| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
|||||||||||||
| Prison Planet | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Thu Jun 9th, 2011 12:36 pm |
|
21st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Anyone, This topic was created by someone other than me. I did not create this topic. This topic was create by someone who chose to copy my responses to another topic, and then paste my responses to another topic into this topic; and a decision was made, not by me, and not with my consent, to attribute this topic to me, which is false. This is not my topic. I can, however, see value in this topic, as a topic. Example: We're a large, diverse industry, and no one is in charge. That is a short and concise description of The Internet; which remains an example of competition. Not a "theory" of competition; as in "conspiracy theory" - The Internet is an example of a working competition. The quote above is cut and pasted from the following link: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-ipv6-day-internet-test I am going to also add my comments concerning the choice of the word "Theories" to the topic title; and again reinforce the understanding that I did not choose that topic title, and restate the fact that my name is misleadingly placed as the topic starter, which is false, I did not start this topic, and I did not choose the topic title, and I did not choose the word "Theories" to label my comments about the force of competition, which is a force, not a theory, and to me this is as important as knowing friends of liberty from foes of liberty; whereby confusing the two will transfer power from those who produce power to those who steal it, or confusing the two will empower the criminals at the expense of the victims, and that isn't a theory, that is a process that has been accurately measured, is accurately measured, and will continue to be accurately measured as that process has proceeded, is proceeding, and so long as it will proceed in that measurable way. The idea that my comments about competition are "theories" goes along the same path as all the other deceptions whereby that which is perceived is supposedly dependent upon that capacity to perceive it; which may or may not be true in any case, and the problem concerns the supposed authority that dictates that which is fiction as if it is fact; without trial, without question, without competitive interpretation testing validity of the supposed facts that are measurably fictions. Competition is, and competition does, and competition that is, and competition that does, is not a theory, it is what it is, and it does what it does, it is not a "Theory" no matter who claims that it is, no matter what badge the person claiming that it is holds, no matter what license the false claim is backed up with, no matter what army backs up the claim, and no matter what force is used to dictate the false claim. Competition is not a theory, and that is not a claim of mine, I don't own the claim, my viewpoint is separate from that which competition is; while my viewpoint can be known as a competitive viewpoint that does seek to know, realize, and then communicate competition. A. Competition is what it is, even if no one claims as much. B. I can know that competition is, and I can communicate that understanding with words; and another person can claim that my knowledge of competition is "just a theory" and that I am a competition conspiracy theorist, or make any claim imaginable. C. Competition is a theory that is supported by competition conspiracy theorists; not something that can actually be measured, and competition is not something real; competition is a utopian fantasy, competition is a fiction, competition is an imaginary creation of someone's over active mind, something that someone with too much time on their hands will invent when bored, and competition is fancy, a choice, and competition vanishes when people stop believing in such nonsense. There are, above, THREE, competitive "claims", or "theories", so as to illustrate, to make available for individual perceptive judgment,
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 12th, 2011 02:52 pm |
|
22nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
July 12 2011 Listening to Alex Jones ask: "What is it with people who know what is going on but they don't talk about it?" I can't speak for anyone else, but I remember the process of shedding the lies, and realizing the truth, and during that process there is a relentless awareness of growing moral concern. What drives moral concern? Fear? What happens when the relentless awareness of growing moral concern reaches a level at which that perception, at that moment, is indistinguishable from abject fear? Think about that, please, as a process. A person is at point A, in time, and place, and this hypothetical person is unaware, and then this person is, in the next moment: made aware, and then, from that moment on: the awareness, once started, is relentless, it grows, and grows, and grows, and that relentless awareness of growing moral concern reaches a level at which that perception is indistinguishable from abject fear at a point in time and place; it reaches a maximum point of high focus consciousnesses. The person is happy, content, comfortable, and led to believe that the authorities will take care of everything, and all is right, and all is good, and the future is so bright, I've got to wear shades, and then a door opens, and it opens more, and more, and then the naked person is alone in the spot light, shivering, frightened to death, with all the eyes of past, present, and future humanity bearing down as one ominous force of will. At time A the person is happily ignorant. Then a spark occurs to the person, the person, like me in High School, reads something, I read a book titled The Lusitania, back in 1975, or so, and that spark of light opens a door, and from that moment on that door begins to open, almost imperceptibly at first, the spark is like a seed, and it slowly grows, it is one single cell at first, but the cell divides, and there are two cells, two books, then it grows, and there are paths to new sources, and then it grows, and there are articles, and other people, like Ron Paul, or Noam Chomsky, Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn, Alex Jones, other books, movies, like The Money Masters, or The History of Oil by Robert Newmann, more, and more, and more, the door opens, the dark room lights up, and then suddenly the person arrives at that point, that point of no return, that point at which the light is blinding, and the point at which the growing moral concern reaches a peak power point whereby the perception is indistinguishable from abject fear. Does the person slam the door shut, or does the person slam the door shut much earlier? Abject fear? Irrational fear? Paralyzing fear? The deer caught in the headlights? "Their mind is scared by corruption. They are lazy people. They want to buy into corruption." I hear Alex Jones reporting. "They immediately go to tribalism." Alex Jones If you can't beat'em: join'em. I've heard that before. What do you do on the path of a growing awareness of moral consciousness? Do you begin to throw anyone other than you under the bus, so as to delay your day of reckoning? "They are trying to find the people.... will these people do the things we want them to do..." I hear a caller speak about a Global Leadership program seeking "the wheat" from "the chaff". "Waking up to this is like a grieving process... no body want's to believe..." a guest named Micheal. I constantly, since the mid 80s at least, get accused of fabricating a false reality, and there is a word for that process, it is called projection or it is called transference. A person who has chosen to shut the opening door of accurate realization chooses to throw lesser (power) people ahead of them, and from then on, after that decision, the doors is shut, and that person constructs a false front to fill their chosen state of ignorance, so as to over power the force of moral conscious. Some people are born without that capacity, that force is absent, by way of a mutated brain, a clinical narcissist, or by whatever actually causes that to be factual, a person so constituted will not have a capacity for moral understanding, such people do exist, they are also called sociopaths, psychopaths, serial killers, etc. Typically they torture animals, they are typically pathological liars, the are typically incorrigible criminals, the wheat, from a legal crime viewpoint, compared to the chaff of people who do have the chains of moral consciousness binding them to a life of moral thoughts, and moral actions. The sociopaths open that door of light, why would they not do so, what is to fear about any truth, any fact, if those people have no fear of moral awareness, no fear of what moral awareness might drive them to do, what moral awareness might cause them to think, and no fear as to the consequences, intended or unintended, that result from a decision to allow moral consciousness to be a powerful force driving thought and action? Therefore, they know, and those who close the door don't. They are knowledgeable, and well prepared, powerful, and armed with facts, which is much more powerful compared to the false fronts fed to those who slam that door shut, for fear of what is in that room, beyond that door, for fear of being thrust into a world where moral consciousness is powerful, demanding, and liable to be very, very, very painful, difficult, hard, uncomfortable, demanding, even torturous, and places the individual face to face with the worst evil monsters ever to have disgraced, and discredited, the human species to date. It is a power struggle. Life is a power struggle. When you no longer have the power to survive, guess what happens, in each case, without fail?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Jul 12th, 2011 03:27 pm |
|
23rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
I don't know, am I? Paranoid Puppet Master, If you don't know, who does? I don't, that is why I asked. You wrote this: So throughout history people were using electricity as sound money? I'm shocked! I didn't write that, you did. You make a statement, and add a question mark to the end of the statement. Why? Why did you do that? Your statement is false, as if someone, not you, but someone wrote that false statement. Who wrote that false statement? You, or someone else but you? As far as I know you are the only one who wrote that false statement, and as far as I know you are the only one who chose to put a question mark at the end of the false statement that you alone wrote. Do you intend to connect me, somehow, with the false statement that you wrote, as if to suggest that I wrote the false statement that you alone wrote? I don't know. I ask. I know why I write the things I write, and all you have to do is ask, and I'll tell you why I choose the words I choose. If you ask me I won't answer with "I don't know", since I do know why I choose the words I choose. I won't then ask you to tell me why I choose the words I choose, since you can't know, since I write the things I write, not you. You highlight with bold text some of the words I choose: Gold bugs have been around for a long time Here is a reference: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=labadie;cc=labadie;rgn=full%20text;idno=2916966.0001.001;didno=2916966.0001.001;view=image;seq=00000001 That is a reference to the statement I made, and that is a supporting reference to the statement that you quoted in bold text. That is a reference concerning the group of people who are known by what they think, and known by what they do, as being in the group known as Gold Bugs. There is a quote in that reference that I will choose to republish right here, right now, because it is relevant to the message I intend to report to whomever has an interest in these facts. Title: OF INTEREST TO GOLD BUGS. by Stephen Pearl Andrews Date of the republication is 1881 Benjamin R. Tucker Publisher (Black Market Press in those days, competing against the monopoly mass media press of those days) A field which has no fence upon one of its sides is not fenced in, no matter how high and strong its fences may be on the other sides. So the volume of the currency is not, in any true sense, limited by prohibitions of free banking, by a return to specie basis, or by any other means, so long as negotiable paper can be freely issued by individuals; and this free issue of negotiable paper is too useful, and too well intrenched in necessity, ever hereafter to be interfered with. Commerce can be hindered and trammeled to some extent-it may even, for a time, be seriously disturbed-by statute arrangements claiming to regulate the currency, whether by restrictive measures, or by flooding the community with over-issues; but the volume of the currency can no longer be adjusted by such means. Now you, or anyone, can begin to understand the full measure of what I am reporting as I choose the words I choose to report what I can, as I can, within my power to do so, and that source, that Mr. Andrews, is not just some crack head in history. You can know more, or you can choose to remain ignorant of your own motives, and you can choose to rely upon other people to tell you what you mean, if that is your choice. Today there is even less of a fence that can overpower the need for a more accurate currency, or power to purchase, as can be illustrated with such things as: PayPal E-Gold Liberty Dollar City run legal currency experiments of which I can link examples Private Stocks Private Bonds Government stocks Government bonds Personal Checking accounts Electricity Algae based fuel Cooking oil based fuel Fuel made through the process of electrolysis by which sewage is fed into a device and hydrogen is produced. and now Electricity All of which are forms of currency, open parts of the fence, black market competitors, or even legal competitors, until the monopoly powers exert monopoly power to crush so fatal a spirit as legal competition. Those are my word choices. Those are not your versions of my word choices. I choose those words for reasons that I know, and I don't have to ask anyone to tell me why I choose those words. I don't know, am I? You are at one time claiming to speak for me, and in the next moment you don't even know why you publish those supposed versions of my words? Are you serious?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Jul 15th, 2011 11:22 am |
