ninth cousin of both men… Twice removed from Mr. Bush, Hefner is a slightly closer relation to Kerry, only once removed.”
“Well I feel closer to Senator Kerry,” Hefner chuckled, over the phone from the Playboy Mansion in Los Angeles.”
“You know I’m an 11th generation direct descendant of William Bradford, who came over on the Mayflower, a direct descendant of a puritan,” Hefner continued proudly, finding no irony in the fact. “I suppose that it is not a big surprise but it is certainly unique to be a relation to both candidates.”
Now I could go on, and on, and on here… and I could show you that all prominent politicians and their wives, historians, queens and kings, Hollywood actors, authors, poets, and any other influential person in history and politics is always a bloodline member. I could even tell you that the truth is that George Bush is the 9th cousin of his own mother Barbara Peirce, as is common in keeping the bloodline pure.
But what’s the use?
The procession of Imbeciles continues deep into the night as Americans vote; then rushing home to turn to their favorite bloodline cousin in the news to tell them that their fake-popular vote did indeed make a difference, and that democracy works in America.
Of course, the typical American imbecile doesn’t understand how the presidential elections work through the electoral college.
The Washington Post wrote on Sunday:
“This year, once again, Americans are confronted with the distinct possibility that the winner of a tight presidential race might not be the candidate who received the most votes…
The electoral college is the system the country has – and has had for centuries – an institution that should be adjusted only with extreme care.
Meanwhile, if today’s election produces a split between the popular and the electoral votes, Americans should keep their cool.
Both candidates accepted and played by the current rules, byzantine as they are. The popular vote will be a byproduct of a contest in which both sides spent time, energy, and money to win the most electoral votes.
As in every presidential election since George Washington’s first, the candidate who achieves that constitutionally prescribed goal will be the legitimate president-elect.”
***In case you missed that, the Washington Post just told you that your vote means absolutely JACK-SHIT, and that the 538 electors (1 per congressman) will decide who your president will be.
–≈–
And for those who don’t know what the government and your bloodline rulers mean when they call you an imbecile, here is the legal definition for your understanding:
IMBECILITY, med. jur. A weakness of the mind, caused by the absence or obliteration of natural or acquired ideas; or it is described to be an abnormal deficiency either in those faculties which acquaint us with the qualities and ordinary relations of things, or in those which furnish us with the moral motives that regulate our relations and conduct towards our fellow men. It is frequently attended with excessive activity. of one or more of the animal propensities.
2. Imbecility differs from idiocy in this, that the subjects of the former possess some intellectual capacity, though inferior in degree to that possessed by the great mass of mankind; while those of the latter are utterly destitute of reason. Imbecility differs also from stupidity. (q. v.) The former consists in a defect of the mind, which renders it unable to examine the data presented to it by the senses, and therefrom to deduce the correct judgment; that is, a defect of intensity, or reflective power. The latter is occasioned by a want of intensity, or perceptive power.
3. There are various degrees of this disease. It has been attempted to classify the degrees of imbecility, but the careful observer of nature will perhaps be soon satisfied that the shades of difference between one species and another, are almost imperceptible.
–≈–
So good luck American imbeciles…
You did your patriotic duty and voted for what you believe is the lesser of two evils – despite the fact that the spawn of evil has been ever-present since the birth of this country (the bloodline were even the signers the constitution and Declaration of Independence – cousins of the King of England that is – placing Americans into permanent debt to the bloodline).
As for my prediction of who will be the winner in this 2012 presidential election?
Why, the bloodline, of course… no matter who wins!
But it does appear that Mitt Romney has more royal bloodline connections than Obama this year, and so my best guess would be Romney.
See the Romney pedigree here, as proudly displayed by the Mormon Church (Romney is cousins with all past Mormon Presidents, by the way, as are all United States Presidents):
A list of most presidents and their genealogical relationship to each other (note that all U.S. Presidents are cousins of George Washington, cousin of the bloodline royalty of England and the world):
Before you dismiss this as coincidence or 6 degrees of separation as the media tells you to, here is what “Jewels of the Crown” says, from “A newsletter of the Order of the Crown of Charlemagne in the United States of America”:
“Many Americans who descend from certain 17th century American colonists, known as “gateways” are able to prove descent from the royal houses of Europe…
“More than 20 American Presidents, including the current one, are believed to have royal ancestry, and thus, in all probability, also have Charlemagne ancestry. President Obama’s “gateway” ancestor, Martha Eltonhead (Mrs. Edwin Conway), is shared with President James Madison…”
“It should be noted that Americans whose ancestors came from continental Europe in the colonial period and the 19th Century are unlikely to easily delineate descent from Charlemagne in their background. There was a separation of classes in Europe and the blood of the rulers seldom flowed legitimately into the blood of the nobility and commoners…”
“The search for new gateway ancestors and new lines to validate former gateway ancestors continues on a pace. In my own case I have seen Thomas Bradbury accepted only to fall from grace more than twice. He’s back in Tracy’s book, but I don’t know for how long. So tell your Bradbury descendants to join now while the going is good.”
“Annual Meeting “Le Bal des Royals” (in Washington D.C)
The meeting was called to order by Dr. Hardwick Smith Johnson, Jr., President General of the Order of the Crown of Charlemagne in the United States of America together with Richard A. Gregory, President General of the Order of the Merovingian Dynasty at 7:30 p.m. for this combined meeting of both Orders. 160 members and guests were present for this combined meeting.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited and the Invocation given by the Rev. Dr. Christopher Mark Agnew, Chaplain General of the OCC.
***Note that the “Flag” of the United States corporation is the same as the crown’s “East India Company” (Corporation) flag pre-United States:
It’s hard to imagine a more true statement than that which was made by economist Patrick Clawson. Here we watch in horror as this arrogant warmonger candidly eludes to a list of “false flag” attacks which led to World War 2, WW1, Vietnam, and the Civil War, and for which the same tactics will ultimately need to be used to thrust the United States into war with Iran (an undeclared, illegal occupation that is)…
So who is this guy anyway, and what is that written behind him?
Let’s play connect the dots, shall we?
Patrick Clawson is a former economist for the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and senior economist with the World Bank. Clawson is currently the Director for Research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and senior editor of “Middle East Quarterly“.
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is a tax-exempt Washington think tank focused on U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East. WINEP is continuously referred to as pro-Israel. In fact, its founder was Martin Indyk, former deputy director of research for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of if not the largest Jewish lobbying groups in America. Indyk became a duel-American-Israeli citizen, U.S. diplomat, and its ambassador to Israel. The list of names as trustees of WINEP are the top Zionist Jewish propaganda, banking, and attorney machine – which as of 2005 included Democratic senator Frank Lautenberg, managing editor of The New York Times Jill Abramson, real estate developer A. Alfred Taubman, and philanthropist Edgar Bromfman.
On its Mission & History web-page, the following quotes can be found:
“In war and in peace, the Institute’s efforts to articulate a coherent and realistic view of U.S. national interests has assisted policymakers, in and out of government, to make informed decisions about the Middle East.” –President Bill Clinton
“Your hard work and commitment to the spread of freedom strengthen our Nation and help make the world a safer and more peaceful place.” –President George W. Bush
(Note: grammar is as printed on WINEP website.)
It goes on to confirm the infiltration and penetration of this group into not only the United States, but as well in the middle-East:
“The Washington Institute accesses the policy process from many angles: the written word, the spoken word, and personal contact. The Institute’s senior research staff includes experts on a wide array of political, military, security, and economic issues that cover every corner of the Middle East. They speak the region’s languages, have lived and worked there, and often hail from the region itself. We are proud of the long list of Institute “alumni” who have gone on to serve in virtually every arm of government that plays a role in Middle East policymaking — including the National Security Council, State Department, Pentagon, and intelligence community.
Every business day, Institute scholars and associates are quoted in major American or international media, appear on the op-ed pages of elite newspapers, or are interviewed on network television and radio news programs. Interpreting the complexities of the Middle East for both general and elite audiences is one of our most important functions.
And Institute publications — from policy briefs to full-length monographs — are widely recognized as “must-reading” for officials, diplomats, and journalists in Washington and around the world. They provide “instant analysis” of breaking events as well as thoughtful, long-range assessments of trends in the shaping of future policy.
Through all of these avenues of access, the Institute seeks to inject dispassionate, research-driven analysis — supported by fact and expertise — into the making of U.S. Middle East policy…”
Our Mission
The mission of The Washington Institute is to advance a balanced and realistic understanding of American interests in the Middle East and to promote the policies that secure them.
The Washington Institute is a 501(c)(3) organization. All donations are tax deductible…
Their (founders of WINEP) mission was simple yet powerful: to inject the power of ideas and the discipline of scholarship into the making of U.S. Middle East policy.”
Since AIPAC is so busy influencing the U.S. Congress; its main focus… WINEP is there to focus more on the Executive Branch and its many cabinets and government-owned corporations. Both groups obviously heavily influence the media. In fact, this webpage continues by describing its own publication, of which Patrick Clawson edits and speaks on behalf of here, as:
“Middle East Quarterly, published since 1994 and edited by Efraim Karsh, it is the only scholarly journal on the Middle East consistent with mainstream American views. Delivering timely analysis, cutting-edge information, and sound policy initiatives, it serves as a valuable resource for policymakers and opinion-shapers.”
I don’t know about you, but I’d sure like to see a definition for “opinion-shapers“, and whether they are shaping the opinions of the “policymakers”.
Howard Sachar, founder of Brandeis University’s Jacob Hiatt Institute in Jerusalem, editor-in-chief of the 39-volume The Rise of Israel: A documentary history, and member of the advisory council of the pro-Israel lobby, “J Street”, described Efraim Karsh as the “preeminent scholar-spokesman of the Revisionist Movement in Zionism.”
Daniel Pipes, founder of Middle East Forum, described Efraim Karsh as “the preeminent historian of the modern Middle East writing today.”
“Middle East Quarterly”,edited by Patrick Clawson (the speaker in the above video eluding to a false flag attack on Iran as a prelude to war), is a pro Israel journal published by the Middle East Forum.
The Forum is tax-exempt, and its address was care of C/O “Abrahams Lowenstein” according to IRS filings and letters of organization into a 501 (c) (3) corporation.
The Middle East Forum is obviously dripping with Jewish blood – yet another tax-exempt Israeli lobby and think tank in charge of lobbying Jewish/American peace through war and conquest in the Arab Middle-East. In short, it’s an Orwellian nightmare of a power lobby.
Middle East Forum’s self-described purpose on its own “about” webpage explains:
Founded in 1990, the Middle East Forum (http://www.meforum.org) has been an independent tax-exempt 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization based in Philadelphia since 1994.
Mission
The Middle East Forum promotes American interests in the Middle East and protects the Constitutional order from Middle Eastern threats.
The Forum sees the region — with its profusion of dictatorships, radical ideologies, existential conflicts, border disagreements, corruption, political violence, and weapons of mass destruction — as a major source of problems for the United States. Accordingly, it urges active measures to protect Americans and their allies.
“U.S. interests in the Middle East include fighting radical Islam; working for Palestinian acceptance of Israel; robustly asserting U.S. interests vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia; and developing strategies to deal with Iraq and contain Iran.”
“Domestically, the Forum combats lawful Islamism; protects the freedom of public speech of anti-Islamist authors, activists, and publishers; and works to improve Middle East studies in North America.”
(Note that it is quite illegal to publicly speak of holocaust denial or anti-Israel speech in many countries, and as close to home as Canada. Thus, protecting only anti-Islamic “speech” in America, which is not illegal in those same countries that outlaw anti-Jewish speech, should be a good indication that the United States is undeniably influenced by Jewish/Zionist interests exclusive of pro-Islamic points of view – especially with the above listed influence of this “Forum” over policy and opinion-makers.)
Methods
The Middle East Forum realizes its goals through three main mechanisms:
Intellectual: The Forum provides context, insights, and policy recommendations through the Middle East Quarterly, staff writings, public lectures, radio and television appearances, and conference calls (see below for details).
Operational: The Forum exerts an active influence through its projects, including Campus Watch, Islamist Watch, Legal Project, and Washington Project (see below for details).
Philanthropic: The Forum annually distributes US$2 million in earmarked donations through its Education Fund, helping researchers, writers, investigators, and activists around the world.
The collective inaction and denial of the American people as to the control, lobbying wealth, and binding influence of the Jewish, Israeli, and Zionist power structure must come to an end. This is not the people’s war, but a clandestine ancient struggle of a once nomadic, usurious parasite of a people to rule over their own declared greater Israel, and about whom the bible tells:
“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.” –Revelation 2:9
This “synagogue of satan” inhabits our government, our media, and our country as duel-citizens of this nation and of the false one they themselves created over Palestine and its people. This is Henry Ford’s “International Jew” – citizens of all states. It’s influence knows no bounds, and its control feels little resistance.
And so I end this with my own humble apology to the people of Iraq, of Afghanistan, of the other over 50 countries victimized and bombed by our Zionist, facist government, and most of all to Iran – the final prize of this International Synagogue of Satan. I give you my sincere condolences and share your disgust with my own people, who idly and without empathy allow this to happen with the American peoples consent – a consent gained by lies and manipulation; manufactured acquiescence to a many century-old grudge match and desire to rule the collective world-wide goy.