|
24th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28579.htmAnother major reason why the Libyans are being subverted, bombed and strafed by NATO is that Qaddafi has launched numerous initiatives to set up alternative banking and development institutions throughout the continent, a stumbling-block to IMF/World Bank "stabilization" programs which typically impoverish the natives while lining the pockets of global financiers and their corrupt minions. Power cannot be allowed to increase beyond a level that is manageable to the legal criminals who perpetrate the legal money monopoly extortion racket. Power must be collected from all power sources, all surplus wealth must flow from all productive sources, to the central, legal, monopoly, money, extortion racket, regime, through all forms of deceit, by way of threats of violence, and by the willful perpetration of acts of vicious, terrifying, horrible, mass violence upon innocent and guilty alike. Stolen power must then be used to eliminate all competition where ever and when ever competition arises. Power is used to Boom all power producers that favor the legal criminals, for as long as the Boom cycle favors the legal criminals, and then power is used to Bust producers who no longer favor the legal criminals, and power continues to flow, through interest payments during Booms, to the legal criminals, from the producers, and power continues to flow, through asset forfeiture, during Busts, to the legal criminals, and from the producers. It is as complicated as that, or as simple as that, whichever level of precision the individual desires to know, as all the legal criminals keep precise records of their crimes. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ There are two sets of books, at least, where one set of books are published for "public consumption" which is itself a lie, the one set of books published for "public consumption" is in reality published by the legal criminals for the targeted victims to suffer from that willfully falsified account. The second set of books is Comprehensive, published Annually, accounts for all Finances, and Reports the actual flow of power from the victims to the criminals precisely. There may now be a third, or fourth, set of books, since Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports have been discovered and is now public knowledge that is gaining currency. Google CAFR, see what you find: http://www.rense.com/general74/whatr.htm Why target Libya? Why now? Why not target Ithaca, or North Fork? http://utopianist.com/2011/01/stimulus-writ-small-tiny-california-town-prints-its-own-currency/ They target everyone, all the time, the power flows from the many who are everywhere, ready, willing, and able, victims, to the few who are never to be found, elusive, unknown, stealthy, and they must be a horrible group to join, what is the price of admission? Think about that please. What is the cost of joining that exclusive club, where everyone, anywhere, anyone you talk to, anyone you see, anyone you know, any honest person who will answer an honest question with an honest answer, pays them. Everyone pays them. Everyone. What is the cost of admission to become one of those few, who if asked, and if the answer is honest, are paid, and they owe nothing to no one, ever. Please put on your thinking caps, and don't borrow ideas from legal criminals. There is, still, competition which competes against the legal money monopoly extortion racket criminals, as some producers of usable money, competitive money, offer higher quality, and lower cost money, to those who need a usable currency, which is everyone who intends to compete in global business. Fights, wars, turf battles, serve the legal criminals, all except one, one turf battle cannot be allowed to exist, there must be no legal money competitors anywhere, not one of any significant power. That will not do. That is not to say that there cannot be, allowed, a phoney legal money market competitor, or two, or many, which is known as a cabal, or a consortium, as the many, allowed, phoney competitors, still pay the single, legal, monopoly, few, for the privilege of serving those Money Masters. This is not news. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0hs Where have you been?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 16th, 2011 03:42 pm |
|
25th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQ37lFha8Uo Anyone, While listening to Alex Jones the subject of criminal government employees ("elected" agents of the government) kidnapping, and abusing, innocent human beings, or the "white slavery" phenomenon, was thrown onto the discussion table. To anyone who questions the validity of the accusation, as a cause to employ interest, concern, or preventative power, leading to accurate identification of victims, perpetrators, leading to discovery, and trial, finding the guilty, and at least warning potential future victims, and at least cutting off the tax money being sent to the possible perpetrators, then, look at the video above, which reports the existence of a "for public consumption" documentary, that was not allowed to be broadcast, according to that source. As far as I know the documentary, not the Youtube video, the documentary that was ready for broadcast on The Discovery Channel, predates Alex Jones's rejuvenated concern on this issue. Before Alex Jones began focusing attention on this issue, other people have also done so, and what is the result of those earlier investigations? CENSORSHIP. If you are still skeptical concerning the need to focus attention on this issue, you may not have children, and you may not be young, desirable, and you may not be personally targeted, personally libel, personally at risk, and you may not care that your surplus wealth, your earnings, your dollars, may be now being spent, by very evil people, "dealing with children", kidnapping them, abusing them, selling them, torturing them, and killing them, and so, being skeptical, you may, for just a moment, a fraction of a second, you may, yet, want to investigate a tiny bit more, along one more path. You have been given that video above, which is not an Alex Jones production. as one method of answering the question, if you have the question in mind: Are my tax payments used for kidnapping, torturing, and mass murdering children in America? It sounds too evil to contemplate. But you have one answer in the link above. You may now, still, remain skeptical. Do this: I will also do this: Search for an authoritative measure of the best known accounting of American missing children. Look for that number, from any authoritative source, so as to know, better, the full measure of that obvious, real, phenomenon. You cannot deny the fact, that, children are abducted. How many? I'm going to try Google (while it remains to be an "open source" of information, which is less CENSORED, compared to Major Media, such as The Discovery Channel on Network Television): Typing in the words Child Abduction America Demographics (an initial guess of the best terms to use to find the best answers): First on the list: http://www.petersenese.com/Crisis_In_America.html According to the NISMART - 2 study that used data from 1999, only 28% of the 203,900 estimated abductions by family members or 56,500 abductions were reported by law enforcement. This illustrates a great reluctance by individuals to come forward and report their cases. That is a number, and that number is specific to specific efforts to quantify a specific type of abduction. 203,900 Looking down the Google search of links to information (accurate or not accurate, it is information that is available, rather than information that isn't available): http://www.ygoy.com/index.php/child-abduction-statistics/ 800,000 children are reported missing every year. That is about two children every day. Who investigates the following: Non – family abductions amount to 204,000. These include kidnappers who are acquaintances or complete strangers to the victims. 204,000 per year. http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2810 The U.S. Department of Justice reports How many cases of missing children has the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) helped resolve? I have not personally been involved in an investigation to accurately identify the kidnappers of a child, but the video at the top of the page reports on such an investigation. The names of specific government employees were reported as people who were accused of kidnapping children. Here is one name: Lawrence King Here is a name of one investigator working the case where Lawrence King, a government employee, is accused of kidnapping children. John DeCamp Try those names in a Google Search: Example: http://educate-yourself.org/cn/franklincoverupexcerpt.shtml "Franklin Case Witnesses Implicate FBI and U.S. Elites in Child-Torture and Murder." There you are, there is an avenue on that road. What road? Are your payments of your earnings, which flow to people running the criminal government (they lie, you know it, that makes them, by their own rules, criminals), being used to kidnap, torture, and mass murder children in America? That is the road, and even if you don't want to ask the question, and even if you don't want to know the answer, the facts are borne by the very children who are the victims. Each snuffed out young life screams for some measure of concern from someone, somewhere, please. Is it good enough to say Conspiracy Theorist at the mere mention of such an evil possibility? Are your payments, of your earnings, which flow to the people running what could be your government, used in the commission of kidnapping, enslaving, torturing, and mass murdering innocent children in America? If you have been watching Nancy Grace, groveling over her Tot Mom, consider applying similar concern for one of the victims that you are paying the legal criminals to snuff the life out of, for you, as you hire them, to do whatever pleases them. If it is true, and you refuse to know it, what pleases you? When it is time to pay up, it may be your turn to scream bloody murder, it may be your children's turn, and it may then be much too late to avoid. If it is not true, show me how you have arrived at that knowledge, and to do so, it seems to me, you have to disprove the Franklin Case linked above. If the people you are hiring to protect you, and protect your children, are using the power you give them, to capture the innocent among you, torture them, and murder them, abuse them, use them up, snuff their lives out, what does that make you? A non-conspiracy theorist? Does that please you, and make you happy, so long as it isn't your turn in the torture chamber, just yet?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 23rd, 2011 02:25 pm |
|
26th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
decepticon, Does it smell like crap? I think there will be a peak at which the legal criminals will be at their highest power compared to their victims, borrowing the pendulum illustration. That peak can be measured as money. Money is a very good way to measure that power, as it peaks, and another way is to measure all the screams of pain, and all the piles of murdered innocent. Anyway, the idea is to help the pendulum slow, then stop, then reverse, as it is currently increasing the rate of acceleration in the wrong direction. Why let it do that without a fight? What can be done? What can be done to get that pendulum slowed down, stopped, at the peak worst we allow, then moving our way, and then always moving our way? Again, the measure is money, or screams and piles of dead bodies, and money is as good as the other, both go hand in hand. The more money power sent to the legal criminals the more will be the screams of torture and the piles of dead bodies, since the legal criminals use that stolen power to purchase all that is need to keep that power flowing, moving that pendulum, their way, faster, faster, and faster. Don't confuse the pendulum with The Business Cycle, created, and maintained, by the legal criminals, because The Business Cycle is working around the clock in moving the pendulum their way, as Booms are caused by them, as they spend the money they steal, by way of legal counterfeiting, legal fraud, and so their power to purchase is greatest, and everyone else who has the money power trickling down have less power, net power transfer is from the producers of power to the legal criminals during Boom, and during Bust, the net power transfer is to the legal criminals by way of default, repossession, and title transfer. I'm not speaking about the bottom 98% of the population involved in "playing the game" within the rules dictated, I'm speaking only about the legal criminals at the top, the ones who have the power to decide such things as: 1. Invade Iraq 2. Double the number of dollars in the total dollar account, such as was done in 2008 by the people running The Federal Reserve System of Legal Extortion 3. Award no bid contracts to military contractors who profit from perpetrating aggressive wars for profit, and profit from rebuilding and maintaining infrastructure owned by the destroyers/re-builders. 4. Invade Afghanistan 5. Invade Libya 6. Invade Pakistan 7. Regime change: fill in the blank I am speaking about the continuous flow of power going from 98% of the population as that power flows, faster, and faster, to that 2%, who have names, who wear clothes, and who stink, who are rotten, who are evil, who cause, willfully, the torture of billions, and who, apparently, have fun serial killing, torturing, mass murdering, enslaving, and destroying, even threatening human extinction, on your dime. The Business Cycle moves power from the 98% to the 2% during Boom and Bust, relentlessly, moving the pendulum further out of reach, further away from Liberty, on out to new, never before known, limits of human endurance, and there have been some very high limits, Stalin's regime, Hitler's regime, to name just two, and both were financed by the same legal criminal gangs, perhaps different leaders of the same legal criminal gangs, but those regimes mentioned were designed to accomplish what they did, which is to increase the rate of acceleration that the pendulum swings well out of reach for the friends of liberty. Skeptics can peruse the evidence, or ignore it: http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/ http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/ http://wallstreetrun.com/wall-street-donors-back-obama-campaign.htm http://bankloansandrates.com/2011/07/16/wall-street-backs-romney-over-obama/ They ("Wall Street"), the legal criminals, have your blood, sweat, and tears, bonuses to them, whatever, and what will they buy with your power now? http://www.americanpendulum.com/2011/04/behind-the-real-size-of-the-bailout-14-trillion/ An average Joe has to employ creative thinking, actually set to the task of imagining the full measure of exactly how much power to purchase is, how much power is, 14 trillion dollars, how much power is 14 Trillions dollars for the first person to spend that much power, then how much power is left for the next person to spend? It will have roughly half as much power, which is 7 trillions dollars worth of power to purchase, after the first purchase, which is a rough way to understand how the legal money monopoly extortion racket works, and either way they have that much power, it was your power, and you no longer have that power, they stole it. What are they going to buy? How much power is 14 trillion dollars? What can possibly be the goal, the true goal, for the people who decided to create, so as to spend, 14 trillion dollars? How much would it cost to set World War III in motion? Who much would it cost to bring down The Dollar Hegemony so as to pave the way for an even better legal monopoly extortion racket money system? This isn't that tough to know. Honest productive people have enough power to completely avoid, completely disconnect from, and completely eliminate, legal criminals, because honest productive people are, truly, the source of all that power that causes all that destruction, all that abuse of power called war, specifically the aggressive wars for profit, and since honest productive people have that much power to destroy, they have that much power to produce, and therefore they can produce liberty or death, at will, and the legal criminals know it, so the legal criminals have to, they must, it is an immoral imperative, they have to funnel that productive power so as to cause destruction, failure to cause destruction will result in too much productive power commanded by the ready victims, failure will mean, to them, that they have to get real jobs, honest work, productive work, where they have to provide higher quality products, or services, at lower costs, just like every other honest productive person, if their extortion racket business dries up, if they fail to use all the power produced by all the honest productive people, in the work of destroying each other, on schedule, perpetually, they will be facing powerful victims that are too powerful to be victims. Is that too hard to know, really? This is so simple, even a legal criminal can figure it out, and it is so simple, that the victims have to be constantly feed lies, false fronts, smoke, mirrors, false advertizements, diversions, destruction, waste, devastation, blood, sweat, tears, obligation, debt, debt, obedience, debt, enslavement, punishment, deceit, threats of violence, torture, serial killing, raping, mass murdering, constantly, constantly, constantly, fed lies, lies, lies, harm, injury, fear, fear, fear, fear, work, work, work, toil, slave, blood, blood, sweat, tears, screams, agony, misery, and for what, what becomes the goal under those conditions? Less pain, please? How much can I give you so that you will injure me less tomorrow, while I suffer anything you demand today? Are you kidding me? Am I ranting? What do you smell? The link is a future date. Now is now. In the future, on the calender, is a date, that time will be the new now, and it will be the new now when that time is the new now. Everyone can see it. That date on that calender is a date that everyone with an interest in it, can see it, and news of it can travel like wild fire, and all the sons of liberty, the dads of liberty, the daughters of liberty, the mother's of liberty, the friends of liberty can see it too. What happens on that day? Someone, left leaning someone, picked a day, put it on the calender, and on that day, as anyone, anywhere, with an interest, can see, there will be something done on that day. What are the right leaning people planning? I'm not flapping my jaw. I know of one thing the right leaning people are planning and I'm paying, what little power I have, to attend. Here: http://www.lpac2011.com/ Will anything be invented, then planned, then placed on the calender, and then everyone having an interest in causing the invention to happen can see the date on the calender, and join in on the effort to cause the invention to happen on that day? Yes? No? Why, I don't know? Something can be invented, placed on the calender, and anyone having an interest can join, and on that day, on the calender, that invention happens on that day. How about No More Legal Criminals Day? How about Liberty Day? How about we stop sending our power to the people who use that power to destroy us Day? How about: On July 4th 2012, we will begin using, all of us who have an interest in this happening, we, all of us, will, on July 4th 2012, start using our competitive moneys, the one's we choose, and that is it, thanks for the order to use one money, but that wasn't working for us, so, no thanks, on this day, we choose not to obey such a criminal order. What does that smell like to you? What would happen if, say, next month, or at least by November, that day was on THE calender, and more people began seeing that day on THE calender, and more, and more, and more, people began having an interest in making that day real, when that day arrives, and the number of people, by next month is X, and the number of people by November is 100 times X, and the number of people by May 2012 is over 100 million, what happens according to your sense, of smell, or taste, or interest, or vision, or imagination? I'm curious, the sound of silence is curiously deafening to me. Thanks for the reply.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jul 23rd, 2011 04:03 pm |
|
27th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1009.htmlYet even that gold standard would be fake. Why? Because no one is being charged for a service: storing the gold coins. Gold does not generate interest. Do you find that fact to be the least bit interesting? Money makes the owner of money more money. How does that work? Money works for the owner of money so that the owner does not have to work. Who works? No one? Money makes more money appear, as interest, like a rabbit out of a hat? Gold does no such thing. Gold, as money, even according to the Gold Bugs, does not "earn" interest, as a reward for existing. So, please, how does money just so happen to have this amazing quality, whereby the mere fact that it exists, it is rewarded, as money, all by itself, makes more money. How can the Gold Bugs explain such nonsense? Well, you have to find out yourself, because they don't confess, and they don't answer honest questions. At least the Gold Bugs have a common enemy, common to all friends of liberty, and common to anyone who produces more than they consume, because the common enemy will always be busy finding ways to steal that surplus wealth, in interesting ways, to be sure. Yet even that gold standard would be fake. Why? Because no one is being charged for a service: storing the gold coins. Any time you find a valuable service being offered for free by any bank, you can be sure that there is a ringer somewhere in the arrangement. The bank is luring you into a deal by means of a promise that cannot be met under all circumstances. In this case, it is free gold coin storage. Somewhere in the bank's operations there is a liability against the gold coins – a liability superior to any depositor's claim. Austrian Economists are caught in a self-made clap trap. They want to be paid a reward for being thrifty, which is fine, but who pays them for doing so, why, and what happens if everyone is just as thrifty, then who pays who for what? To get this straight in your head you may well imagine an actual working free market, a market that is as free from effective fraud, as free from effective deceit, as free from effective false advertizement, as free from threats of aggressive violence upon the innocent, and as free from actual aggressive violence upon the innocent as is humanly possible, and in that free market, so defined, anyone can produce any form of money, and anyone can accept any form of money, at any time, anywhere, and under such conditions money will be forced higher in quality and money will be forced toward lower cost. Do you have that in view, and if so, think, and invent, the highest quality money at the lowest cost, and know that someone else will be raising the bar you set, since there is always someone bigger, better, stronger, more powerful, and able to kick your ass; but go ahead invent, think, imagine, produce the highest quality money you can produce in your mind, at the lowest cost you can produce in your mind, and begin the process ahead of time, just in case an actual free money market moves into place, and the legal monopoly money power moves out of place - regime change. This isn't hard to know. How much worse can the money we use be made worse, and how fast can the money we are forced to use be made much, much worse? If that is easier to know, instead of knowing how much better money can be, then you have a scale in view. 1. Money is of a known quality and a known cost right now. 2. Money can become much worse in quality and it can become much more expensive soon. 3. The opposite direction of 2 above. Gold Bugs have money revert back from the horrible quality and extremely high cost that it is now to Gold. Gold is better money, and all but a few people will disagree with such a claim, or accurate assessment, and the viewpoint will be subject to the power of numbers. In other words: if only one person claims, or has an accurate assessment of Gold as being high quality money, then the claim is not baseless, it is based upon one accurate assessment, which isn't going to work, as money. If everyone but one person assesses gold as a powerful money, then the power of numbers, obviously, confirms the accuracy of the assessment. All but a few, very few, people claim that Gold is not money, and as it happens, those few probably own most of the Gold, which should interest you, if anything should, if you want to work less and have more, you should know this, and you should know this well. The clap trap, the corner they paint themselves into, is that Gold is the limit toward better money, and there isn't any thought, any action, any effort, any work, there is no competition imaginable, to them, working to improve upon that standard, therefore, by default, they, in their minds, create a money monopoly. A monopoly is the absence of competition. Competition ends a monopoly. The Austrian Economists may be right, sure, in a free market, gold will become the best possible money, and no one can ever invent anything better, ever. I'm skeptical, since electricity is a much better money, by far, compared to gold, but then again so is oil, and as anyone can see, those forms of currency have been taken over by the legal criminals too, and here is a quote from Gary North, which you may want to consider when considering the power of Gold as money: In August 1914, European governments that entered the war broke their monetary promises, confiscated the gold that was on deposit in commercial banks, turned this gold over to their respective central banks, which then inflated to fund World War I. It was the biggest bank heist in history. There was no resistance by the public. Back to Gary North: The point of a gold standard is to limit central banks. I can translate that for you. Here is the translation: The point of a gold standard is to sever the connection between those who produce surplus wealth and those who steal it with a legal money monopoly extortion racket "system". The problem is that the legal criminals can confiscate gold. Then a silver standard will work to accomplish the goal. Then the legal criminals can confiscate silver. Then whiskey can work to accomplish the goal, and then the legal criminals can assemble an army the size of the army used to drive the British Military out of the 13 colonies so as to enforce a tax on whiskey, payable in gold. Then oil can be used, then electricity can be used, then any other inventive replacement can be used, and each time the legal criminals will invent a way to regain the connection to the producers of surplus wealth, until such time as the power of numbers work for the honest productive people instead of having the power of numbers working against them, by way of deceit, by way of threats of violence, and by way of aggressive acts of terrifying violence upon the innocent people. The entire economics profession, except for the Austrian School, believes in central banking and fractional reserve commercial banking. ... Who professes to have an exclusive license of authority over economic facts? Gary North is nearly criminally ignorant, in my view, but I don't have a license, and I have not be elected into an office of authority, and I don't profess to be a professional in command of exclusive knowledge, and I can offer competitive examples of many people who do not believe in central banking and fractional reserve commercial banking, and who are not Austrian School economists who base their "knowledge" upon a false premise that they claim as fact. Where is this "entire economics profession"? Why does that "entire economics profession" ignore all the competitive economic inventions that have existed, exist now, and will exist so long as competition is still alive and working despite all the force of stolen wealth being used to crush so fatal a spirit? Gary won't confess. I've tried to reach him. It is a one way street with the Austrian Economists, which is a nice way of saying Dictatorship. What about all the economic inventions that have managed to compete, work, and prove to be valuable, outside that exclusive club of "entire economics profession"? 