I’m sorry, for we the people in America have no excuses except for our blatant ignorance and lack of empathy for your millions of dead children, women, and men. And perhaps our greatest obstacle – hope that things will get better, while believing that hope is a substitute for action – is our downfall.
And so to our future false flag attack on you, be it a political suprise in October or a prelude to illegal occupation in later months, I can only say that I am personally sorry, and that if anything, I tried.
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Thursday, September 27th, 2012
QUESTION: Why would a professed and staunch Libertarian such as Ron Paul officially run as a Republican Party candidate?
–=–
ANSWER 1 (planned obsolescence): Most libertarian voters are not registered Republicans, and therefore cannot vote for Ron Paul in any primary election or caucus, making Ron Paul’s campaign completely useless and obsolete due to lack of registered Libertarians as registered Republicans.
The series of presidential primary elections and caucuses held in each U.S. state and territory is part of the nominating process of United States presidential elections. This process was never included in the United States Constitution, and thus was created over time by the political parties. Some states only hold primary elections, some only hold caucuses, and others use a combination of both. These primaries and caucuses are staggered between January and June before the general election in November. The primary elections are run by state and local governments, while caucuses are private events that are directly run by the political parties themselves. A state’s primary election or caucus usually is an indirect election: instead of voters directly selecting a particular person running for President, it determines how many delegates each party’s national convention will receive from their respective state. These delegates then in turn select their party’s presidential nominee.
Each party (not the people) determines how many delegates are allocated to each state. Along with those delegates chosen during the primaries and caucuses, state delegations to both the Democratic and Republican conventions also include “unpledged” delegates, usually current and former elected officeholders and party leaders, who can vote for whomever they want.
ANSWER 2 (control of opposition): Because of this primary and political party structure and hierarchy, opposition to the pre-determined candidate (Willard Mitt Romney) is controlled and funneled out of the process before the primary even takes place, ensuring the bloodline candidate in both Democratic and Republican parties as the winning candidates, whom will progress to the General Election for president in November, where once again the “electoral college” of 538 people actually elect the president of the United States.
–=–
“The Presidential candidate with the greatest
number of royal genes has always been the victor,
without exception, since George Washington…”
–Harold Brooks-Baker,
publishing director of Burke’s Peerage
–=–
Note here that Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are indeed cousins of George Bush.
In 2004 George W. Bush ran as a “Republican” against “Democrat” John Forbes Kerry – his 16th cousin.
In 2008 Barack Obama ran against cousin John McCain.
Obama and McCain Are 22nd Cousins Descended From King Edward I of England!
McCain, it turns out, is a sixth cousin of First Lady Laura Bush.
Obama is eighth cousin, twice removed, of the 39th President, Jimmy Carter, through his seventh generation maternal grandfather, Moses Teague (1718-1799).
Obama is the tenth cousin of former presidents Gerald Ford (once removed), George H.W Bush (once removed) and George W. Bush (twice removed).
Romney is actually related to… Franklin D. Roosevelt is his eighth cousin, twice removed, and both Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover are his 10th cousins. Then there is his sixth cousin (four times removed) Franklin Pierce, and both 10th cousins Bush I and II. Three out of these six were even (gasp!) Democrats.
Note that Bush, Romney, and Obama are therefore cousins – the bloodline presidents, all presidents being cousins of George Washington and the Queen of England.
Rick Perry and Jon Huntsman are also cousins with Bush, Obama, and Romney.
Also note that George W. Bush is a 9th cousin once removed with Barbara Peirce, his mother because brothers Israel Reade and Ralph Reade married Mary Kendall and Mary Peirce, who were siblings of William Reade and Mabell Kendall in the min-16oo’s.
Through these same types of genealogically interbred relationships, George W. Bush is also twice a 10th cousin once removed and twice an 11th cousin once removed with his mother Barbara Peirce.
To be fair, Ron Paul is the one candidate (winning or losing) I cannot seem to find in this bloodline. I’m not done searching though…
More major research on this expanded genealogy coming very soon…
–=–
SOLUTION: There are two options…
1) Either all Libertarians must in the future register as Democrats or Republicans (a travesty and purposeful deceit of idealism and political subterfuge amounting to an unethical sabotage of another party) meaning that they will not be able to register as Libertarians for their own political party of Libertarian so as to participate in their own primary election process, or…
2) All libertarians must stay out of the Democratic and Republican private political parties and therefore never elect a Libertarian into one of these two “major” or mainstream political parties, which again completely controls (controlled opposition) and oppresses the possibility that a Libertarian will ever become president under the current domination of the two-party political system.
–=–
THE MYSTERY: Ron Paul is either completely aware of these facts, or completely ignorant.
–=–
THE ONLY CONCLUSION: In either situation (awareness or ignorance), and in consideration of these preceding facts, Ron Paul’s 2012 campaign as a representative of the private association called the Republican Party was without question a controlled opposition – in the fact that in no way could he possibly win this primary election. At no time has Ron Paul been registered as a candidate for president in the general election with any other party affiliation, including Libertarian. Therefore, Ron Paul was never a true candidate for president of the United States.
In short, at no time during the entire 2012 election process (controlled by the private political party structure) was there any chance whatsoever for Ron Paul to actually become president of the United States.
It is this researchers opinion that Ron Paul is and was fully aware of these facts, considering his over 24 year congressional career and past attempts to run under the Libertarian party, and in considering his necessary knowledge of the facts presented here to run for president – including his attempts at gaining delegates in the Republican party as opposed to acquiring voters in the general elections.
It is also the opinion of this researcher that most Libertarians, as well as the vast majority of all registered (contracted) citizens eligible to vote in the United States are also completely unaware of the true political process in this country (corporation).
Oh, the joys and heartaches of logic and reason…
–=–
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”
–Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
–=–
.
–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Sunday, September 23, 2012
One of the things that the “truth” movement does best is to perpetrate and over-propagate myths and legends.
While a myth is something that just isn’t the truth, a legend is based on a grain of truth that has been blown way out of proportion into being almost god-like in its power – able to create whole movements based on false facts.
Of course, the favorite “truther” myths and legends seem to circulate around the creation of and the continuing story of the Federal Reserve System. In a previous post, I broke down the legal structure of the Federal Reserve, including the Federal Reserve Act and the reality of what an “independent agency of government” actually is (The Postal Service, Social Security Administration, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Elections Commission, Securities And Exchange Commission, and the Federal Reserve System are all examples of “independent agencies of government”.) They are Federal government corporations, created by Congress, and given the limited power of “rule-making” while still bound by congressional “law” – and there is just no way to get around these facts. All this and the sources you need are right here:
But obviously, the legend still outlives the reality…
My favorite part of the Fed legend is the story of the men who gathered at Jekyll Island to supposedly “create” the Federal Reserve.
While it is certainly true that men congregated to create a bill that could then be eventually run through and passed by congress, the legend of that meeting is one of the more discrediting aspects of the movement. In fact, it unfortunately gives people the false impression that this meeting at Jekyll Island was some rare event in history – as if the rest of the time in government, bills and acts are created by the actual congressmen who spend days and weeks composing and signing them. This is far from the truth.
Was there a meeting on that island? Of course. This fact is not in question.
Did these men create the Federal Reserve? Of course not. They simply wrote a draft of a bill that would take some three years to finally be rewritten, amended, and passed by congress. Congress created the Federal Reserve, which was finalized by then President Woodrow Wilson’s signature. Government, in fact, created the Federal Reserve Board and banks in committee after the Federal Reserve Act was signed, just as it was instructed to do by the Act.
Did the bill pass by the vote of just a few house members on a late stormy night when most of congress was at home sleeping or celebrating the holidays? For this myth, I simply did a bit of simple, logical research….
–=–
“The House passed the bill 298-60 on the evening of Dec. 22, 1913″
“The Senate began debate the following day at 10am, and passed it 43-25 at 2:30pm.”
“Wilson signs currency bill,”–New York Times, pp. 1-2, Dec. 24, 1913.
Oh, yeah… the legend seems to forget the check and balance rule that when a bill passes the house, it must also pass the Senate and be signed by the President. So in reality, The Federal Reserve Act didn’t get “created” until that very stroke of the presidents pen. And since bills go from the House to the Senate, and since the Senate then passed the bill as well, and since the bill then went to conference for final amendment and approval, we can’t very well state with any historical accuracy that the Federal Reserve Act was created on a dark stormy night in the House after all of the congress had already left for the holidays, now can we? For the Senate met the next day at 10 am! We can’t just dismiss or not mention the rest of the legislative process for the fulfillment of our legend.
But we also can’t dismiss the journals of the House and Senate, which clearly show the number of votes cast as official record. In other words, when role call was announced, the following was the response of congressmen in attendance for the final vote on the conference report (amended version of the Federal Reserve Act Bill):
House: Bill passed the house on September 18th by a vote of 282-85 with only 3 democrats voting against it. Senate: The Senate passed the Federal Reserve bill, 54-34 on December 19th with full Democratic support. Conference Committees: agreed and on December 22nd and 23rd the two houses ratified the bill and the President signed the measure as follows…
Does this sound like congress was home for the holidays when the Federal Reserve was created? 76 members out of a total of 434 were listed as not present for the vote. This means that approximately 18% of House members were not present for the vote, which as it turns out is not at all uncommon. It also means that even if these 76 members were present to vote, and they all voted nay on the act, the total votes would have stood at 136 nays, and 298 yeas. This would still have been well over a 2/3′s majority vote in favor of the Federal Reserve Act by the House Members.
The New York Times then reported:
“WASHINGTON, Dec. 23.–President Wilson signed the Currency bill at 6:02 o’clock this evening, following the passage of the conference report by the Senate in the afternoon by a vote of 43 to 25, and the House’s approval of that report last night…”
So that you can understand how common this absenteeism is in legislatures across the United States, I’d very much like for you to watch this coverage of the Texas Legislature, perhaps my favorite tool to wake people up to the fraud that is government:
Note that since the legislature makes the rules, the legislature very seldom enforces their own rules.
The point here is that if one pours through the journals of the congress, one will continuously see the fact that congress is never full. Absenteeism is a normal aspect of the legislature.
Is this right or wrong?
I’m not here to tell you what is right or wrong, though I personally believe that no bill should be passed in congress without 100% attendance and vote. What I am here to do is present fact -vs- fiction. And the fact is that nothing out of the ordinary happened on that night (when only 18% of the Congress didn’t vote for the conference report on the Federal Reserve Act) and that it was indeed passed quite legally. Good or bad? That’s not the issue. It’s good for some, bad for others. I’m not here for that. Good and bad are not facts, they are opinions. My opinion, so as to be clear, is that the Federal Reserve Act was both good and bad, but that its management is very bad. But more importantly, my opinion of congress and the President, both past and present, is that they are acting in treason to the people of the united states of America under the Lieber Code (martial law) and that nothing they do is lawful in America in the first place. But, they are acting legally in the United States under their own laws, which is outside of the united states of America, in Washington D.C. They are the provisional government of the occupying military force called the United States. So my opinion is based on these facts, as a man who understands that he is under martial law and that since the Civil War, the government of the United States is illegitimate under duress.
Interestingly, because of this fact, the ludicrous pursuit of Obama’s birth certificate to prove “citizenship” is a fallacious waste of time. For under military rule, there is no law that requires any head of any corporation to be a natural born citizen of the united states of America in the government of the federal corporation called the “United States”. In fact, there is no law period! You see, there is no such thing as being naturally born in the “United States” corporation. The United States are a corporation, and there is nothing natural or human about it. The President is the CEO of the United States, not the united states of America.
And as it turns out, the myth of future martial law as a result of “civil unrest” is one of the few instances where the myth covers up an already existing fact that is much worse than the myth. In this occupied land, the “United States” military already has bases in all 50 States, which are federal territories of the United States, signifying the presence of martial law according to the laws of war in the Lieber Code. And so the fear of martial law covers up the actual ongoing military rule and occupation that already exists! Just one more quiver in the educational void of the truth movement. The Lieber Code directly influenced both the Hague Convention deliberations and the Geneva Conventions in the mid-twentieth century, and was originally put into effect as General Orders 100, on April 24, 1863, by Lincoln’s secretary of war, Edwin Stanton.
By the way, I feel perfectly justified in saying these things because of the FACT that I was once equally as naive as the rest of us; telling people to wake up even as I was completely asleep. A cursory glance at some of my first posts on this blog is proof enough of my own ignorance just a year ago, and of the arrogance that comes with being an nonfactual truther. So getting offended at my writing is pointless. I still have a lifetime of learning to overcome my own current ignorance, and I no longer fool myself into thinking that I know even a fraction of what is.
My intention is only to point out what isn’t, so as to make it easier for both you and myself to see what is. So bare with me…
For more on this, may I suggest my previous research here:
One last example as to the myths that get passed around without verification.
This quote is often put forward to be said by Woodrow Wilson after signing the Federal Reserve Act.
“I am a most miserable man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A fantastic industrial nation is controlled by its system of confidence. Our system of confidence is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men…”
But when we actually examine where this quote comes from, we can quite easily and logically deduct the fact that this quote could not have been said by Woodrow Wilson any time close to or after the date of the signing of the Federal Reserve Act in December of 1913!
Page 185 of “The New Freedom” by Woodrow Wilson (1913, Doubleday, Page & Co) has this quote.
For a description of this book, we read: “The New Freedom comprises the campaign speeches and promises of Woodrow Wilson in the 1912 presidential campaign.” Also note that this book was copyrighted and published earlier in the year 1913.