5 examples: http://lysanderspooner.org/node/40 http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm http://www.umungu.com/scrip.htm http://utopianist.com/2011/01/stimulus-writ-small-tiny-california-town-prints-its-own-currency/ Those are not among the Austrian School of professors, authorities, officials, and license holders, nor are those examples examples of believers in central banking and fractional reserve commercial banking. The first example, a proposal written by Lysander Spooner employs land as the commodity backing a competitive currency, not meant to be an enforced currency, which would be enforced by deceit, on purpose, and not meant to be enforced by threats of violence upon the innocent, and also not meant to be enforced by acts of vicious violence perpetrated willfully upon those who choose to use that competitive invention if that is what they choose to do. The second example blows the whistle on the whole fallacy behind Austrian Economics, written well before Austrian Economics became Austrian Economics, whereby "scarcity" is required before "value" can exist, or some such nonsense, and I can find the relevant quotes, as needed. That example bases money on labor, which is not to be confused with the "argument for the sake of argument" invented by some people, whereby some people invent a "labor theory of value" which is their own exclusive Straw Man invention, an invention they attach to their targeted victims, and then by that false association they win the argument they create, as they claim that their victims "believe" in "The Labor Theory of Value" that they alone create, which has nothing to do with Example 2. Example 3 blows the whistle on the fraud known as "interest", well done in the essay titled The Parasite City. Example 4 proves the workability of a Stamp Script competitive form of money, as it was used, and it did work, for all to see, if you have an interest in knowing the truth. Example 5 is used today, for as long as that competitive example managed to compete, despite all the forces that are, or will be forcing that competitor out of business. The entire economics profession, except for the Austrian School, believes in central banking and fractional reserve commercial banking. That is called ignorance. It may be willful ignorance. It may just be stupidity. I can't know, the person who fails to report the facts does not confess. This means that economists favor a cartel. Legal criminals favor a cartel, because a cartel cannot exist without some force being exerted in the work required to render competition powerless. The forces that render competition powerless, in all but a few cases of naturally occurring monopolies (cartels), are deceit, threats of aggressive violence upon the innocent, and acts of aggressive violence upon the innocent, clueless, powerless, targeted, victims. Economists call for their favorite pseudo-market, government-administered limitation on this or that aspect of banking. But they do not call for 100% reserve banking, as Rothbard did. They do not call for free banking, as Ludwig von Mises did. Gary North is the only Austrian Economist I've ever read where by a confession is made as to the existence of a split up within the ranks of Austrian Economists. A. Actual supporters of a free market. B. Frauds, who claim to support a free market, but their true color is criminal: they support legal crime, they support a cartel, they support whatever force is required to enforce a legal monopoly. Of course there are individuals who have individual viewpoints, individual thoughts, and individual actions, which span from the most effective supporters of a free market to the most effective supporters of legal crime, with in the ranks of The Austrian Economists. The gold coin standard removes final economic authority from people with badges and guns and turns it over to the masses. As far as I know, that is the truth, and as far as I know Ron Paul knows that that is the truth, and as far as I know Ron Paul will cause that to happen if elected, and if that is true, then Ron Paul is the Anti-Legal Criminal, and that places a huge target on Ron Paul's back, if that is as true as I believe it to be. Gold is not the best form of money, but it is most certainly better than the worst form of money, and if you think the dollar is as bad as it can get, think again. The reason for the truth being expressed in the quoted words above is that Gold becomes a competitor, so it is competition that accomplishes the task, whereby economic authority is removed from people with badges and guns, as they were enforcing a single money upon their victims, and competition turns the power of choice over to anyone else, or "the masses" of people who didn't have a choice, or not much of a choice, or a choice between two evils, which is still evil, and competition becomes a choice, a higher quality option, and an option that costs less. In this life, there are nails and hammers. The battle over final economic authority is the battle over the monetary system, for money is the central institution in a division-of-labor economy. Thus, the battle is over who holds the hammer. Suddenly I have to work. No time to edit
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jul 27th, 2011 10:31 pm |
|
28th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Freeski, Thanks for the welcome response. You did not address me. I am here to discuss the topic. If you do not address me then I can assume that you do not want to address me, and therefore I cannot assume that your comments are meant to address my comments, and therefore it is not assumable, to me, that you are open to discussion, with me, on this topic. I can ask: Why did you not address me? I can also ask: Do you think that it is appropriate, within the boundaries of the forum rules, or within any boundary whatsoever, do you think it is tolerable, for me to address you, and for me to comment on your comments, as if I were discussing the topic with you? I won't wait for an answer. I assume, despite the fact that you did not address me, that comments in this thread are fair game, open to discussion. Example:
Do you have an exclusive definition of the term government? Please consider the question to be important enough to ask, and important enough to answer in any case whatsoever. Failure to define government is a measure of abdication, someone else will define it in no uncertain terms. Do you mean: A voluntary association. Is government a voluntary association, according to how you define government? If no, then please leave no uncertain terms, if the idea is to discuss the topic, please leave no uncertain terms during the process - please. If you mean: Government is an involuntary association. If that is what you mean, then please tell me how your government, as you define it, is any different from any crime, in principle. The answer will clue me in on your stand, where you are standing, and I'll know, in this case, more, I may know enough, depending upon your answer, to know friend from foe. I can ask for more details, but, frankly, if the answer is the criminal answer, I'll know enough to distrust any other answers you may offer. Do you define your government as an involuntary association? Is this question not clear? Is your version of government, your government as you define it, an involuntary association according to your definition of government? The answer allows me to know that which you are, that which you intend, if you answer honestly. I can, at least, know what you mean, when you publish your messages, that are here, in response to the topic. You wrote this:
If you dodge the question. I'll have the answer. The question: Do you define government as an involuntary association? A Democratic Federated Republican form of government experiment was tried, in the form of The Articles of Confederation, and that was an example of a working voluntary association experiment. The subject of this topic is dealing with an involuntary association such as the legal fiction, or corporate entity, known as U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) which was formed by employing the enabling document called The Constitution. So, my question directed at the author of the response, in this thread, is aiming at that specific clarification, to be clear about my intentions. When referring to the thing knowable as government, to be clear: is the focus of attention meant to focus upon an involuntary association, or is there an intent to focus attention upon a voluntary association? Examples of each: A. The Nation State founded upon the fraudulent usurpation known as The Constitution, which is an involuntary association, or legal despotism. B. A Democratic Federated Republican experimental form of government such as the historical example recorded as The Articles of Confederation, which was a voluntary association - relatively speaking. Note, please, how the response to the topic can have completely opposite meanings when government is defined clearly, one way or the other opposite way, a voluntary association, or the opposite meaning, and please also note that the meaning of the response can be too ambiguous to convey meaning without clarification on that one duplicitous word: government. Example A (use of the word government as a voluntary association, such as the historical example provided by The Articles of Confederation): First the quoted message without clarification:
Now an rewrite with clarification of the intended meaning of the word government. Example A: 1) Jobs are created when free enterprise is left alone to create them; by asking for the voluntary government to create jobs, you're asking the voluntary government to manipulate the market and the natural law of supply and demand, and that's exactly what we have today (that is voluntary corporatism!) If that is the intended meaning of the word government the obvious question is: What does "free enterprise" mean? The apparent message is such that there is this thing called free enterprise and then there is this thing called government, and one is mutually exclusive to the other, if not directly opposite the other, and therefore, apparently, the message is not going to make sense when the government is voluntary, since it would be a product of free enterprise; hence the need for clarification, if the idea is to communicate meaning and do so accurately. Now rewriting the message with clarification concerning the intended definition of government as an involuntary association. Example B: 1) Jobs are created when free enterprise is left alone to create them; by asking for the involuntary government to create jobs, you're asking the involuntary government to manipulate the market and the natural law of supply and demand, and that's exactly what we have today (that is involuntary corporatism!) That makes even less sense to me, since there is no point in asking the involuntary government to do anything, what is the point, why not ask the government to alter the association from an involuntary association into a voluntary association and thereby eliminate the need to ask - altogether? When the legal criminals hear the victims begging for mercy, what do you think they will do, give mercy, or turn the screws faster, deeper, and with renewed vim and vigor? I can't help but be inspired to respond in the manner before me, from a common sense point of view, rather than from a fashionable one, whereby the response is akin to reading from a script. On to number 2: 2) Education has been totally co-opted by evil forces BECAUSE of government meddling: think of the cost and college debt, the tax exempt foundations, the dumbing down, the political correctness, propaganda and so much more (that too is corporatism at work) Again the use of the word government as if there is only one, and everyone supposedly knows this one thing, as if no one can ever invent a competitive version, so as to have two obvious forms of government ready for appraisal by anyone, as to which is of a much higher quality, and which is of a much lower quality, and which is much higher in cost, and which is measurable in ways that can account for negative costs, or production instead of costs, whereby the form of government actually manages to help people increase the standard of living while simultaneously lowering the cost of living. One is used to destroy, compared to the other. One is used to produce destructive deceit, targeting victims, and it is used to threaten aggressive violence, targeting innocent victims, and it is used