How is it then that this quote can possibly be attributed to President Wilson after signing the Federal Reserve Act in the last week of that year, on December 23rd, 1913?
Does nobody verify facts anymore?
It turns out that Wilson didn’t write or say the phrase, “I am a most miserable man. I have unwittingly ruined my country.”, at least that anyone can find.
In Chapter 8 of “The New Freedom”, we find written:
“A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.”
And then in Chapter 9, we read:
“We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world–no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.”
And as of yet, I can’t seem to find a reference for the “unhappy man ruining his country” quote.
But someone out there put it all together, shortening sentences and blending intent, to read as such:
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
And this quote is used in such movies as Freedom To Fascism, Zeitgeist, The Money Masters, etc…
On “The Money Masters” website, the quote for that movie is listed as:
“Despite these warnings, Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote: ‘I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit…’ etc…”
For the movie, “America: Freedom To Fascism”, the quote was:
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
Among other misquotes, Mr. Russo also twisted this quote completely out of context when he read:
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans.” –Bill Clinton, March 11, 1993
What Clinton actually said (on March 1, 1993) was:
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americansto legitimately own handguns and rifles—it’s something I strongly support—we can’t be so fixated on that that we are unable to think about the reality of life that millions of Americans face on streets that are unsafe, under conditions that no other nation—no other nations—has permitted to exist.”
How can one then trust any other quotes or references in such “documentaries” if such blatant misquotes with unverifiable information are placed into them as “historical fact”, and then parroted by “truthers” to people who might actually verify the lie? It is my opinion that a documentary is supposed to document facts, not parade half-truths for the benefit of emotional response.
Again, if almost the entirety of Wilson’s quote was written in a book that was published well before the Federal Reserve Acts was signed, then how could it be Woodrow Wilson’s thoughts “after signing the Federal Reserve Act“, as so many have quoted without verification?
The “truth” is that it can’t.
And to assign some sense of heroism to the very man who signed the Federal Reserve Act, making it law, after he agreed to do so for campaign donations and support to become president in the first place, is a stain on the reliability of the good people who then quote these lies as truth. In fact, the only logical conclusion is that Wilson was stating these facts about the banking system to prepare and predicatively program people to except the fact that the Federal Reserve was going to be created to solve all of these problems that he wrote about in this book. What a twisted history and tangled web we “truthers” can weave…
–=–
Another aspect of this legend of the Federal Reserve story is the strange notion that the Federal Reserve System somehow operates outside of government control, that it owns its own assets, and that some rouge “bankers” or “elite” own some fictitious stock in the Federal Reserve that no one can see, touch, or verify. I’ve even seen lists going around listing certain men (international bankers) as shareholders of the bank. Despite the fact that the current Federal Reserve Act as annotated in U.S. CODE has been amended by Congress numerous times in every decade since its inception, and is now a completely different “creature” than it was at its creation, even the original Federal Reserve Act states quite clearly that these myths about the legend are simply not true…
Here is an excerpt from the original Federal Reserve Act:
SEC. 2… Under regulations to be prescribed by the organization committee, every national banking association in the United States is hereby required, and every eligible bank in the United States and every trust company within the District of Columbia, is hereby authorized to signify in writing, within sixty days after the passage of this Act, its acceptance of the terms and provisions hereof. When the organization committee shall have designated the cities in which Federal reserve banks are to be organized, and fixed the geographical limits of the Federal reserve districts, every national banking association within that district shall be required within thirty days after notice from the organization committee, to subscribe to the capital stock of such Federal reserve bank in a sum equal to six per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus of such bank….
Any national bank failing to signify its acceptance of the terms of this Act within the sixty days aforesaid, shall cease to act as a reserve agent, upon thirty days’ notice, to be given within the discretion of the said organization committee or of the Federal Reserve Board.
Should any national banking association in the United States now organized fail within one year after the passage of this Act to become a member bank or fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Act applicable thereto, all of the rights, privileges, and franchises of such association granted to it under the national-bank Act, or under the provision of this Act, shall be thereby forfeited….
No individual, copartnership, or corporation other than a member bank of its district shall be permitted to subscribe for or to hold at any time more than $20,000 par value of stock in any Federal reserve bank. Such stock shall be known as public stock and may be transferred on the books of the Federal reserve bank by the chairman of the board of directors of such bank….
SEC. 3. Each Federal reserve bank shall establish branch banks within the Federal reserve district in which it is located
and may do so in the district of any Federal reserve bank which may have been suspended.
* * * * * * * *
SEC. 5. The capital stock of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $IOO each….
* * * * * * * *
SEC. 7. After all necessary expenses of a Federal reserve bank have been paid or provided for, the stockholders shall be entitled to receive an annual dividend of six per centum on the paid-in capital stock, which dividend shall be cumulative. After the aforesaid dividend claims have been fully met,all the net earnings shall be paid to the United States as a franchise tax, except that one-half of such net earnings shall be paid into a surplus fund until it shall amount to forty per centum of the paid-in capital stock of such bank.
The net earnings derived by the United States from Federal reserve banks shall, in the discretion of the Secretary, be used to supplement the gold reserve held against outstanding United States notes, or shall be applied to the reduction of the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the United Statesunder regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury….
So after reading this, does it sound to you like “bankers” took over the banking system of the United States?
No. In fact, Individual banks were REQUIRED to purchase stock to be a Federal Reserve Member to continue operating as a reserve bank of the United States. In other words, if any bank wished to continue to create funny money legally through the United States, they had to become members of the Central bank of the United States. So technically, government actually created a system to control bankers.
But what needs to be known is that government, over many, many decades, has slowly invested in the ownership stock of all of these banks and other corporations and collectively, governments have become the major share holder of these banks. Government is where the public wealth is – 100′s of millions of people’s wealth exacted and extorted daily – and the power to control that wealth as well as the regulation of the banking industry in one consolidated government was the collective goal.
Please get this through your head… I am not here trying to convince you that government isn’t controlled by outside influences, bankers, elites, or whatever the legend of today names these men as… I am simply telling you the facts: The Federal Reserve System is a government agency that is politically independent (not naturally or lawfully independent), no differently than the Post Office or the Social Security System or many other independent agencies of government, and that it is government that holds the wealth and stock ownership of most corporations and banks.
There are no ownership shareholders of the Federal Reserve because the Federal Reserve does not offer ownership stock. Wallmart and Monsanto offer “public” ownership stock, for which people and government has been purchasing for decades. But government corporations do not offer public (ownership) stock, which means that government is not owned.
Thus, the myth that “corporations own the government” can also be dismissed here. It is quite the opposite, actually. The word “own” is the legal holding of stock of a corporation. So while there is very much a symbiotic relationship between corporations (including banks) and government, the fact is that government owns shares in corporations, and not the other way around. The reality is that at any time government, with the swish of a pen or the dumping of its collective stock, can indeed shut down or make insignificant any corporation it chooses to. On the other hand, no corporation can do the same to government.
These are the facts. And while these facts do not preclude the idea that a bunch of evil bankers and corporate elitists control the government from beyond its borders, they do show quite clearly that while government may be controlled by these men, government is not “owned” by these men. The distinction here is perhaps the most important one I can think of, and yet it is the most overlooked by the creators of legends and myths. Is it any wonder that the masses, with the help of the government-owned media (through stock investment), calls us “conspiracy theorists”? If 99 out of 100 “truthers” are purposefully led into the mythological beliefs we are uncovering here, and then present those beliefs as fact (as I once did) without verifying these stories of false history, then how can the masses of people ever be persuaded to “wake up”? For waking up into just another dream-state is never going to accomplish anything – and belief in mythology and legends is not truth!
–=–
We also see in the Federal Reserve Act that earnings shall be used to supplement the gold reserve held against outstanding U.S. notes. What does this mean? After all, the myth states that there is no gold in Fort Knox, right?
As of 2009, the gold reserve held as collateral by the Treasury against outstanding United States notes was listed in the Federal Reserve Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, pages 453 and 490.
Please note that the Federal Reserve is required to publish its audit of its financial statements just as every other government agency is in the country – NO EXCEPTION - and this can be verified in the Federal Reserve act and in U.S. CODE here:
Section 11B. Annual Independent Audits of Federal Reserve Banks and Board
The Board shall order an annual independent audit of the financial statements of each Federal reserve bank and the Board.
[12 USC 248b. As added by act of Nov. 12, 1999 (113 Stat. 1475).]
But wait a minute, the Fed doesn’t get audited, does it? Isn’t that what the myth states, that the legend called the Federal Reserve doesn’t get audited because it is a rouge agency and out of control of the government?
It’s really simple and a generally accepted practice for governments and private corporations you see, to create their own financial statements and have them audited by an outside accounting firm. This was the case even when The Creature From Jekyll Island was written, and for many decades before. In fact, the Federal Reserve has been audited since it was created.
Also, the Government Accounting Office in its 2009 CAFR reports for the Federal Government shows the same exact information, listing $11,037,000,000 worth of gold at a fixed (contracted) price of $42.2222 per troy ounce being held as collateral for United States notes. This can also be found on page 61 of the Federal Government’s CAFR.
With a little math, we can calculate that as of 2009 fiscal year, the Federal Reserve was holding 261,498,900 troy ounces of gold as collateral for United States notes. And as the price of this pledged gold is fixed at a statutory value of $42.2222 per troy ounce, that legal value as listed is a bit over $11 billion dollars.
However, if we were to consider that U.S. gold as valued by the market price of $1654 per troy ounce today, August 30, 2012, that gold would be worth $432,519,180,600 dollars. $432.5 billion! Ironically, and perhaps purposefully, the “gold certificates” held by the Federal Reserve System – which are redeemable for the physical gold listed as payable by the Treasury - these gold certificates have been used in the markets as swaps, using the market value of the physical gold as collateral for other trades. In other words, while the physical gold is force-valued at $42.2222 per troy ounce by statute, the gold certificates representing that actual physical gold in contract can then be used in certificate swaps at the gold’s market value – at $1654 per troy ounce – because the certificates represent the gold itself, not the contracted price! The collateral is being used as collateral!
Thus, the myth that the Federal Reserve and the United States Treasury are somehow at odds with each other or in some strange form of competition is fairly ludicrous. We are talking about legal organized crime here. And no rational criminal would set up a system to impede the implementation of that criminal activity. In fact, it states very clearly here that “all the net earnings shall be paid to the United States as a franchise tax“.
Think about it… if “The net earnings derived by the United States from Federal reserve banks shall, in the discretion of the Secretary, be used to supplement the gold reserve held against outstanding United States notes“, and the “net earnings shall be paid to the United States as a franchise tax“, where is the competition?
This makes a causal loop where profits (earnings) of the bank get paid to the Federal government and then those payments get used to increase the physical gold held by the Federal government which creates more swappable gold certificates to collateralize the United States notes which will make even more profits (earnings) for the Federal Reserve which will be paid back again to the United States as a tax and can buy more gold and swap more certificates making more profits and so on and so forth– ad infinity.
Does this sound like a competition or non-cooperation to you?
As far as the Fort Knox myth:
“The gold stored in the Depository is in the form of standard mint bars of almost pure gold or coin gold bars resulting from the melting of gold coins. These bars are about the size of an ordinary building brick, but are somewhat smaller. The approximate dimensions are 7 x 3-5/8 x 1-3/4 inches. The fine gold bars contain approximately 400 troy ounces of gold, worth $16,888.00 (based on the statutory price of $42.22 per ounce). The avoirdupois weight of the bars is about 27-1/2 pounds. They are stored in the vault compartments without wrappings. When the bars are handled, great care is exercised to avoid abrasion of the soft metal…”
(Top) “A large amount of the United States’ gold reserves is stored in the vault of the Fort Knox Bullion Depository, one of the institutions under the supervision of the Director of the United States Mint. The remaining gold reserves are held in the Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the West Point Bullion Depository and the San Francisco Assay Office, also facilities of theUnited States Mint.”
Read this clearly… The gold of the United States is held in several depositories, Fort Knox being just one of them. It is listed at the same statutory price that is pledged to the Federal Reserve as collateral for United States notes. And there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that this gold is not being hoarded in Fort Knox or one of these other installations. Seriously, what purpose would it serve to lie about this? Why the pervasive myth?
Understanding the connections and financial reporting of that gold and how it is pledged as (collateral), and seeing these audited reports match up gives us a look into the reality of the situation.
And, as for the audits of the gold in Fort Knox, we read:
Appendix D: Continuing Audit of the United States Government-Owned Gold Summary
A continuing audit of the United States gold stock has been underway since 1975 at the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury. When it is completed in 1984, it will have covered all the gold for which Treasury is accountable and will have involved an estimated 26 man years of work. This audit, together with a special audit of the gold stock conducted by the General Accounting Office in 1974 and audits by examiners of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, has (as of September 30, 1981) covered more than 212.7 million fine troy ounces of gold. This represents over 80 percent of the total amount of United States-owned gold of 264.1 million fine troy ounces. No discrepancies have been found in Treasury records with regard to any gold in permanent storage.
Current Audit Program
On September 23, 1974, members of Congress were invited to inspect the United States gold stock stored in the Ft. Knox bullion depository. Following Congressional inspection, which involved removal of the seals and opening selected vault compartments, a special audit was conducted in September and October 1974. The General Accounting Office (GAO), in cooperation with auditors from the Bureau of the Mint, Bureau of Government Financial Operations (BGFO), United States Customs Service, and the Treasury Department’s Office of Audit conducted an audit of 21 percent of the gold bars stored at Ft. Knox. In the report of the audit, the GAO recommended that consideration be given to performing continuing audits of the gold in custody of the Mint. That recommendation is the basis for the current audit program. On June 3, 1975, Treasury Secretary Simon issued Treasury Department Order No. 234-1 authorizing and directing the Fiscal Assistant Secretary, with the cooperation and assistance of the Director of the Mint, to conduct a continuing audit of United States Government-owned gold for which the Department of the Treasury is accountable.
The Fiscal Assistant Secretary established a Committee for Continuing Audits of United States Government-owned Gold to provide guidelines and general direction to ad hoc gold audit committees. The Committee for Continuing Audits is headed by the Director, Audit Staff of the Treasury’s Bureau of Government Financial Operations (BGFO) and includes the Chief of Internal Audit of the Bureau of the Mint and the Assistant General Auditor of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York…
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 20. 1974
INSPECTION OF GOLD AT FORT KNOX
The inspection by Members of Congress on September 23, 1974 of U.S. gold stocks stored at the Fort Knox (Ky.) Bullion Depository marks a unique departure from the long standing and rigidly enforced policy of absolutely no visitors, Mrs. Mary Brooks, Director of the Mint announced today.
“On April 28, 1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt inspected the Bullion Depository,” Mrs. Brooks said. “His visit was the one and only time a gold vault was opened for inspection for anyone other than authorized personnel.”
“The Congressional inspection adheres to the new open door policy of the government announced by President Ford. Treasury Secretary William E. Simon issued the invitation to Congressmen to inspect the gold at Fort Knox. By also inviting the press to witness the Congressional inspection, the Mint is clearing away the cobwebs and re-assuring the public that their gold is intact and safe. For the first time photographing is being permitted inside the Depository.”
After the Congressional inspection, the Bullion Depository will once again be closed to visitors.
On September 24, 1974, a special settlement (audit) is scheduled to begin and at its conclusion a report on the audit will be issued.
The audit will be performed by a committee of auditors from the U. S. General Accounting Office (GAO) and the Department of the Treasury. The auditors from the Treasury will be drawn from the Office of the Secretary, the Bureau of Government Financial Operations, the U. S. Customs Service, and the Bureau of the Mint. In addition, the committee will include technicians from the Bureau of the Mint who are trained in assaying and weighing gold bullion.
The monetary gold stock of the United States totals 276.0 million fine troy ounces valued at $11. 7 billion at the official rate of $42.2222 per fine troy ounce, and is stored in various federal depositories (table attached), the largest of which is at Fort Knox. Kentucky. 147. 4 million fine troy ounces, valued at $6.2 billion, is stored in 13 vault compartments at the Fort Knox Bullion Depository.
CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS INSPECTING GOLD AT FORT KNOX SEPTEMBER 23. 1974
SENATE
Walter D. Huddleston. (D) Kentucky
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Clair W. Burgener. (R) California
John B. Conlan. (R) Arizona
Philip M. Crane. (R) Illinois
Walter E. Fauntroy. (D) District of Columbia
Angelo D. Roncallo. (R) New York
John H. Rousselot, (R) California
Gene Snyder. (R) Kentucky
Chalmers P. Wylie. (R) Ohio
“The United States Bullion Depository Fort Knox, Kentucky:
Amount of present gold holdings: 147.3 million ounces.
The only gold removed has been very small quantities used to test the purity of gold during regularly scheduled audits. Except for these samples, no gold has been transferred to or from the Depository for many years.
The gold is held as an asset of the United States at book value of $42.22 per ounce.
The Depository opened in 1937; the first gold was moved to the depository in January that year.
Highest gold holdings this century: 649.6 million ounces (December 31, 1941).
Size of a standard gold bar: 7 inches x 3 and 5/8 inches x 1 and 3/4 inches.
Weight of a standard gold bar: approximately 400 ounces or 27.5 pounds.
In the past, the Depository has stored the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, three volumes of the Gutenberg Bible, and Lincoln’s second inaugural address.”
One of the most interesting legends – one that is alive and well today – is that of Ron Paul. Paul wanted to spend many 100′s of millions of taxpayer dollars to audit the gold reserves of the United States, and is one of the key promoters of this “no gold in Fort Knox” myth, with absolutely no proof that this is the case.
But his real claim to fame is his Audit the Fed bill and “End The Fed” book and movement. He has become infamous for using such mythical catch-phrases as “The Federal Reserve is about as Federal as Federal Express”, and “the Federal Reserve has never been audited”. But even worse than that, his followers and fans then parrot the same thing without ever verifying the factual nature of these statements, as shown above. Again, I should know, as I used to be one of the parrots!!!
Before Paul’s current false-hope bill to supposedly “Audit The Fed”, his 2007 bill actually contradicts his own speeches where he states that the “Federal Reserve is not Federal“.
H.R. 2755 in the 110th Congress is entitled: “Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act”, and is solely sponsored by Ron Paul.
In it’s introductory text it states the following:
A BILL
To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
Further into the text, it states:
SEC. 2. FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLISHED
(a) In General- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal reserve bank are hereby abolished.
(b) Repeal of Federal Reserve Act- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Reserve Act is hereby repealed…
(2) LIQUIDATION OF ASSETS-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall liquidate all assets of the Board and the Federal reserve banks in an orderly manner so as to achieve as expeditious a liquidation as may be practical while maximizing the return to the Treasury.
(B) TRANSFER TO TREASURY- After satisfying all claims against the Board and any Federal reserve bank which are accepted by the (Federal) Director of the Office of Management and Budgetand redeeming the stock of such banks, the net proceeds of the liquidation under subparagraph (A) shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury and deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury.
Now, there are only three options here:
Either Ron Paul knows that the Federal Reserve System, the Board, and its banks are already the property of the Treasury of the Federal Government and can be shut down and reabsorbed into that government because of that fact…
Or he had temporary insanity and contradicted his own speeches and writings…
Or he is calling for the assumption by government of a completely separate and totally private corporation that was not created by, regulated by, or owned by the federal government.
If this third option were true, would this mean that Ron Paul could write a similar bill to abolish WalMart, Monsanto, or perhaps your own personal small business to be assumed and liquidated into the Federal Treasury?
Which of these scenarios is more reasonable, logical, and for that matter provable, just by reading this bill? Do you actually think that the Federal Reserve Corporation (or any other federal agency) can exist or act legally within the United States if the Federal Reserve Act is abolished?
Where would the Fed then get its authority to operate as the United States central bank, do you think? I mean, if indeed it is a completely separate rouge entity not controlled by government, it really wouldn’t need the Federal Reserve Act or Congress’ approval in the first place, right?
Note: Anyone who answers yes to that question better go back to paragraph one…
Notice too the fact that Paul lists the “stock” of banks to be “redeemed”. The perception that this stock of the Federal Reserve Bank is owned by some international bankers is again one of those prevalent myths that just wont go away. In fact, when we go to the horses mouth (the current amended Federal Reserve Act), we can see what the stock of the Federal Reserve is and who is forced to invest in it.
Section 5 of the Federal Reserve Act (codified in U.S. CODE 12 Section 287) states:
Section 5. Stock Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital
1. Amount of Shares; Increase and Decrease of Capital; Surrender and Cancellation of Stock
The capital stock of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $100 each. The outstanding capital stock shall be increased from time to time as member banks increase their capital stock and surplus or as additional banks become members, and may be decreased as member banks reduce their capital stock or surplus or cease to be members. Shares of the capital stock of Federal reserve banks owned by member banks shall not be transferred or hypothecated. When a member bank increases its capital stock or surplus, it shall thereupon subscribe for an additional amount of capital stock of the Federal reserve bank of its district equal to 6 per centum of the said increase, one-half of said subscription to be paid in the manner hereinbefore provided for original subscription, and one-half subject to call of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. A bank applying for stock in a Federal reserve bank at any time after the organization thereof MUST subscribe for an amount of the capital stock of the Federal reserve bank equal to 6 per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus of said applicant bank, paying therefor its par value plus one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend. When a member bank reduces its capital stock or surplus it shall surrender a proportionate amount of its holdings in the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank. Any member bank which holds capital stock of a Federal Reserve bank in excess of the amount required on the basis of 6 per centum of its paid-up capital stock and surplus shall surrender such excess stock. When a member bank voluntarily liquidates it shall surrender all of its holdings of the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank and be released from its stock subscription not previously called. In any such case the shares surrendered shall be canceled and the member bank shall receive in payment therefor, under regulations to be prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, a sum equal to its cash-paid subscriptions on the shares surrendered and one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend, not to exceed the book value thereof, less any liability of such member bank to the Federal Reserve bank.
[12 USC 287. As amended by act of Aug. 23, 1935 (49 Stat. 713).]
Does this really sound like a bunch of bankers have control of the Federal Reserve to you? Or does it sound like banks are begging to be members of the Federal Reserve System so that they can get all of the benefits of being members of that system so as to create money via the federal reserve system? Seriously, banks can’t fractionally create money without being members of the Federal Reserve. So no usurious United States bank is going to voluntarily leave the Fed.
Does it sound like banks have a choice as to whether they want to be stock-holders to you, that is, if they want to be members and get Fed benefits?
This legend of the Federal Reserve is out of control!
Perhaps the next time you hold up a sign or plaster a bumper sticker across your automobile that reads “End The Fed”, you’ll actually think about what it is you are demanding. Are you trying to close down a private corporation, or are you trying to demand that government end its own government-owned corporation through a vote of Congress? If you believe the former, then why not hold up signs to government saying end the Monsanto or end the Walmart?
–=–
Now, you may be curious about the title of this rant, “Today’s Creatures From Jekyll Island”.
So let’s talk about who exactly these “creatures” are today and how they’ve changed since yesterday.
Again, the concept that the drafting of these words that would eventually be utilized by congress to create the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve itself through congressional committee was a rare or singular occurrence in the history of legislative actions is the biggest myth that needs to be dispelled here.
Congressmen, in fact, very seldom write their own legislation. Though the misconception is that this is the job that we vote them into office for, nothing could be farther from the truth. As you saw above, half of the time they don’t even bother to show up for voting session!
These are corporate yes-men. They are propped up into office for one reason… they have no spine. They vote as they are supposed to along party lines, without reading the bills half the time, while putting on a patriotic show every once in a while so that the “truth” movement can pass the video along to other “truthers” and make themselves feel better about exposing the truth.
So who actually drafts most of the important bills in Congress?
I’d like you to meet ALEC.
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the ultimate ultra-lobbying group, consisting of a membership roster of 100′s of major corporations and the thousands of legislators that they wine and dine before they send them back to their state or federal legislatures with ALEC-composed bills in hand. In other words, ALEC ghost-writes the bills that are put on the congress floor, just as the Federal Reserve Act was ghost-written at Jekyll Island. And the congressmen then alter and amend those bills and send them to conference just like they did in 1913.
This is not at all uncommon. In fact, it is the norm.
Hundreds of what are called ALEC Model Legislation Bills are passed each year in congress, and an unknown number are passed on the local and State level. These bills are written by corporations, amended and earmarked by congress, and signed by whichever party president, governor, or county mayor is in office at the time. It isn’t just a rumor that congress doesn’t read the bills they sign. The truth is, they don’t need to. They are just there to sign the dotted lines and enjoy the perks of their ALEC membership, add a few earmarks onto the bills, and then enjoy the benefits they’ll receive in retirement for their cooperation and for being good little minions of the shell-game.
And so, these are the creatures that both inhabit government and professionally organize outside of it, in the open, while writing the nation’s legislation without needing the privacy of an island any more.
While there are certainly other similar groups out there, ALEC is certainly the most prevalent.
Warning: As with many mainstream sites and watchdog groups out there, I urge caution and verification. While much of the information on this site is good, the Center for Media and Democracy has some troubling aspects to it… like the fact that it promotes democracy instead of a republic!
Recently, Jan Irvin interviewed one of its representatives, exposing its less public side, here:
And finally, I did an interview on ALEC and private prisons with Joyce Riley on the Power Hour, one of my better interviews. Alec is one of the major supporters of and sponsor of the privatization of prisons and everything else in government. Interview here:
In the end, the creatures are all around us. The only difference seems to be the blatant openness in which they operate in today’s world. They are organized into non-profit groups, for the benefit of their for-profit corporations. They are members of countless private associations (including the political parties), and they follow the rules of these associations in the legislature while our politicians lend their allegiance to the parties, not the people. Virtually nothing in government is done in the traditional way that Americans still believe it is, and still the “truther” movement seems to always look to now century old history and quotations for an explanation of what is the reality of today – which is a completely different animal in both technological prowess and the amended law books that read nothing like the rules of yesteryear.
And today, virtually all relevant statutes that are being rubber-stamped and implemented out of our local, State, and federal governments are being written by these treasonous creatures, outside of government halls, by men who no longer need to meet in secrecy on some secluded island – because treason and crime are now commonplace, publicly accepted and anticipated, and legal!
And the people do nothing but change the channel…
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, September 1st, 2012
There has been a lot of hype about the new sequel, “Why In The World Are The Spraying”.