to produce ever increasing levels of horrible, terrifying, destructive violence, targeting the very people who would otherwise have expending their time, and energy, improving the standard of living, and lowering the cost of living, had they not been subjected to the employment of that destructive, non-competitive, form of government. Why is there no reference whatsoever mentioned as to the existence of a competitive form of government, as if there can only be one? I can ask, and I do ask, and this time the question may not be dodged. I may have a real answer, instead of a lack of an answer, which is an answer in fact. No answer is an answer, as much of an answer, as meaningful as any other ambiguity - it is measurable as nothing, as space, as void, as vacuum, as meaninglessness, direction-less-ness, powerlessness, etc. Why refer to government as if there is only one, there can be no competitive version, there is only one, always, and forever, and never can there be a competitor? To me, from my vacuum, from my ignorance, I imagine someone reading from a script, and the script does not mention a competitive form of government, therefore there is no such thing, according to the script. Number 3: 3) Environmental protection is a buzzword for the UN's Agenda 21 - and they even say in the video that they want "Sustainable Development": they've already fallen for the very thing they don't even realize comes with more catches than they could ever imagine (more corporatism, aka fascism/communism/collectivism) Now there are more words that appear to be subsets of the one word, as if there is, according to the script, a singularity, a monopoly, a whole, and then with closer inspection there are components of the one thing. I. Government A. Corporatism B. Fascism C. Collectivism There is, however, according to the script, an anti-singularity, apparently, and this anti-monopoly, this anti-government entity, floating around in the same universe, occupying, living, breathing, thinking, and acting, within the same space, and the name on this anti-government entity is, as far as I can tell so far, a thing called free enterprise. Can this script be illustrated as follows? I. Government II. free enterprise A. Corporatism A. Non-Corpratism B. Fascism vs. B. Non-Fascism C. Collectivism C. Non-Collectivism Having a general understanding of the purpose of words, as a tool to either transfer accurate meaning, or as a tool used to deceive targeted consumers of lies, it stands to reason that a word is needed to convey the existence of a voluntary association whereby many people collect their power into one collective power so as to have more power to accomplish a goal that cannot be accomplished without the combination, and the same word could be used to convey a voluntary association. Is that word a term, and is that term: free enterprise? What happens if an involuntary association employs the same word? There is a serous problem when two opposite things are using the same word to focus attention on both opposite things at once, since one thing could then be easily confused with the other, opposite, thing. Who benefits when the bad version is confused with the good version? Suppose, for example, there were many people seeking to form a voluntary association whereby all their separate powers are combined into one greater power, a power that is even greater than the sum of all the parts, whereby the reason, and purpose, of the combination, is to defend against people who enforce involuntary associations? Supposing that such a group of people did exit, what would happen if said group confused the good thing with the bad thing, and all those Honest Productive Americans failed to join the good thing, and all those Honest Productive Americans joined the bad thing instead? Could that be a result of confusion when the two opposite things are sharing the same word? Suppose, on the other hand, that there does exist another group of people who desire to exploit weaknesses, such a morality, embodied in a targeted group of innocent people, weakened by their morality, and this group were also confused by the use of one word used for two opposite things, and as a result of that confusion the legal criminals joined the honest productive voluntary association by mistake? In whose interest is it to confuse the word government with the ongoing practice of using the concept of law in the work required to perpetuate crime? It is not my interest to do so. I have an interest in the opposite. Jeepers, they even demand that U.S. law should adhere to international law. Yes, jeepers, more ambiguity. Which law? If the law is such that people are allowed to volunteer to join, or combine, their separate powers, into a single power, a collective, and then use that power to avoid being either criminals or victims, then whose going to crush so fatal a spirit, and why would they choose to do so? Do you see a need to crush out anyone working toward a voluntary association whereby each volunteer sends a portion of their earnings to a central collective and then that collective is then used to avoid the undesirable move toward involuntary associations? What would you call such a thing, if one existed, ever? Here is an example of U.S. Law: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html AMENDMENT XIV When do the volunteers decide to avoid being both criminals and victims, and how do they go about reaching that goal? Discuss the question, and refuse to settle for ambiguous answers? http://october2011.org/issues 5. Government – all processes of the three branches of government should be accountable to international law, transparent and follow the rule of law, people have the right to participate in decisions which affect them. That is ambiguous, therefore it can mean anything, it can be constructively interpreted, which is the one major flaw with The Constitution, among many flaws, that the Founding Fathers warned their followers as a serious concern. If by "international law" the meaning is such that millions of victims of legal criminals using The Constitution to torture, and mass murder, have, the victims have, the least bit of legal power to hold those legal criminals to account, if nothing else is legally their power under that verison of International Law, just hold the guilty torturing mass murderers to account, to have their crimes, at least, officially recorded, in some legal manner, as in, hey, did you know, officially, in a legal sense, the criminal Clinton, the criminal Bush, and the criminal Obama, have tortured these people on this list, and those same criminals, as you may want to know, have serially murdered all these people on this, official, legal, list of victims. According to this version of International Law, the victims have the power to know the truth, at least, and it is now official, those criminals are now officially guilty of those crimes upon those innocent victims. Victims do not often manage to secure the power to hold the criminals to account, with few exceptions, but what if that is the constructive interpretation of that International Law, that one in question, there, by those people, right there, in that group? Heaven forbid! Before anyone begins bantering around the false demonization of me, for being less than expected, less than supportive, or less than compassionate, or less than understanding, whatever, know what you mean, before you do so, please. This is not my first rodeo, and I have done my homework. If you jerk your knee, in writing, on this forum, you can't go back and edit it out, as far as I know, so, be forewarned. Look in the mirror, know what you support, and if you can stand scrutiny, do so, and if you resort to deceit, you will do that, and if you resort to threats of violence, that is what you will do, and if you can find me, you can resort to acts of violence, or you can hire someone to do that work for you, I suppose, and then that is what you define to be you, even if you don't see that when you look in the mirror. I am being nice; nice enough to care - and not settle for less than a more accurate perspective. If those people choose to fight the fight they see worth fighting in their way, something can be learned from that effort, not the least of which, to me, is having a date on the calender, so as to call attention to that specific time, a time when all who have an interest in that fight will honorably agree to combine their separate powers into one well focused power on that date, and they are good enough to warn their targets concerning their intentions. They are targeting very powerful people, people I call legal criminals, people who torture, and people who mass murder, and people who get paid very well for doing so, not based upon volume, not based upon the number of screams, their pay is based upon the limit that their victims tolerated the costs they accrue, for doing the jobs they are hired to do, which is to deceive, they are hired to deceive, and they are hired to threaten violence, and they are hired to commit violence. Those volunteers are volunteering to take on the worst criminals the human species has had the misfortune of bearing, and they do so peacefully. That is worth something. The simple fact that they may, or may not as individuals, validate the legitimacy of their government is as worth knowing, in my view. A. Honor, self sacrifice, willful disobedience in the face of potential serous injury, and refusal to resort to violence. B. Tragic misunderstanding of the principles required for the invention and maintenance of peaceful coexistence. A lesson learned is a lesson learned well enough to do any good. What do you think might be the true cost of a situation whereby enough people show up to demonstrate in the manner planned in the October 2012 event, that the legal criminals can get away with actions perpetrated by mercenary agent provocateurs who then cause an excuse used by the legal criminals to rapidly increase the torture and body count on those days? Following the script is almost certainly going to support the authors of the script, at the expense of those who fail to recognize just how false the script has become since the first legal criminal began writing that narrative, or so, to me, commons sense dictates. What will it take to realize the full measure of the problem? What is the true limit that the victims can endure? Know that, it seems to me, and you know the bar that the legal criminals aim to lower. What is the alternative, what is the free enterprise script, in the face of all that destructive power? Can all the friends of liberty manage to avoid all that misery, destruction, torture, and mass murder, by remaining disconnected from each other, or connected with a link that also allows the connection to both the criminal group and the ready, willing, and able victims? I think so, and I think a date on the calender is a fine idea, a very good goal post, and having a goal post can be a device by which the problem is communicated, in no uncertain terms, and therefore as many volunteers as possible can work at offering the highest quality, and lowest cost, solutions, and one possible offering can be to say that, hey, on that day, we should try to narrow down the field to a workable few solutions, so as to be in a position to implement at least one. How about, or example, picking July 4th 2012, as a competitive day, and on that day, I can offer, as a competitive solution, that those who agree will agree to stop using the criminal fraud money, and start using competitive money, all at once, on that find summer day, in the not too distant future.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 07:00 pm |
|
29th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1012.htmlThe purchase of government debt by a central bank in a fractional-reserve banking system is the basis of an unsuspected transfer of wealth that is inescapable in a world of monetary exchange. Through the purchase of debt by a bank, fiat money is injected into the economy. Wealth then moves to those market participants who gain early access to this newly created fiat money. Who loses? Those who gain access to this fiat money only later in the process, after the market effects of the increase of money have rippled through the economy. Anyone, As a means by which competition in legal money markets can be illustrated I offer the above quote. What happens if a lot of people decide to voluntarily send a portion of their power to one central collection point? This is an easy question with an easy to see answer, and there are many examples of such things happening in human existence. Power flows from many sources and power flows to one place, and power in one place grows more powerful, and power at all the many sources grow weaker, as more power flows from the sources, the sources grow weaker, and as more power flows to the one place, the one place grows more powerful. The power flow can resemble a pyramid. Many places at the bottom move power up one step. The next step moves power further up. Power reaches the one step at the top. The power flow chart is also measurable as an upside down pyramid, as the many sources of power have the least power at the bottom, where the measure of power is almost nothing, a minimum power supply, a measure of one, the least amount of power, and as power flows up from those many sources of one unit of power, the next step is a more powerful step, measuring two power units, and then upward there are four power units, and then 16, and then at the top there is one place where all the power stops flowing and that one place has enormous power at the top of the upside down pyramid. What happens to the power once it flows to the one place, and what happens if the power struggle is not yet built like a pyramid? What happens when the one place is only a storage place, not a place where power is allowed to flow to any other place, not yet constructing a pyramid, just many sources of power, where all the sources of power voluntarily send extra power to one place, and see this, and illustrate this, know it, measure it, envision it, and exemplify it, before it becomes something else, like a pyramid. What is that arrangement before it begins to flow out from the central source of collected power? Picture many dots on a piece of paper and each dot is one pixel in size, and each dot produces enough extra power to grow into the size of 2 dots, but before each dot can grow into three dots the second dot detaches from each dot and that second dot flows to the center of the paper. The dot in the center becomes 1 dot when one productive source has grown into the size of 2 pixels, the extra size disconnects from the source, the extra dot flows to the center and at the empty place in the center the first extra dot stops. A second, third, fourth, and then many extra dots are produced, detached from the source, travel from the source to the center, and the center single pixel becomes 2 pixels, then many, than many more, until the room around the center is less, and less, as the center grows larger and larger, as more extra power flows from the sources of power to the center. Who ever dreamed up the idea to begin producing more power than needed so as to send power from the source of power to some other place? Why did that idea become such a good idea, such a great idea, that very many people adopt the idea, employ the idea, and voluntarily participate in that process of producing extra power at the production source, sending extra power to a central location, and repeating that process over and over again? What is the purpose of employing that idea? Some examples help answer the question. 