Admittedly I have not seen it yet, though I intend to…
What I wanted to provide for you today actually has nothing to do with this movie. Instead, it is a research tip: one that I’ve found to be quite prolific in researching and finding what I look for to verify facts and find new ones in my own projects.
The tip:
Don’t Ask; Know…
For instance, asking a question like “do I have a family tree” will not get you very far, as many others out there might be asking (and answering) that same question. Instead of asking the internet a question for it to answer with other answers, you should tell the internet exactly what you are looking for. A question will bring back yes, no, maybe, and everything in between. If you ask a question, the answer will be based on an assumption of your not knowing the answer, and on your asking if anyone and everyone out there in the world does.
And so, I’m telling you that you must know the answer before you ask the question. You must presume that the subject matter you seek already exists, and is well documented and regulated, thus tricking the search engine into conducting a search pattern of someone seeking a subject they already have an answer for, and that you already know exists as matter of fact.
In the case of the question of “Why in the world are they spraying {chemtrails}“, this would be the worst possible question you could ask of the internet as a search. After all, you aren’t looking for other people asking the same question in a slightly different way than you, and looking for their answers or the speculation of others. No, you are (or should) be looking for nothing but facts.
So why would you then ask such a simplistic and un-confident question as this to a computer with trillions of nonfactual answers? Remember, we are looking for primary sources, not opinions and speculation.
Don’t you think that the computer will be just as un-confident as you are as to what you actually want to acquire?
Instead, no matter how ridiculous and unlikely an object may be (UFO’s, for example), and even if in your heart you can’t even imagine that this object or idea can even exist, you should conduct your search as if you already know it actually does exist – even if you don’t.
Let’s say I want to know why “they” are spraying “chemtrails”, and exactly who they are…
My first thought would be to look for documents, laws, government white papers, official essays, corporate/government permits, or agencies and corporations that spray or create what is being sprayed, and who regulate that industry (if indeed it does exist).
I wouldn’t ask “who is spraying“.
I would delete the why/who/what/where/when question, and in its place I would type the factual statement:
“current weather modification projects in the united states”
Now the internet knows that I already know “why” “they” are spraying, “what” they are spraying, and “who” is spraying. Thus, as a pretend informed searcher, the computer is only searching for when and where of something that already exists, instead of inquiring to the ether as to whether “they” are even spraying in the first place.
The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) serves as a hub for research, education, and public outreach for the atmospheric and related Earth sciences community.
The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) provides research, observing and computing facilities, and a variety of services for the atmospheric and related Earth sciences community.
The UCAR Community Programs provide innovative services in support of the community’s education and research goals.
NCAR and the UCAR Community Programs are managed by UCAR, a nonprofit consortium of research universities, on behalf of the National Science Foundation and the university community.
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR)
UCAR provides services to and promotes partnerships in a collaborative community of researchers and educators who are dedicated to understanding the atmosphere—the air around us—and the complex processes that make up the Earth system, from the ocean floor to the Sun’s core. We manage the National Center for Atmospheric Research and UCAR Community Programs on behalf of the National Science Foundation and the university community. Our headquarters are in Boulder, Colorado.
Sweet! Now I can go from this page and find just about anything I want; from who, what, when, where, and why. I have now proven what seems ridiculous, by treating the theory as a reality, not as an unlikely or even a likely possibility. I pretended to know it already existed, and therefore I did not ask if it did exist or why.
Now that I have this website and all of the information and contacts that are presented therein, I could call these guys up and ask the questions or send them a professional email pretending to be a corporation interested in learning more about modifying the weather.
Here are their listed numbers on this same website page:
“Below is a list of NCAR scientists who have participated in recent or historic weather modification experiments or who have played a key role in preparing the new NAS report. Their specialties and contact information are included.”
Specialties: Cloud physics, rain enhancement, atmospheric electricity, radar meteorology, airborne instrumentation. Breed has served as project manager for NCAR’s rainfall enhancement studies in Mexico and the United Arab Emirates. He also participated in the National Hail Research Experiment in the 1970s and subsequent cloud physics projects relevant to weather modification.
Specialties: Weather modification of all sorts, including various types of cloud seeding and the study of the effects of smoke and pollution on clouds and rainfall. Bruintjes was a primary author of the NAS weather modification report. He headed NCAR’s cloud seeding experiment in Mexico in the 1990s and is leading a similar research project in the United Arab Emirates. He first studied hygroscopic cloud seeding in his native South Africa.
Specialties: Severe storms; cloud physics; history and current state of weather modification, including silver iodide cloud seeding, hygroscopic cloud seeding, experiments in hail suppression and rainfall enhancement; and the effects of smoke and pollution on clouds and rain. Foote was a project leader with the National Hail Research Experiment. He was an invited speaker for the NAS panel that compiled the report on weather modification, and recently cochaired a World Meteorological Society meeting of experts on hail suppression.
Specialties: Past and current uses of radar in a wide range of meteorological applications, including weather modification. Serafin is an expert on the role of radar in monitoring storms, detecting and forecasting new storm development, and studying the behavior of precipitation from growth to dissipation. Radar observations can improve our understanding of basic processes relevant to weather modification and may lead to new seeding ideas and hypotheses that can be tested. A former director of NCAR, Serafin offers a general knowledge of meteorology, forecasting, cloud physics, and satellite instrumentation. He served on the NAS weather modification committee that produced the report.
NCAR Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division
Specialties: Hail, ice, and snow, including the natural formation of snow and other precipitation in clouds, artificial snowmaking, the structure of snowflakes, and hail suppression. Knight is an expert on nucleation, a process that is important for both artificial snow production at ski resorts and natural snow formation in the atmosphere. He played a prominent role in the National Hail Research Experiment.
Specialties: Clouds and cloud physics, especially the processes involved in the formation of precipitation in clouds; studies of cloud hydrometeors (droplets, raindrops, and ice particles); and the influences of aerosol particles on cloud microstructure and precipitation. Cooper also is an expert on research aircraft and their instrumentation. Currently on a term appointment at the National Science Foundation, Cooper has been the director of NCAR’s Advanced Study Program for seven years. Throughout his career, he has sought to understand how precipitation forms and the degree to which both natural and human-produced particles can influence precipitation amounts.
Just from these few descriptions I now have many very real search terms to pursue, like:
“Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research report, water-absorbing hygroscopic flares stimulate rain production in convective summertime clouds, hygroscopic flare seeding,history and techniques of weather modification, weather modification experts,cloud physics, rain enhancement, atmospheric electricity, radar meteorology, airborne instrumentation, NCAR’s rainfall enhancement studies in Mexico and the United Arab Emirates, National Hail Research Experiment 1970s, cloud physics projects relevant to weather modification, cloud seeding, NAS weather modification report, NCAR’s cloud seeding experiment in Mexico 1990s, NCAR’s cloud seeding experiment in United Arab Emirates, hygroscopic cloud seeding, silver iodide cloud seeding, hygroscopic cloud seeding, experiments in hail suppression and rainfall enhancement, National Hail Research Experiment, NAS panel for report on weather modification, World Meteorological Society meeting on hail suppression, uses of radar in meteorological applications, uses of radar in weather modification, role of radar in monitoring storms, detecting and forecasting new storm development, behavior of precipitation from growth to dissipation, former director of NCAR, NAS weather modification committee report, artificial snowmaking, structure of snowflakes, hail suppression, nucleation, natural snow formation in the atmosphere, cloud hydrometeors, influences of aerosol particles on cloud microstructure and precipitation, research aircraft for weather modification, National Science Foundation, NCAR’s Advanced Study Program, human-produced particles for precipitation, NCAR Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division, NCAR Environmental and Societal Impacts Group…”
I would type each of these into a search engine exactly as presented above, as I can state clearly that they do indeed exist based on this organization and its report, and are being utilized by these people and organizations. The returns for my inquiries should be just as fruitful, since again I am not asking if they exist, but instead knowing they do and only searching for their whereabouts.
I could then cross-reference each of these phrases, topics, names, and corporations or organizations they might work for currently or previously and eventually have a complete working model of the entire “geo-engineering” industry. And I would now know that “chemtrail” is the worst word I could use in a search engine, as that is just slang for the masses and will lead mostly to speculative and inquiring websites.
And I could email or call the experts in this field of weather modification and study whenever I got stumped, and even request an interview.
I could then write an entire referenced book on “chemtrails” or make a movie about them with some simple images downloaded from the internet and be hailed as some kind of hero for exposing the “industry”, without ever really doing any in depth study of that industry, other than to compile the research presented here on this one internet page.
And all of this is possible because I didn’t ask a simple question, but rather told the search engine my answer.
There are no hero’s, folks. There are only people who do and people who don’t. Michael Murphy is a man who is doing, and I admire him for it.
But now you too know how to make just as good of a research project as anyone else out there… and maybe you should, even if it’s only for yourself. At the very least you can verify what you hear from the shock-jocks selling gold and survival supplies and food while telling you over and over and over that the world is ending – and making millions on the value of the gold they bought way before all of your panic purchases raised the price to the ridiculous level of today by raising false scarcity and supply and demand principles.
Just stop asking… and instead, know what you are looking for!
The answers are out there, but asking for them will do you about as much good as asking government for something. Just like government, search engines respond much better to demands rather than requests.
Happy researching!
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, August 25, 2012
It is rare that an opportunity to showcase a truly good and wholesome charity presents itself; one that actually utilizes 100% of all donations for charitable purposes instead of administrative ones. And I was even more amazed to find just such an organization right in my own community; within one of the most materialistic and corrupt of counties in America.
For reasons I cannot comprehend, I have somehow been drawn through wonderfully ironic circumstances to this place in the high desert called Salt Lake City. And perhaps this chance to expose one of the few good organizations left in the world today was one of those reasons for my being here.
As my readers should have noticed by now, and indeed by the title of this website (Reality Blog), I do not sell any products or services (like survival supplies or storage food while reporting that the world that we know it will end soon). Likewise, I do not voluntarily support any organization by posting advertising or links of any kind on my blog or other websites, unless they are the subject of such writing. For your information, this is my own effort to remain free and clear of any influence, restraint, or conflict of interest in my ability to report what needs to be heard. I consider and offer my writings and films free to all without restrictions or profit. I believe this is the very definition of community service. It is freedom defined. It is humanity, in and of itself. It is an offering of oneself without expectation of anything in return. It is charity…
But unfortunately, considering the world we live in, my investigations are without exception about corruption and greed in the corporate/government arena that has become the new “organized crime” – the lawlessness of the law. And so it gives me great pleasure to present to you a positive and enlightened story about an organization called UMCOR – the only true official “charity” that I know of.
Like a beacon of hope through selfless action and as a model of what can be, UMCOR has become a part of my life… and indeed, it has given me a bit of hope in this modern darkness we call our civilized society. And so today I’d like to introduce you to this charitable organization so that perhaps you too might make it a part of your life. Today, I would only ask of you to take the time to watch this 16 minute presentation on UMCOR, to pass it on to others who might need a bit of hope in their own lives, and to consider becoming involved in it yourself.
The following is my contribution to UMCOR:
What is UMCOR?
Now, after viewing this, I’d like for you to imagine what this beautiful charity could really do around the world and in America to actually help people if it had the support of all of the people who give instead to organizations like the The American Red Cross or The United Way, simply because the media tells them that they should…
Since The United Methodist Committee On Relief’s administrative expenses are wholey funded by donations from the United Methodist Church, the CEO and Methodist Board of Directors and employees of UMCOR receive no salary from UMCOR donations. In other words, no donations from you (other than the once a year international Methodist Church offering) will ever go to pay the salaries or business expenses of UMCOR (unless you want them to), because the real workers are actually unpaid volunteers from around the world!!!
Imagine…
In 2004, President and CEO of the American Red Cross Marsha J. Evans was paid $651,957 in salary, plus expenses. The board of Directors of the Red Cross is a who’s who of corporate business men and women, who’s companies in turn benefit from the grants of the American Red Cross in it’s disaster relief programs by your donations, which seldom are sufficient in practice to help the people in need.
Ralph, Dickerson Jr – the former president and CEO of United Way – received a salary of $420,000. (Source: Chronicle of Philanthropy)
The New York Times reported:
“The United Way of New York City said yesterday that an internal investigation had determined that its former leader, Ralph Dickerson Jr., diverted $227,000 of charitable assets for personal use in 2002 and 2003… Mr. Dickerson is not currently facing charges from the findings.”
In 2008, United Way President and CEO Brian Gallagher earned $1,037,410 in salary. (Source: Better Business Bureau link below)
All of this comes from your donations… your donations to CEO’s salaries.
The Better Business Bureau also lists the following expenses for “The United Way”:
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, UWW’s program expenses were:
Investor relations $39,010,000 Community Impact Leadership & Learning $20,794,000 Campaign and Public Relations $8,711,000 Brand Leadership $8,195,000 UW Store $2,880,000 Public Policy $1,056,000
Total Program Expenses – $80,646,000
How does this add up when compared to the United Way’s charitable and investment income?
The Following information is based on UWW’s audited financial statements (CAFR) – consolidated for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009:
Source of Funds Contributions $51,922,000 Membership support, net $29,202,000 Campaign efforts of Tri-State, net $13,569,000 Promotional materials sales $3,764,000 Conferences $1,816,000 Program Service Fees $1,072,000 Misc and other $671,000 Investment Income, net $342,000
Total Income – $102,358,000
(So $8 million in donations was spent on campaign expenses to earn $13 million in campaign donations, instead of feeding, clothing, and housing the poor and destitute.)