1. Insurance 2. Stock and bond sales 3. Taxation 4. Banking 5. Farming 6. Saving 7. Investing 9. Open source programing 10. Libraries 11. Education 12. Irrigation 13. Legal crime In the interest of brevity, economy, and so as to expedite the transfer of information from me, the source of this message, to anyone, I will choose two competitive examples of the power struggle from the list above so as to begin creating a scale of examples from best to worst, by some value measure, such as morality, which can be based upon the value of life, whereby life promoting things make those things more valuable and whereby life destroying things offer the opposite end of the value scale. 1. Insurance 13. legal Crime Many people earn more, by producing more, than needed, or wanted, or more than consumed, more than saved, more than invested in other things, so as to send a portion of their power to a central place that is called: 1. Insurance 2. Legal Crime The illustrated paper with dots on it help, so please get a piece of paper, or picture one in your mind, and start placing dots on the blank paper. Those are people. 10 dots will work, for now, and all the people in the world can be easy to see as more dots on more papers, drawn by someone else, somewhere else, the point is to point out how one process compares to the opposite process. You are one of the 10 dots on your paper. You almost become another dot, but you don't become another dot, you send one dot of power to the center of the paper. Your dot in the center of the paper is the first voluntary dot produced by you, traveling down the road from where your dot is on the paper, and that dot ends up being stored in the center of the paper, so as to begin creating one or the other of the two competitive things: 1. Insurance 2. Legal Crime Now jump ahead 10 years and draw a big black dot in the center of the paper as more and more people send more and more extra power to the center of the paper and some of the dots have to move from the center to clear places outside the center or those dots will be swallowed up by the growing power in the center of the paper. Copy that paper with the big black in the center, where 10 dots had to move to clear places outside the center black dot, and make two competitive illustrations of this idea whereby many sources of power send extra power to one central power. Now you have: 1. Insurance 2. Legal Crime On one you can write a title on the top of the page and it is: Insurance. Title the second, the copy, as: Legal Crime. By what calculation does the growing power in the center send power to the weakening powers around the center in the case of insurance? This is not too difficult to know. You may have suffered a broken leg, an accident at work, and you are now unable to earn enough to keep alive, you can no longer send extra power to the center, you can't even earn enough power to keep eating, not for awhile, and that is why you sent money to the center, you invested in insurance, for your own good, just in case. The calculation is as complex, or as simple as you agree to contribute, voluntarily, to that type of investment, if it is too complicated, look for one that is less complicated. Power flows in, from many, power flows out, to a few, and the center grows weaker, when someone suffers an accident, and the victim grows stronger, for having suffered an accident, and the whole business is based on a simple calculation, which can be fully automated, requiring no workers hired to crunch the numbers, or write the check, or haul the money, or store the money, or for any other expense, you earned enough to earn enough, simple, easy, and really, a no brainer, not rocket science, no need for an authorities permission, or say so, or regulation, or punishment, or anything other than steady transfers of power from many, and then according to the calculation agreed upon, power flows from the center back to the sources of power, on time, based upon the same exact calculation agreed upon before sending the power to the central location in the first place. Easy? How about one more thing? If the calculation is done well enough, then the center supply of power is almost nothing, and it can even be negative at times. It does not have to keep growing larger, ever. It is nothing but an agreement. If you can't grasp this in your mind, having the illustrations presented to you, you can ask questions, or you can depend upon the authorities for all your answers to vital questions, and they can let you eat cake too. If you have traveled this far, with me, and you have a two pieces of paper, one is titled Insurance, and the other is titled Legal Crime. One is one end of the scale, the other is on the other end of the scale. On that paper titled Legal Crime you have a growing black hole in the center, and it is designed to grow larger, and larger, and it is designed to wipe out all the free space, and it is designed to turn the white paper into nothing, it is designed to destroy everything, and you can see it happening if you look. The sources of power are made to send power to the central location and at the central location there is a power that determines the calculation that is used to employ the power collected, from all the sources, to the central location, and the calculation is even simpler than the insurance example. The central location uses a simple formula for deciding how the power at the central location will be spent, and it is simply used to keep the power flowing in that direction. That is it, and that is as easy to know as the most obvious visual example existing today. Here is the most obvious visual illustration of how Legal Crime is designed to work today: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ As soon as the connection between all the sources of power (the dots on the white paper) to the central location (the larger power in the center) is involuntary, that is the moment when that central location is no longer beneficial to the sources of power, at that very point in time and place, when the connection is no longer voluntary, that central power begins to grow "at the expense of" all the sources of power. Legal Crime is an involuntary association, it is designed to grow more powerful, at the expense of, all the sources of power, and it is as simple as that, and as they say: "the devil is in the details", and Legal Crime has three measurable methods by which the process is realized in time and space. 1. Deceive the targeted victims into sending power to the Legal Criminals, making the victims weaker, and making the legal criminals stronger. 2. Threaten the targeted victims with violence so as to keep the power flowing in that direction. 3. Execute violence upon the targeted victims so as to keep the power flowing in that direction. There you have, before you, a scale, and on one end of the scale is Insurance, and other the other end of the scale is Legal Crime, and power flows in both examples, and in both examples power flows from the sources of power to a central location, and at the central location the power grows, and in one case the central location never grows more powerful than any one of the sources of power, and in the other case the central location consumes all the power that can be produced by all of The Honest Productive People. Banking is a similar arrangement on that scale, and it is interesting to note how interest works in banking. To close this effort think, from this point, assuming that you have traveled to this point, what would be the process, and what would be the math, or the calculation, on an insurance policy called Legal Crime Insurance? Example: Suppose that one of the families of innocent victims in, say, The Waco Massacre, or in one of those three towers in New York, on Sept 11, 2001, had a Legal Crime Insurance Policy, what would be the calculation of power returned to that beneficiary if one of those family members had a Legal Crime Insurance Policy? Follow that through with me, please, with a hypothetical example. Suppose one third of the population of American, and we can call this hypothetical group The Honest Productive Americans, and we can suppose that that group started paying into The Legal Crime Insurance Policy, on a specific day. How about the day that U.S.S. Liberty was attacked by Legal Criminals June 8. 1967 http://www.gtr5.com/ Suppose that day was a day you remember as the day that One Hundred Million Honest Productive Americans began paying into an agreement, known as Legal Crime Insurance, and that pot of gold grew, and grew, from June 8 1967 until that day when one of the family members was slaughtered at Waco, just for an illustration of how insurance works, compared to how Legal Crime works. So, you have June 8 1967, the U.S.S. Liberty is attacked by Legal Criminals, and then One Hundred Million Honest Productive Americans start a Legal Crime Insurance Agreement, and all those people pay into that one central power, fund, until one person sends in a claim as their members of their family are slaughtered at Waco, or later, in New York. This event: http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/ From June 8 1967 to April 9 1996 One Hundred Million Honest Productive Americans send money to one fund whereby victims of Legal Crime earn benefits for having paid into that insurance policy. If you don't pay into it, you don't earn benefits; which is naturally known as a voluntary association, reasonably known, common sense knowledge, easy stuff. That is how that works. What is the opposite arrangement? What is the measure of Legal Crime? Your investment is used to reward mass murderers. Your investment is used to torture you, or your fellow members of the Honest Productive American group. Tax payers pay into an involuntary association so as to hire liars, torturers, and serial killers, and worse, to do what they do best, to someone else, so that tax payers can move further down the list of victims? Your investment is used so that serial killers earn a higher standard of living for doing things that make them ever so happy. Are you happy enough yet?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Aug 11th, 2011 07:16 am |
|