(Also, note that in order to have investment income, this requires The United Way to invest the contributions it receives, as opposed to using them to help people. So its expenses for “investor relations” was over $39,000,000 [almost 50% of listed expenses] while its return on investment was only $342,000? Is this a charity, really?)
Did any of this actually help someone in the world besides big business?
The report then goes on to add additional expenses of:
Fund raising expenses $1,003,000 Administrative expenses $8,827,000
For total expenses of – $90,476,000
It then states that:
Note: According to its 2009 audited financial statements (CAFR), UWW recorded Other Changes in Net Assets including loss from write off of investment in Trust, change in tax liability, and pension-related changes other than net periodic pension cost.
And of course, to add insult to injury, this corporation lists its “status” as:
This organization is tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. It is eligible to receive contributions deductible as charitable donations for federal income tax purposes.
Just what does the United Way do to help people besides raising money so that it can raise more money? Well, it does help some people so that it can make commercials which show that it helps people… granted.
Folks, the United Way has the potential to help people from all over the world… But it doesn’t. It has no time to do this because it is too busy investing, advertising, and fund-raising so that it can invest and advertise more. It is too busy attempting to infiltrate your paycheck as one of your “choices” of recommended charities to contribute to.
Is this what a charity is supposed to look like?
I don’t think so.
UMCOR, in this authors opinion, is the stand alone model of what a charity can and should be. It should be the stand alone model for even being granted a tax-exempt status in the first place. And it is the only charity that I choose to support because of these reasons.
I choose to volunteer my time to UMCOR, because I have nothing else to give. Anyone is welcome to give of themselves by just showing up to UMCOR and volunteering to work. If I could, I would also choose UMCOR to make monetary or supply donations to as well.
It is my hope that you might see things in the same way…
Thank you for watching.
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Thursday, August 16th, 2012
What does this obtuse and open-ended catch-phrase actually mean?
Have you ever asked yourself that question?
–=–
It is fairly obvious and easy enough to say that the police are not actually there to “protect and serve” the people of the land in the conversational sense of the words, but indeed protect and serve only the interests and continuity of the corporations called States, Counties, and Cities.
But we must also define what “protecting” and “serving” actually mean in the legal language. Of course, because we are talking about the sales pitch of the municipal corporation (government) police departments, we must answer this question with the best legal definitions of these words, instead of relying on our mislead perceptions of this misleading moniker as portrayed by the media and entertainment industries.
To protect and serve… Who? What? Where? When? Why?
We will now use U.S. CODE and the Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, to get a full description of this open ended statement, “To Protect And Serve“.
–=–
TO PROTECT
–=–
The observation that police are driving around in expensive taxpayer-funded vehicles while being paid by taxpayers to do so, issuing citations for speeding, crossing double yellow lines, making illegal U-turns, and other pointless victimless crimes, should be quite enough evidence that the police aren’t driving around looking for an opportunity to protect you from danger or to serve or help you, but are instead driving around looking for ways to earn money through exaction and force for the corporation (government) that they are employed by – so as to fulfill their monthly quotas.
But if this concept isn’t readily obvious to you – that police officers are there to extort money out of your pockets – then let’s examine together the legal definition of the word “protect”.
First, we must understand what a legal right is as opposed to a natural right.
This section of U.S. CODE does a very nice job of making that distinction…
42 USC § 1981 – Equal rights under the law
(a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, andshall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
(b) “Make and enforce contracts” defined
For purposes of this section, the term “make and enforce contracts” includes the making, performance, modification, and termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and conditionsof the contractual relationship.
Here we see the difference between a God-given natural right and a right that is bestowed by the government under color of civil law, which in fact is nothing more than a contracted privilege you agree to by signature and consent. When one understands what is stated here in U.S. CODE, one understands that political rights are the definition of tyranny and extortion.
In fact, the word exaction is specifically defined as extortion.
EXACTION, torts. A willful wrong done by an officer, or by one who, under color of his office, takes more fee or pay for his services than what the law allows. Between extortion and exaction there is this difference; that in the former case the officer extorts more than his due,when something is due to him; in the latter, he exacts what is not his due, when there is nothing due to him. Wishard; Co. Litt. 368.
“A willful wrong…“
This means that government claims under TITLE 42, Section 1981, that it is your right to be exacted (extorted) from by government or other corporations through the “contractual relationship”. And that it is your right to be wronged by men in uniform who willfully harm you while acting under the “color of law”
By signing a ticket or citation (a contract) and then by paying the fee imposed by that contract and agreed upon by you, the fine line of extortion and exaction is crossed, and exaction (nothing due) by contract under threat and duress is created and becomes extortion (what is now due). Add a few late fees and other charges by the courts (more than is due) and exaction is legally upon you via contract. So how does a police officer under the color of his office extort money from you in a way that “exacts what is not due” to him? He forces you to sign a contract which obligates you to pay his office a fine or fee. Thus, exaction (taking what is not due) becomes a legal function of legal contract law, and your “right” to be extorted from (stealing what is now due) as listed in U.S. CODE as an “equal right” (privilege) is justified by your signature on the ticket (contract).
Do you understand? Being extorted and exacted form is a right, benefit, and a privilege. Being taxed is a right, benefit, and privilege. And being subject to pains, penalties, and punishment is a right, benefit, and a privilege. These are the wonderful rights, benefits, and privileges of being a citizen (person) of the United States enjoying the “contractual relationship” between yourself and government.
You enjoy those rights now, ya hear…?
Ok. So what exactly does the word “protect” mean, considering that pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions (extortion) are the so-called rights enumerated and “protected” by police?
PROTECTION, government. That benefit or safety which the government affords to the citizens.
Yeah… so “to protect” can legally be defined as: to ensure the entering into and enforcement of the contractual relationship between government and the citizen by officer willfully wronging the citizens, for which a citizen may be forced into contract under duress and color of law so as to ensure commerce (exaction) for government through such contract, or be imprisoned for breach of that forced contract. And so, police officers (employees of government) are there for the “protection” of the authority and jurisdiction of government to tax, exact (extort), penalize, put into pain, and punish contracted “citizens” through its police “officers” and its “legal system”.
Great…
So what does government mean when it offers to protect your equal rights under the law?
equal protection: an overview
The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. SeeU.S. Const. amend. XIV. In other words, the laws of a state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances. A violation would occur, for example, if a state prohibited an individual from entering into an employment contract because he or she was a member of a particular race. The equal protection clause is not intended to provide “equality” among individuals or classes but only “equal application” of the laws. The result, therefore, of a law is not relevant so long as there is no discrimination in its application. By denying states the ability to discriminate, the equal protection clause of the Constitution is crucial to the protection of civil rights.
And so once again, we can plainly see that civil rights were and are not created to make all men equal in the eyes of the law/government, but instead are instilled to make all men equally liable to the legal statutes and codes created by government. In short, civil rights make all Persons of the United States equally enslaved by diminishing natural rights into codified civil rights – turning unalienable God-given rights into State sanctioned and revocable privileges under contract and force.
–=–
TO SERVE
–=–
So what does it mean for the police to serve the people?
Probably not what you think…
SERVICE, practice. To execute a writ or process; as, to serve a writ of capias signifies to arrest a defendant under the process; Kirby, 48; 2 Aik. R. 338; 11 Mass. 181; to serve a summons, is to deliver a copy of it at the house of the party, or to deliver it to him personally, or to read it to him; notices and other papers are served by delivering the same at the house of the party, or to him in person.
Hmmm… So legally, “to serve” actually means to serve process, to arrest under that process, to serve a summons, or to deliver a notice. Ok, so “service” is not quite what we thought it was…
But remember, the police are protecting your right to be served by government, and your right to be exacted from and punished.
So what happens when a police officer (a corporate officer of a municipality, county, or State) serves me with a summons, process, or notice?
SUMMONS,practice. The name of a writ commanding the sheriff, or other authorized officer to notify a party to appear in court to answer a complaint made against him and in the said writ specified, on a day therein mentioned. 21 Vin. Ab. 42 2 Sell. Pr. 356; 3 Bl. Com. 279.
SUMMONERS. Petty officers who cite men to appear in any court (i.e. municipal police).
TO SUMMON,practice. The act by which a defendant is notified by a competent officer, that an action has been instituted against him, and that he is required to answer to it at a time and place named. This is done either by giving the defendant a copy of the summons, or leaving it at his house (i.e. mail); or by reading the summons to him.
Interesting. Just one problem though…
The problem with a police officer witnessing, writing (creating), and delivering at the same time a “ticket” for a code violation – which is a summons and notice to appear in court – is that the police officer is the creator of the complaint, as well as the authorized officer who is citing in the ticket (summons) a time to appear in court to answer an action. This ultimately means that a “ticket” is an illegal summons, as there is no action that has been created by a court of law, magistrate, or by an actual victim.
The “officer” may legally serve a summons written by a court, but does not have the legal authority to create a summons without the court… (Without means outside of its jurisdiction) A lawful summons must come from a judge or magistrate.
Of course, this is why the officer requires your driver’s or other license with a current address and personhood name. The license represents the contract agreed to, signed, and broken by you (i.e. vehicle code, etc.). Without the license and the consent presumed by it, no legal statute in code could be broken, and thus no citation could be created. That would mean no money could be exacted, oh my!
But can an officer make a complaint?
COMPLAINT, crim. law. The allegation made to a proper officer, that some person, whether known or unknown, has been guilty of a designated offense, with an offer to prove the fact, and a request that the offender may be punished.
COMPLAINANT. One who makes a complaint. A plaintiff in a suit in chancery is so called. 2. To have a legal effect, the complaint must be supported by such evidence as shows that an offense has been committed, and renders it certain or probable that it was committed by the person named or described in the complaint.
A better question would be: Can a police officer make a complaint to himself about you, and then punish you for the offense that he complained about to himself without a judge and jury? Can he complain to himself?
Isn’t that bypassing the whole concept of law and a fair trial?
The officer is supposed to be receiving a complaint, and serving a notice of that complaint. Can he do both lawfully? Isn’t there a checks and balances system for these types of lawless behaviors?
As we all know, the police officer generally has no complaint received for traffic and other citations, and is creating the complaint himself, and then creating a summons to appear in court to answer for that complaint/misdemeanor crime.
In fact, one might construe and even be able to prove that the police officer who issued the citation is indeed impersonating an officer of the court by issuing an unlawful summons to appear in that court. This, of course, is a serious felony crime – the impersonating of a court official. Thus, the magistrate would be required to answer to this fact when presiding over the trial. So the magistrate must admit to the fact that the police officer acted with or without his consent and jurisdiction to issue a summons to appear before this magistrate. If the answer is no, the summons holds no legal authority. If the answer is yes, then the magistrate is admitting on the record to cooperating in criminal coercion with intent to extort. Either way, I’m betting the case would be dismissed.
This is really no different than if a Girl Scout came up to you on the street and forced you at gunpoint under threat of arrest to buy her cookies, and by doing so, you must either pay a fine for her services or appear in court. This, in effect, is forced commerce through a forced contract (citation/ticket) under duress and threat of incarceration. The ticket is a get out of jail card. Sign the summons or go to jail…
So what is the definition of an “action”?
ACTION, in practice… Actions are divided into criminal and civil… 2. – 1. A criminal action is a prosecution in a court of justice in the name of the government, against one or more individuals accused of a crime… 2. A civil action is a legal demand of one’s right, or it is the form given by law for the recovery of that which is due… (lawful vs. legal)
“A legal demand of one’s right…“.
Think about what that means for a moment. And remember, your “rights” are taxation, pains, punishments, and extortion under the “contractual relationship”. Thus, these “rights” can be demanded of you.
What a messed up system we have…
Criminal actions require a victim harmed. Civil actions require a contract broken or unfulfilled.
So the legal rules, codes, and municipal corporation statutes, which require the consent and contract of the governed to have authority and jurisdiction, are all based on “civil action” – a legal (not lawful) demand to pay what is due to government – when government police officers bypass the court system altogether to create a demand to pay via an illegal summons. In other words, you must pay the fine or go to court.
But what is the cause of action? Who is the injured party? What contract has been broken?
That’s just it, there is no victim and therefore there is no criminal law broken (no victim, no crime). The action, therefore, is based solely on extortion under threat of arrest in the civil realm. This is an unlawful action, and is created or action without cause with an illegal summons to appear, which you may pay money for (extortion) to avoid making an appearance in court. All of this happens when the citation is signed, becoming a contract.
Ok. So what is a “demand”?
DEMAND, contracts. A claim; a legal obligation…
DEMAND, practice. A requisition or a request by one individual to another to do a particular thing. 2. Demands are either express or implied. In many cases, an express demand must be made before the commencement of an action… in other cases an implied demand is all that the law requires, and the bringing of an action is a sufficient demand in those cases… A demand is frequently necessary to secure to a man all his rights, both in actions arising on contracts and those which are founded on some tort. It is requisite also, when it is intended to bring the party into contempt for not performing an order which has been made a rule of court… 4. – 1. Whether a demand is requisite before the plaintiff can commence an action arising on contract, depends upon express or implied stipulations of the parties… 13. – 2. In cases where the taking of goods is lawful, but their subsequent detention becomes illegal, it is absolutely necessary, in order to secure sufficient evidence of a conversion on the trial, to give a formal notice of the owner’s right to the property and possession, and to make a formal demand in writing of the delivery of such possession to the owner. The refusal to comply with such a demand, unless justified by some right which the possessor may have in the thing detained, will in general afford sufficient evidence of a conversion… 14. – 3. When a nuisance has been erected or continued by a man on his own land, it is advisable, particularly in the case of a private nuisance, to give the party notice and request him to remove it, either before an entry is made for the purpose of abating it, or an action is commenced against the wrong doer and a demand is always indispensable in cases of a continuance of a nuisance originally created by another person… 15. – 4. When an order to pay money, or to do any other thing, has been made a rule of court, a demand for the payment of the money, or performance of the thing, must be made before an attachment will be issued for a contempt…
So technically, the police officer is making a demand before an action is created in a court of law. In other words, the officer is acting illegally as both the party that is harmed (legal codes broken) and the judge of a court who would otherwise issue a demand to answer and pay for an action. This paradox, where the demand for payment is created without a cause of action for payment having been created, is why the “ticket” is actually an illegal summons. No judge ordered you to appear before him, and the police officer is not a judge. Thus, your signature on the “ticket” becomes a private contract created through threat and duress between you and the corporate municipality for which that officer is an employee of – which automatically makes that contract null and void. For a contract must be entered into voluntarily. If you break that contract with consent (by ignoring it, not paying, or not appearing), then you are guilty of breach of contract, and more civil actions will be placed upon you, including liens on your home and personal property – the taking of property to pay the fine created illegally in the first place through coercion and duress.
This is the job description of police officers…
This is service at the barrel of a gun.
So can a ticket be an “order”?
ORDER, contracts. An indorsement (endorsement) or short writing put upon the back of a negotiable bill or note, for the purpose of passing the title to it, and making it payable to another person. 2. When a bill or note is payable to order, which is generally expressed by this formula, “to A B, or order,”or” to the order of A B,” in this case the payee, A B may either receive the money secured by such instrument, or by his order, which is generally done by a simple indorsement, (q. v.) pass the right to receive it to another. But a bill or note wanting these words, although not negotiable, does not lose the general qualities of such instruments… Vide Bill of Exchange; Indorsement. 3. An informal bill of exchange or a paper which requires one person to pay or deliver to another goods on account of the maker to a third party, is called an order.
The police officer is creating a bill of exchange (an order) requiring you to pay or deliver yourself (as surety) to the third party (the court/government). You are agreeing to this order with your signature.
PARTY, practice, contracts. When applied to practice, by party is understood either the plaintiff or defendant. In contracts, a party is one or more persons who engage to perform or receive the performance of some agreement. Vide Parties to contrads; Parties to ‘actions; Parties to a suit in equity.
PERFORMANCE. The act of doing something; the thing done is also called a performance; as, Paul is exonerated from the obligation of his contract by its performance… 2. When a contract has been made by parol, which, under the statute of frauds and perjuries, could not be enforced, because it was not in writing, and the party seeking to avoid it, has received the whole or a part performance of such agreement, he cannot afterwards avoid it… and such part performance will enable the other party to prove it aliunde (from another place)…
PAROL. More properly parole. A French word, which means literally, word or speech. It is used to distinguish contracts which are made verbally or in writing not under seal, which are called parol… which are under seal which bear the name of deeds or specialties… It is proper to remark that when a contract is made under seal, and afterwards it is modified verbally, it becomes wholly a parol contract… 2. Pleadings are frequently denominated in the parol. In some instances the term parol is used to denote the entire pleadings in a cause as when in an action brought against an infant heir, on an obligation of his ancestors, he prays that the parol may demur, i. e., the pleadings may be stayed, till he shall attain full age… But a devisee cannot pray the parol to demur. 3. Parol evidence is evidence verbally delivered by a witness. As to the cases when such evidence will be received or rejected…
SEAL – OFFICE, English practice. The office at which certain judicial writs are sealed with the prerogative seal, and without which they are of no authority. The officer whose duty it is to seal such writs is called “sealer of writs;”
SEALING OF A VERDICT,practice. The putting a verdict in writing, and placing it in an envelop, which is sealed. To relieve jurors after they have agreed, it is not unusual for the counsel to agree that the jury shall seal their verdict, and then separate. When the court is again in session, the jury come in and give their verdict, in all respects as if it had not been sealed, and a juror may dissent from it, if since the sealing, he has honestly changed his mind.
By now, we should realize that this whole exchange is an attempt to exact (extort) money from people by government. The police officer is having you sign an informal bill (contract) requiring you to pay on account of the officer to the government court system, which in this case is the “third party”. The police man is an employee or officer of the government corporation, and is securing the bill as a title backed by yourself as surety to pay exaction (extortion money) to the government corporation (third party). If you don’t pay, you and your property (registered property with the State) are the collateral that will be collected or put in jail.
As a parol(e) contract, a ticket/citation (illegal summons) has no authority accept that which you give to it with your consent and signature. It is based on the presumption of law (prima facie law) and orated (without seal) by the officer of the government, and relies upon the consent of the governed (you) for its authority and jurisdiction.
A “ticket”, as an illegal summons to appear, is a contract signed by you to avoid being placed in jail (parole). If you do not sign the summons, you will be arrested. Under this threat, most people sign the ticket, just as they would give their wallet over to an armed robber who threatened to harm or kill them.
Thus, the summons is not lawful. It is an illegal contract based on coercion and fear.
Of course, most people just accept and consent to the authority and jurisdiction of the police officer due to their fear of that officer and to that of the illegitimate for-profit court system of the corporations called municipalities and their prisons. If they decide to take a stand against this ridiculous extortion and racketeering ring hilariously called “law enforcement”, they must then do as the illegal summons requires them to do under their forced signature, which is to make an appearance in court.
APPEARANCE, practice. Signifies the filing common or special bail to the action. 2. The appearance… should (in accordance with the ancient practice) purport to be in term time… yet, in fact, much of the business is now done, in periods of vacation (without appearing). 3. The appearance of the parties is no longer (as formerly) by the actual presence in court, either by themselves or their attorneys; but, it must be remembered, an appearance of this kind is still supposed, and exists in contemplation of law. The appearance is effected on the part of the defendant (when he is not arrested) by making certain formal entries in the proper office of the court, expressing his appearance… or, in case of arrest, it may be considered as effected by giving bail to the action. On the part of the plaintiff no formality expressive of appearance is observed.
The most important aspect of this term is the fact that it can be done through the certified mail using a notary public. In short, the notary is your court away from court. By responding (answering) via certified mail (certification show proof of receipt by the court) with a notarized letter (the notary makes the letter official by witness), the court must then consider that answer as a contract. It must answer that contract or be in violation of it. Thus, a time period (generally 21 days) for the answer of the court must be included within your letter, just as the original illegal summons allowed you a certain amount of time to pay for your fine or appear in court. Items requested should be things like the judges oath and affirmation to the united states of America (not the United States without America), a fee schedule showing the fees required by you to conduct commerce in that court, and demands for cause of action among other things.
This is your appearance and your answer to the illegal summons. And the last thing you want to do is to appear in a court, unless it is with a grand jury.
In a grand jury, the judge has no real authority over you, and the people of the grand jury decide the outcome of the case. Chances are, since the court system is a for-profit enterprise, the case will be dismissed long before it reaches an expensive and arduous grand jury process that must be paid for by the government. After all, they just wanted to exact you of the amount of the citation, and hope you will just be a good little slave and pay it via mail or online with a credit card. And with the judge and police officer participating in organized crime, the last thing they would want is to be indicted by a grand jury for coercion, racketeering, and illegal contracts created at gunpoint.
It is important to note here that when we show up to what is commonly referred to as “traffic court”, we are not really going to court at all. In fact, often times the presiding attorney over the traffic court is not even a true judge, but is just an administrative clerk assigned to arbitrate the proceedings. In order to actually make an appearance, the traffic court would have to schedule a hearing, which it does for those who are fooled into making a plea of “not guilty”. Of course, the only true answer to the question posed by the court as to your being guilty, not guilty, or no contest, is the word “innocent”.
INNOCENCE, The absence of guilt. 2. The law presumes in favor of innocence, even against another presumption of law…
Making a plea of “not guilty” is not synonymous with being innocent. In a municipal administrative traffic court (legal setting), you are presumed guilty. Only in law is one presumed innocent. This is why “traffic courts” are set up as the first place the people will appear. Traffic courts are like spider webs – they catch the 99% of the ignorant people who make an appearance there, and entrap them with a plea. Claiming innocence is not a plea. It is a demand.
CLAIM. A claim is a challenge of the ownership of a thing which a man has not in possession, and is wrongfully withheld by another…
The claim of the innocence of a man by that man cannot be withheld or challenged by the court.
However, the guilt of a man who claims his person (a corporation/thing) to be not guilty can be so held and presumed under contract created by the plea.
With the plea of “not guilty”, guilt is still assumed by the court under the contract (ticket) signed. After all, you signed the ticket – and this could be construed as an admission of guilt (though you had no choice and would be arrested if you didn’t sign). The plea itself is also a contractual agreement with the court, and the court will demand (legal obligation) action (recovery of what is due the court by contract) based on any plea. A plea of any type is not a demand, but is instead literally a process of begging of the courts forgiveness by answering the declaration (challenge) of the unlawful plaintiff (police officer of the court or government), as opposed to answering the court’s claim with your own demand for the cause of action through the notarized and certified mail, as talked about above.
PLEA, practice. The defendant’s answer by matter of fact, to the plaintiff’s declaration.
PLEA, chancery practice… A plea is a special answer to a bill, and differs in this from an answer in the common form, as it demands the judgment of the court in the first instance, whether the matter urged by it does not debar the plaintiff from his title to that answer which the bill requires… 2. Pleas are of three sorts: 1. To the jurisdiction of the court. 2. To the person of the plaintiff. 3. In bar of the plaintiff’s suit…
This process of making a plea takes place within the court, and binds the plea maker (defendant) to the court in contract. One should never make a plea, for this assigns the jurisdiction of the court to the case, and places the person under that jurisdiction.
In opposition to this, an answer may be created by the innocent man to the the courts (plaintiff’s) claim prior to the date of the summons, which may challenge the jurisdiction of the court and require a cause of action of the plaintiff. In most traffic citation cases, there is no cause of action, because the demand was created without the cause of action existing. So there is no official cause of action that dated prior to the illegal summons issued by the police officer (plaintiff), thus the demand (citation and summons) was not based on a legal action of that court – which would have created the summons in the first place. And so your notarized “answer” to the court listed on the “ticket” (illegal summons) through the certified mail is to demand the cause of action, for which the court cannot produce because the summons was created without an action by the court.
Thus, this paradox is not answerable by the court, and its jurisdiction is challenged successfully. Remember, in traffic code violation cases, a civil action is a legal demand of one’s right, or it is the form given by law for the recovery of that which is due.
There is no law that gives a corporate for-profit municipal traffic court the lawful ability to recover what is due to them under a contract (citation/illegal summons) that was created under duress and by force and coercion. If you pay the fee listed on a ticket, you are doing so under your own free will with consent (and ignorance of the law), and accepting the validity, pain, and punishment of the unlawful contract by paying the fee, so as to not have to appear physically in court. This is extortion, and you submit to it by payment or by appearing in traffic court, instead of standing on your natural, God-given rights against tyranny.
What does it mean to legally answer the court?
ANSWER, practice. The declaration of a fact by a witness after a question has been put asking for it…
ANSWER, pleading in equity. A defense in writing made by a defendant, to the charges contained in a bill or information, filed by the plaintiff against him in a court of equity… 2. As a defendant is called by a bill or information to make a discovery of the several charges it contains, he must do so, unless he is protected either by a demurrer, a plea, or disclaimer…
DISCOVERY, practice, pleading. The act of disclosing or revealing by a defendant, in his answer to a bill filed against him in a court of equity.
The answer is part of the discovery process in our case. It should be done by mail.
PLEADING, practice. The statement in a logical, and legal form, of the facts which constitutethe plaintiff’s cause of action, or the defendant’s ground of defense; it is the formal mode of alleging that on the record, which would be the support, or the defense of the party in evidence… In a general sense, it is that which either party to a suit at law alleges for himself in a court, with respect to the subject-matter of the cause, and the mode in which it is carried on, including the demand which is made by the plaintiff; but in strictness, it is no more than setting forth those facts or arguments which show thejustice or legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s demand, and the defendant’s defense, without including the statement of the demand itself, which is contained in the declaration or count. Bac. Abr. Pleas and Pleading.
So what does it mean for a police officer to “serve” a process or a notice?
PROCESS, practice. So denominated because it proceeds or issues forthin order to bring the defendant into court, to answer the charge preferred against him, and signifies the writ or judicial means by which he is brought to answer… 3. In criminal cases that proceeding which is called a warrant, before the finding of the bill, is termed process whenissued after the indictment has been found by the jury…
PROCESS, rights. The means or method of accomplishing a thing.
NOTICE. The information given of some act done, or the interpolation by which some act is required to be done. It also signifies, simply, knowledge; as A had notice that B was a slave… 2. Notices should always be in writing; they should state, in precise terms, their object, and be signed by the proper person, or his authorized agent, be dated, and addressed to the person to be affected by them.
In case you missed that, the “serve” part of “To Protect and Serve” is to deliver notices and to issue process (serve process) so as to give official notice to you that you are either required to pay a fine, fee, tax, or other exaction (extortion), or are required to appear in court via a warrent in criminal charges, or as a defendant in a civil case.
To “serve” does not mean to “help”.
It means to “force” or to “deliver”.
“Serving” is a legal term, not a lawful one. Cops are not required to help you or to protect you in any way, accept those which are required of the cop in serving legal documents in process, notice, or summons.
But let’s go back further into the roots of the word serve under feudal law:
SERVICE,feudal law. That duty which the tenant owes to his lord, by reason of his fee or estate. 2. The services, in respect of their quality, were either free or base, and in respect of their quantity and the time of exacting them, were either certain or uncertain. 2 Bl. Com. 62. 3. In the civil law by service is sometimes understood servitude. (q. v.)
SERVITUDE,civil law. A term which indicates the subjection of one person to another person, or of a person to a thing, or of a thing to a person, or of a thing to a thing… 4. The subjection of one person to another is a purely personal servitude; if it exists in the right of property which a person exercises over another, it is slavery. When the subjection of one person to another is not slavery, it consists simply in the right of requiring of another what he is bound to do, or not to do; this right arises from all kinds of contracts or quasi contracts. Lois des Bat. P. 1, c. 1, art. 1.
SERVITUS,civil law. A service or servitude; a burden imposed by law, or the agreement of parties upon certain persons, for the benefit of others; or upon one estate for the advantage of another, or for the benefit of another person than the owner.
SERVITUS.Servitude; slavery; a state of bondage. “Servitus autem, est constitutio,” say the Institutes of Justinian, 1, 3, 2, “qua quis dominio alieno contra naturam subjicitur.” Servitude is a disposition of the law of nations, by which, against common right, one man has been subjected to the dominion of another. See Bract. 4 b; Co. Litt. 116.
SUBJECTION. The obligation of one or more persons to act at the discretion, or according to the judgment and will of others.
SUBJECT,contracts. The thing (i.e.person) which is the object of an agreement…
SUBJECT,persons, government. An individual member of a nation, who is subject to the laws; this term is used in contradistinction to citizen, which is applied to the same individual when considering his political rights (not the same as natural rights – political rights are codified civil legal privileges granted via contract. Natural rights are God-given and above the laws of men.).
SLAVE.A man who is by law deprived of his liberty for life, and becomes the property of another. 2. A slave has no political rights, and generally has no civil rights. He can enter into no contract unless specially authorized by law; what he acquires generally, belongs to his master… 3. In Maryland, Missouri and Virginia slaves are declared by statute to be personal estate, or treated as such… In Kentucky, the rule is different, and they are considered real estate… In general a slave is considered a thing and not a person; but sometimes he is considered as a person; as when he commits a crime; for example, two white persons and a slave can commit a riot…
Remember, the 13th Amendment didn’t end slavery, it made all persons as equal slaves through conviction. This is what government calls equal rights!
Remember, the police are there to serve you process and notice and to protect your rights of punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind.
What more really needs to be said here?
.
For more fun and understanding of our collective disposition within this government fraud per the legal definitions of the words that bind us, you may wish to explore my other essay, here:
Disclaimer: I am not an attorney. I am not offering legal advice. I am not practicing law. I will never act as or within any of these presumptions. Claims put forth otherwise will be met with a lawsuit for defamation of my character and slander… If you understand this, then you understand self-actualization and liberty.
.
P.S. I turned 40 years old today. Happy berth-day to me…
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 8th, 2012
With the help of the mainstream media and its rags, the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) is yet again using its over $233 in reported investment fund wealth to somehow claim it is in a deficit, despite having an investment return this fiscal year.
(Note here that the actual gross fund balances are generally many billions higher, and were reported as $245,848,527,000 in 2011, and $204,727,543,000 in the 2010 CAFR’s.)
USA Today put out the following story, which was of course originally printed from the false-news clearing house, Associated Press:
“SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The nation’s largest public pension fund collected a dismal 1% annual return on its investments, a figure far short of projections that will likely bring pressure on California’s state and local governments to contribute more money, officials said Monday.
The return reported by the California Public Employees’ Retirement System was well below its projected return of 7.5% for the fiscal year that ended June 30.
The investment returns are critical because taxpayers are on the hook for the difference if the pension funds fail to meet their performance targets.
“The last 12 months were a challenging period for all investors as the ongoing European debt crisis and slowing global economic growth increased market volatility and reduced equity returns,” said chief investment officer Joe Dear. “It’s a clear reminder that we must remain focused on performance, risk and internal controls in today’s financial environment.”
The fund was most impacted by a negative -7% return on global equities. Half the pension’s assets are in equities, Dear said.
The fund, known as CalPERS, runs a $234 billion pension system for more than 1.6 million state employees, school employees and local government workers…”
–=–
In this first three paragraphs we can see the entire scam played out in front of us, as told from a master story-teller who is trying to sell sunglasses to a blind man. But even a blind man should be able to read between the lines here…
So far, we have learned that the CalPERS Pension fund has earned a 1% increase in its investment portfolio, which for this year would have been over $2.2 billion dollar in gains on investments. Yes, that’s $2,200,000,000 when spelled out properly. And this is of course reported as bad news!
Why?
Simply because CalPERS did not reach its “projected” goal. It wished upon a star, and failed to reach that star. It did not lose value or money, it only failed to miss its desired gains. It still did fine, and has no problems whatsoever meeting its “obligations” to pensioners. In fact, if CalPERS liquidated all of its investments today at today’s market value it could easily pay future pension benefits for the next 15-20 years.
So what’s the problem?
That’s just it, there is no real or tangible problem. You see, governments across the country are crying broke or bankruptcy based on this type of situation – hiding assets with future liabilities, without reporting the future assets that will pay for those liabilities. With billions in assets, all of this hoopla is based on nothing more than throwing a temper tantrum because the CalPERS fund didn’t reach what it wanted to reach this year.
It’s true. Nothing bad has actually happened here, as we will see in a moment. But the government creates any excuse it can in order to collect higher taxes, or to funnel as much taxpayer money into the pension system. Case in point: here the article states that “California State and local governments (will be forced to) contribute more money“. In other words, the government wishes to keep its investment wealth untouched instead of liquidating it to pay for pension obligations to its employees. And so it will raise taxes instead, as the article states here: “taxpayers are on the hook for the difference if the pension funds fail to meet their performance targets.” Remember, taxes fund government. So government contributions means taxpayer contributions, despite the fact that taxpayers receive absolutely no benefits from the pension system, only employees of the government receive pension benefits.
Now imagine if Target, Bank of America, General Electric, or any other corporation out there forced all people in America or in an individual State or local government to pay for its private employee’s pension fund costs. How would that make you feel? Well, that is how the pension fund system works, as this article tells you.
Note here as well that the so-called “loss” on the equity value of stock and investments does not represent a loss of the actual number of stocks or investments. Just because a stock goes down in value for a 1 year period, does not mean that it will stay down. The same amount of stock is still held, and that physical equity has not changed, only this years value.
For instance, the following capital gains for 2010 and 2011 fiscal years were stated by the CalPERS pension fund in its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report:
CalPERS (2011) –$41.1 billion gain in net assets after all benefits paid.
“CalPERS reports 20.7% investment return for fiscal year“
“The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) reported a 20.7 percent return on investments in preliminary estimates for the one-year period that ended June 30, 2011.
This is our best annual performance in 14 years, said Rob Feckner, CalPERS Board President. For the second straight fiscal year, the Pension Fund exceeded its long-term annualized earnings target of 7.75 percent.”
CalPERS (2010) – 13.3 % increase with a $23.2 billion gain in net assets after all benefits paid.
“The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension, earned a 12.5 percent return in 2010, led by gains in private equity and U.S. stocks, Chief Investment Officer John Dear said.
The $228 billion pension fund earned 17.3 percent from domestic equity and 21.5 percent in alternative investments such as private equity, Dear said today. Its real-estate portfolio lost 5 percent while its fixed-income investments gained 12 percent“.”
Also, in 2009 fiscal year, as with all fiscal years, the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report show the following contributions from employees and separately from taxpayers (government).
Employees:$4,154,388,000
Taxpayers:$7,605,532,000
And here is a USA Today article with the headline:
“Calpers posts 16.7% gain for fiscal year“
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) — Calpers, the biggest U.S. pension fund, earned a 16.7% return on its investments in its fiscal year ended June 30, (2004) best returns in six years, the fund said Tuesday.
And in 1998, CalPERS reported a record 19.5% gain in its investment portfolio. Yipee!
So the question you might be asking yourself is… Why don’t the taxpayers get a refund of all of that money they are putting into the pension system when there is a good year, when we have to be “on the hook” to support the fund with more taxpayer money in a bad year? Not that this was really a bad year, mind you.
–=–
Notice here that I am not mentioning 2008 in this list, and instead giving the reader the impression that CalPERS has gained every year in its portfolio. That is what the news does, you see, but not me. In 2008, Calpers lost a butt-load of asset value to the tune of $58.8 billion due to the financial crash of that time. This was big news of course.
The point here is that a portfolio such as this is designed to acquire as many assets as possible, knowing in advance that those assets will go up and down in the short term, but is designed for the long term. A slow year or a loss is expected every once in a while, of course, and events happen and the economy goes bad and the strengthens again. This is an established reality that any long term investor will tell you.
So let’s here what CalPERS itself says about this years portfolio:
Press Release
July 16, 2012
External Affairs Branch
CalPERS Reports Preliminary 2011-12 Fiscal Year Performance of 1 Percent
Real estate portfolio earns nearly 16 percent exceeding benchmark
SACRAMENTO, CA – The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) today reported a 1 percent return on investments for the 12 months that ended June 30, 2012, falling short of its benchmark that returned 1.7 percent. CalPERS assets at the end of the fiscal year stood at more than $233 billion.
The small gain – despite continued volatility in world markets and economies – was helped by improved performance of CalPERS real estate investments. Investments in income-generating properties like office, industrial and retail assets returned approximately 15.9 percent, outperforming the pension fund’s real estate benchmark by more than 3 percent.
CalPERS performance was negatively impacted by significant allocations to U.S. and international public equities.
“The last twelve months were a challenging period for all investors as the ongoing European debt crisis and slowing global economic growth increased market volatility and reduced equity returns,” said Joe Dear, CalPERS Chief Investment Officer. “It’s a clear reminder that we must remain focused on performance, risk and internal controls in today’s financial environment.”
CalPERS 1 percent return is below the fund’s discount rate of 7.5 percent, a long-term hurdle lowered recently in response to a steady decline in inflation and as part of CalPERS routine evaluation of economic assumptions. CalPERS 20-year investment return is 7.7 percent.
“It’s important to remember that CalPERS is a long-term investor and one year of performance should not be interpreted as a signal about our ability to achieve our investment goals over the long-term,” said Henry Jones, Chair of CalPERS Investment Committee…
Returns for real estate, private equity and some components of the inflation assets reflect market values through March 31, 2012 (not June 30, 2012). Final performance including the last quarter of the fiscal year will be available after asset valuations are completed.
Investment returns are based on compounded daily earnings over the year, including continuing member contributions and benefit payments, and do not precisely correspond to one-year changes in CalPERS overall portfolio market value.
In another listed report, the CalPERS system shows that “CalPERS Outperformed Its 7.5 Percent Target 13 out of the Last 20 Fiscal Years (FY 1992/93 – FY 2011/12).
–=–
So what does this all mean?
Remember, this reported bad thing of an over $2 billion gain in net assets for the fiscal year is being reported after all benefits have been paid out to the employees of this pension fund. And so there is no loss at all for the year, and this gain is all profit for the fund.
Also notice that for the last 20 years, this fund has attained an above average return on investments, 7.7% compared to the desired 7.5%. This is the wonderful aspect of the CAFR – it allows you to see previous cycles so as to not be fooled by media sound bites. Here, CalPER’s confirms the data in the financial statements that prove that this fund is wealthy beyond even the stated CalPER’s long term goals.
Simply put, this whole media frenzy was a false flag scare tactic – utilizing incomplete information for the CalPERS fiscal year report as stated by CalPERS to pre-program the people of California to accept unnecessary and unneeded increases in taxation, and all for a pension fund that will benefit the taxpayers in no way whatsoever.
We will not know the true statement of CalPERS financial situation until the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is released for fiscal year 2011-2012, sometime in the next couple of months.
The problem is, most taxpayers have never heard of the CAFR, and place blind trust in their government and their media when they report such ridiculously contradiction data-sets as we have seen here from the Associated Press. And as government forces taxpayers to contribute taxpayer money into the public pension systems of the Federal, State, County, municipality, and district funds on an involuntary basis every year, the taxpayer base looses over $900 billion into the either of public pension black hole each year. This is to say nothing of what the employees of government are also forced to contribute.
If Walmart or Haliburton corporations required taxpayers to fund their pensions at no benefit to the taxpayers in any way, there would be riots in the street tomorrow.
And if they tried to get away with trying to convince the people (or for that matter the IRS) that their over $2 billion dollar gain in investments was somehow a bad thing or was somehow a loss requiring more taxpayer infusions into the Walmart or Haliburton corporate structure, there would be attorneys, accountants, CEO’s, and Board members hanging from the nearest tree…
What gives America?
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, July 21, 2012