30th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Honest Productive Americans, Listening to Alex Jones interview Max Keiser. I hear false statements; which may be error on the part of Max and Alex, and therefore not willful lies. Max says that capitalism requires savings. That is false. Capitalism requires higher rates of production relative to the rates of consumption; without which there would be a steady decline in all things valuable, as all things valuable are consumed and not replaced by higher rates of production. Max says that there are two forces fighting against each other (my take on his words); where those who want high interest rates are being overpowered by those who want low interest rates. That is missing the force of competition which forces any product to higher quality and lower costs. If there is competition then interest rates are forced down. A monopoly money supplier subsidizes any production, including the production of aggressive wars for profit, and including the production of savings accounts, and including the production of speculators. Who decides who is subsidized, given welfare, and when? In the Legal Crime business here in America it is The Federal Reserve System of Extortion operators; they stop and start the flow of welfare, they are the income re-distributors. A person who competes with another person as to what savings is the most affordable, and least costly, and therefore what savings is the highest quality, and the lowest cost, will have no monopoly money supply power subsidizing their savings by making the legal money supply very scarce. That is why interest rates go up, when there is no competition, and that is why "capitalists" who "save" money in legal banking monopoly banks, or Central Banks, have an easy time finding a competitive savings account, since the Legal Criminals subsidize their accounts by making legal money scarce. During typical bust cycles, run by Legal Criminals, running Legal Central Banking Monopolies, the money supply is made scarce on purpose, and during those times "savings" is subsidized, as interest rates rise, and "savers" are then rewarded for "saving" as their monopoly money makes money because it is made scarce by the Legal Criminals. "Savers" can do nothing, and still they have a steady income, when they accept that form of welfare. So "savers", who are actually just another form of bail out recipient, or subsidy taker, or welfare recipient, during Bust Cycles, which can last decades, as "savers" become those people who are then set against their diametric opposites, who are speculators, as speculators are subsidized during Boom Cycles, when the Legal Criminals are paying people to spend money, which amounts to a negative interest rate, and once an actual, honest, competitive money is in place the interest rate will be forced to nothing more than a cost to cover expenses for the supplier, and a cost attached to risk averse borrowers, and a competitive measure of profit. Here is where my Product 1 and Product 2 shine to illustrate how honest, competitive, money works. Honest Productive People can earn zero interest, why would they not earn zero interest, when it is their good faith and credit, their productive capacity that causes production to rise above consumption, and therefore it is their honest hard work that creates the capital that does cause increases in the standard of living while the cost of living reduces, so why are they punished with high interest rates while the Legal Criminals (and those who have grown to accept Bust and Boom Cycles) buy the gift of subsidy, with your stolen power? The gift of subsidy is also known as welfare. The Legal Criminals buy that gift of subsidy, and they buy that gift of subsidy with the power they steal, and then they purchase victims with that gift, and they purchase employees with that gift of subsidy, and they purchase obedience with that gift of subsidy. Why are "savers" given welfare during typical BUST cycles when the Legal Criminals "tighten" the money supply, and make currency (which is money) scarce, and therefore interest rates are driven up, and therefore the wealth redistribution path goes from Honest Productive People to the Legal Criminals, and then a gift is given, a welfare payment is awarded, for those people who accumulate large sums of "cash" in "savings" accounts - instead of having to find competitive, honest, earning, accounts of productive investment? Sure a "saver" should have their "savings" saved, when they pay to have their "savings" saved, such a saving gold from theft, which is a cost, and gold, unlike Central Bank Dollar Denominated Savings Accounts, do not generate interest, Just ask a Gold bug, they can set you straight on that point. Why does a "saver" get a steady increase in their "savings" account? It is a subsidy, high interest rates are a subsidy, a wealth redistribution scheme, a give away, a something for nothing racket, with obvious hidden costs - if you care to look. Why are speculators also given subsidy during a typical BOOM cycle when Legal Criminals "loosen" the money supply, as they pay lairs (as in Liar Loans, or stated income loans) to spend money? Think about that some, as the inflation rate may be 9% while the interest rate on the loan is 4%, which is a net cost to the borrower of negative 5% since the thing purchased, and purchased quickly, will gain 9% relative price while the inflation rate is 9%, holding onto the title of the purchase, paying 4% interest on the loan while holding onto the title, and even collecting rent, and in 10 years, at 9% inflation rate, while the interest rate is 4%, is an effective gain of 5% increase in price over those 10 years. That is negative interest. That is subsidy, or welfare, to speculators in the know. There is an obvious downside, if you care to look. The downside is such that only the few have the information concerning when the Central Bankers are going to switch from BOOM to BUST and where in the economic network a specific market will be turned from BOOM to BUST or back to BOOM, and therefore savers and speculators (and savers are speculating, and speculators are savers, since both words can mean anything at any time when dealing with Legal Criminals) can be caught short if they buy when they should have sold, and visa versa. If the FOMC, and everyone connected to them, published all their meetings, so that everyone knew when the Legal Criminals were moving which part of the economy from BUST TO BOOM and back to BUST again, then speculating would be simple, just follow what everyone else does, and no one is caught short, unless someone has yet to learn the source of the schedule, but think about it, and know the truth, there will always be insiders who get a jump on the herd, before the herd is moved in the opposite direction, and they can't, of course, let everyone in on that inside information, or it won't work, and that is the point: a crime includes both a victim and a criminal as power is transferred from the victim to the criminal, the victim can't be warned in advance. That does not work. Criminal: "Hi, how are you, Mr. Victim? I"m calling to set up an appointment." Victim: "Now is not a good time, I'm almost late for work, and I can't afford another ticket." Criminal: "Oh, hold on, this will take a little longer, as I inform my buddies at the speed trap." Victim: "Seriously, I have to go." Criminal" "Yes, seriously. Please get your entire savings account and have that ready for me this evening, and don't stop at the bar on the way home." Victim: "You must be Joe King." If you are being led to buy Gold and Silver while the price is already at an all time high, from an all time low, then you are merely joining them, joining speculators/savers, in the game. Why not pay off your mortgage instead? Why not buy Solar Panels and an Electric Car, or two, instead? How about a Modular Home Vertical Farming Unit or two, instead of Gold? How about more bullets instead of gold? You have no more money? That is such a big mystery. You work harder, longer, more efficiently, and yet you have no more money? There are two divisions and they are not the two divisions reported by Max. Max: 1. Savers 2. Speculators Those are one group divided into two groups. They are one group. Joe: 1. Honest Productive Americans 2. Legal Criminals (and their accessories, co-conspirators, cohorts, employees, and willing victims) Of the first group, which consists of all the honest productive people in American who cause higher standards of living and who cause lower costs of living, and who produce more than they consume, and who are the group of people who produce the stuff that is targeted by the Legal Criminals, the TAX supply, the wealth, the purchasing power stuff, some have savings, some speculate, and many, and even the majority, have been robbed blind, and owe more than they produce, because they have been targeted, exploited, and have had their power taken by way of deceit, by way of threats of violence, and by way of violence upon their number. Suppose the first group amounted to one third of the population of America, roughly One Hundred Million Americans, and those 100m continue to produce more, while more is taken in TAXES, and of those 100m, roughly half have no savings left, instead, roughly half have debt forced upon them by their parasitic hosts: The Legal Criminals. Suppose then, that there are Fifty Million Honest Productive Americans left, which are roughly half the source of all wealth, half the source of all taxes, half the source of all Good Faith and Credit of The U.S.A., and they own, currently, more debt than they can produce wealth to pay the debt, in their life time, according to The Legal Criminals. Suppose that the following is true: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ Who exactly owes who exactly, and what exactly is owed to exactly who? Know that the Legal Criminals are very precise with the answer, but it is a trade secret. Who then has any power left to save anything? Who then has any power left to buy gold, or silver, or guns, or bullets, or shelters in the mountains, or food stocks, or any power left to buy speculative purchases of any kind whatsoever, unless they choose to work more overtime, choose to take another part time job, choose to forgo any vacation time, choose to forgo any medical treatment, choose to forgo any luxury of any kind, and choose to work harder, and harder, and choose to stay competitive with higher quality production, and choose to stay competitive by lowering the price of the same production? Who are these savers, and the speculators, who constitute the two groups Max reports? What ever happened to The Honest Productive Americans, who produce higher quality stuff, at lower costs, and can out compete anyone on the planet, so long as they are not victims of Legal Crime? If the only "News" that is ever reported is the full measure of The Legal Criminals, those who are alternately subsidized, and then taxed, voluntarily, joining in on the "business as usual" business cycle, for fun and profit, at the expense of someone, since that occupation does not produce anything, then is that all there is, because that is all that is ever reported? Because The Honest Productive Americans are "the silent majority" they don't exist? The Legal Criminals know exactly who The Honest Productive Americans are, they have a vested interest in knowing that precise information, since that is the actual source of their power, and they didn't trip over that power supply, that power supply is meticulously targeted, exploited, and ruined, on a schedule. A paper trail exists. Max did offer a good new report on Bill or William Black. Max said that William Black fingered 1000 Legal Criminals. How is that for a ratio? What would happen if there were 1000 William Black's managing the same ratio? Why not start at the top, and sweep down? Why not start at the source, instead of a few tributaries way down the wasteland of the flood? Why not treat the cause, not the symptoms, or the massive hemorrhaging from the neck instead of the paper cut on the finger tip? Why not just get off that road and step onto a higher quality road, a road without the toll booths lined up from one end to the other along that road to doom day?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Aug 16th, 2011 05:06 pm |
|
31st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Hendo 19, I think that you are describing future events, and you are merely voicing an early perspective of those soon to be future events. In my opinion the name used by the one challenging group will be something incorruptible, something other than "tea party", or "liberals". Something along the lines of Tax Payers Union, or Honest Productive Americans, or Enemies of Legal Crime, but my guesses are inconsequential, the name will be the name that works the best. There will be a date at which the group does reach that tipping point, and it can be a known future date, or it will be a date that is understood to be the date at which the challenge group became powerful enough to challenge Legal Crime, or challenge the criminals running the law power. There will be an event too, and that event may occur on the tipping point day, before it, or after it, depending upon how that regime change event plays out exactly. I think the event will be a declaration made by all the members of the new group to accomplish two things simultaneously and I can prove to you how these two things must happen, and if these two things do not happen, then there will not be a victor over Legal Crime, the Legal Criminals will perpetuate victimization without these two events. 1. Refusal to connect to the criminals by the precise connection of fraudulent legal money. 2. Invention, production, and maintenance of a legal money that maintains the disconnection of Legal Criminals, with legal money, to The Honest Productive People, who produce the power that powers up the Legal Criminals. Anyone can argue the facts, sure, but that does not change the facts. Once enough people realize what needs to be done, it will be done, because enough power will be employed to make what needs to be done happen, on a day, at a time, and history can record who did what on that day. You are seeing this, and you want to name it. It will be, or humans will be no more, and either way, it will happen relatively soon.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Aug 17th, 2011 09:31 pm |
|
32nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Honest Productive Americans, Please consider the words I am about to write, and if these words help, in any way, then consider passing on that help. A person trained to be servile will be subject to that training, a subject, a weaker, dependent, powerless, subject of the producer, distributor, and perpetuating trainer, master, brain-washer, behavior modifier, response conditioner, dictator, criminal. A person trained to be servile will fail to ask vital questions. A person failing to ask vital questions will then fail to even look for accurate answers. Failing to even look for accurate answers will render the person trained to be servile, trained to be powerless, and will be unable to employ accurate answers to vital questions. An example may help. Is it important to answer vital questions? Yes, so long as the answer is accurate, as the answer can be employed productively. How about another example? How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing human life perpetuates instead of failing as I allow the opposite to occur? Have you asked that question? Is it a vital question? If the answer is yes, and the answer is accurate, then you have an accurate answer that you can then employ, you can then work that productive answer for your own best interest. Those who have stolen all the power produced by The Honest Productive People have used the power they stole to train their victims into believing that jobs are given to workers, as workers are a step down from employers, and these gifts of jobs are sure fire, tell tale, sound, and irrefutable evidence that hoists someone up higher and from lower, up from lowly worker status, up from the lowly worker class, up to the better, higher quality, brighter, wealthy, rich, and powerful employer class. That is a story, and it is as false as the moon made of cheese. That lie leads to abject servitude. Workers should be grateful for such bounty, such generosity, as employers give workers jobs. Do you believe that lie? Lick their boots. Workers are trained to believe that more gifts are given to them, on top of the gift of employment, and this additional gift is called pay. Employers give the gift of jobs, and then, from a bottomless pit of generosity, employers spoil the targets of their limitless generosity with money, given to the workers, from the employers, paying the workers for the privilege of work. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Where did this story line come from, how did this arrangement occur, from what point did human beings exist, to get to this point, where there are now two groups of human beings instead of the one liberated group? When group A offers an involuntary association to group B, and group B accepts, the race to the bottom begins, and that is the point of (seemingly) no return. Return to the question: How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing human life perpetuates instead of failing as I allow the opposite to occur? Is that a vital question, worth gaining the power of having an accurate answer to employ in that specific work, on that road, having that goal in mind? I am going to support the perspective I offer to you by way of linking another source of information, and from this source of information I will pick out quotes, and from those quotes I will unravel the lies behind the quote, and I will present to you a more accurate answer to the question asked, and from that accurate answer the person asking the question can then have an answer they can use, an answer that can be employed by the person asking the questions. Don't wait for someone else to hand you questions and answers, if that is what you are trained to do, don't, instead, choose to employ yourself, employ your own power, ask your own questions, settle for nothing but an accurate answer, an accurate answer that you can employ, don't settle for duplicity, don't settle for contradiction, don't settle for the lesser of two evils, don't settle for an offer you can't (seemingly) refuse, don't settle for insanity, don't settle for less than an accurate, workable, useable, reasonable, and equitable answer, and in so doing you will be another example of liberty, another example of independence, another example of honest productive capacity, and the stuff you produce will be worth enough to add up to higher standards of living, and lower costs of living, so as to reverse the race to the bottom, and so as to ensure the survival of the human species for ever, if not longer. You will pass on honorable, honest, productive, human legacy, because that is what you are, as you settle for no less. Why not? Here is the link: http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/2011/08/16/216-nixon-gold-and-ron-paul/ Here are the quotes: "nobody could be trusted with the power to just print up unlimited numbers of new 100 dollar bills in your basement and spend them on what you want. Nobody can be trusted with that..." "Ron Paul I think very correctly suggests as a baby step toward a sound money system: allowing competitive currencies, allow other things besides the dollar to be used legally and from a tax standpoint to have the same status as the dollar, that would be a huge step forward, that's the kind of thing we need to do and I think there is no question that gold will out compete everything else as money, just as it has for thousand and thousands of years." How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing human life perpetuates instead of failing as I allow the opposite to occur? Those who have been trained to be victims and criminals have a common bond and the common bond is falsehood. Their bond vanishes under the light of accurate discernment, as each potential victim is separated form each potential criminal once the bond of falsehood is broken, as the light of factual accurate perception shines through. Note the first contradiction: "nobody could be trusted with the power to just print up unlimited numbers of new 100 dollar bills in your basement and spend them on what you want. Nobody can be trusted with that..." If no one can be trusted, then trade does not exist, and failing to know this is a huge failure. If the question is this: How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing human life perpetuates instead of failing as I allow the opposite to occur? Then the accurate answer must include a means by which one person can trade with another person because one person, alone, disconnected from any other person within a productive connection, can produce much more than the bare essentials for survival, even when the single person is surrounded by natural wealth. No single person, alone, can produce space travel, for example, so as to increase the survivability of the human species past the capacity of the Sun and the Earth to sustain life. No single person, alone, can produce a steel sewing needle, let alone space travel, as such things as steel sewing needles are examples of years of human invention as human beings did, and do, in fact, manage to trade their individual productive powers so as to produce productive power that is more than the sum of all the individual parts. If no one can be trusted, as the dictators say, in their effort to subject you to falsehood, or in whatever effort they have dreamed up, seeking whatever secret goal they may have in mind, if no one can be trusted, there then can be no productivity, as each individual is presented with an obstacle instead of an advantage, a road block is placed in place where a connecting avenue to prosperity would exist, a steep and insurmountable vertical wall is constructed instead of a gentle, natural, smooth road going downhill. Without trust in your fellow man you are operating the very same operating system as every other dictator and criminal in human time. Men are bad, they say, and therefore exploiting them before they can exploit you is the only path, without exception. If you can't beat'em: join'em. Joe, you say, you are taking those words out of context. "nobody could be trusted with the power to just print up unlimited numbers of new 100 dollar bills in your basement and spend them on what you want. Nobody can be trusted with that..." The contradiction confesses the lie. If no one can be trusted to create money, no one can be trusted to create money, I did not use the word, I quoted the word, the word choice is "nobody", and that either means "nobody" or it is a false front, a false word, a misdirection, willfully chosen, or merely parroted dogma, the answer is not accurate, and therefore the question is not answered. How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing human life perpetuates instead of failing as I allow the opposite to occur? The accurate answer includes whatever process manages to combine the individual powers into a power that is greater than the sum of all the parts which is, in one word, trade. Trade is a word that points to the process that is an answer to the question. Distrusting everyone is not the answer, and to distrust everyone for the willful crimes of a few is an accurate answer to a different question. How can I increase my standard of living, reduce my cost of living, and in so doing my life perpetuates at the expense of the lives of other people? Resort to deception, resort to threats of violence, and resort to aggressive violence upon the innocent ones who trust each other and are capable of producing more than they consume, and in that way you can increase your standard of living, reduce your cost of living, by lowering your victims standards of living, and by passing costs of your living onto your victims. Punish everyone for your crimes. "nobody could be trusted with the power to just print up unlimited numbers of new 100 dollar bills in your basement and spend them on what you want. Nobody can be trusted with that..." If that were true, which it is not, all men, and all women, all human beings, could not be trusted with power, for lack of any moral understanding, lack of any restraint of reason, all men, all women, all human beings will abuse power, without question, therefore nobody could be trusted with power. Except me of course. Nobody can be trusted with that...except me. Except the Gold bugs who don't print money, they buy it, and where do they get the stuff needed to buy gold, or silver, or barrels of oil, or lies? If they can't be trusted, that is a fact, if someone else can be trusted, that is a fact, what is the idea behind punishing everyone for the crimes of a few? There is more to this story provided by the quotes already offered. Repeated: "Ron Paul I think very correctly suggests as a baby step toward a sound money system: allowing competitive currencies, allow other things besides the dollar to be used legally and from a tax standpoint to have the same status as the dollar, that would be a huge step forward, that's the kind of thing we need to do and I think there is no question that gold will out compete everything else as money, just as it has for thousand and thousands of years." Note another contradiction as "a baby step" becomes "a huge step forward", and how does that happen in time and space? A monopoly, or Cartel, is by definition the overpowering of competition, not exactly the complete destruction of all competition where ever and when ever competition arises, but a measurable absence of competition as monopoly defeats competition and the opposite is true as competition defeats monopoly like mass defeats space, like sunlight defeats darkness, and like warmth defeats cold. A. Monopoly B. Competition One is not the other, one is opposite the other, and where one is the other is not, and here in good ole' U.S.A Inc. (LLC) there is a working legal money monopoly whereby the money can be as low in quality and as high in cost as the producer cares to make it because there is no force of internal competition causing the producer to increase quality and there is no internal force causing the producer to lower the cost and that fact is as measurable a fact as competitors are systematically forced out of business by the legal producers of the single legal money. Internal competition in money markets is against the law, and in fact: "it shall not be questioned." Joe, you may say, they are on the same page as you, why bicker over semantics? If gold isn't forced by Gold Bugs to be the only legal money it won't be the highest quality money at the lowest cost and that is a measurable fact, so why do the Gold Bugs (tm) repeat such lies? I think there is no question that gold will out compete everything else as money, just as it has for thousand and thousands of years. That is an opinion followed by a false claim. Perhaps the claim is false on purpose, perhaps it is believed to be true while it is demonstrably false. When gold is scarce, in each and every case, those who have none have invented much better alternatives, and the quality of being better is such that the better money isn't scarce to the inventor of the alternative, as something useful is better than nothing at all. In each case where people who have gold, as sure as can be, and measurably so, gold is very good money, for them, so long as they have it, and therefore it is good for them, when they have it, and that makes a lot of sense. Gold can be confiscated, it has been confiscated, and for reasons that remain clear, to anyone who cares to answer those vital questions. How many people who have no gold, no gold certificates, no gold futures, no gold receipts, and no desire for gold, are inclined to trust that gold is the best money, "that gold with out compete everything else as money" as the dogmatic claim suggests? Even if they say yes, yes, gold is the best money, while they have none, while they fail to get any, while they continue to trade without gold, their actions confess the truth, as gold escapes their command. What happens if Ron Paul adds one more competitor on the list of legal tender competitors? 1. Federal Reserve System of Extortion products a.k.a dollar denominated legal units of debt 2. Gold There is where I am in full agreement with the dogma offered by the Gold Bugs as the obvious facts will become obvious when that legal competition is no longer against the law. Where the agreement ends is as obvious. 1. Federal Reserve System of Extortion products a.k.a dollar denominated legal units of debt 2. Gold 3. Anyone can print their own legal money anytime, at their own cost. What I have just handed to you is an accurate answer to the question asked at the beginning of this effort to communicate to the masses of humanity. How can I increase my standard of living, reduced my cost of living, and in so doing life perpetuates instead of me allowing the opposite to occur? You don't see the answer? You have to ask the question. You have to settle for nothing less than the highest quality answer, at the lowest cost. Ask, and then get the answer. When you find the answer, please consider passing it on. When competition is the power exerting the most force then everyone who can compete competes, without the force of deceit preventing some competitors, forcing them out of business fraudulently. When competition is the power exerting the most force then everyone who can compete competes, without the force of threats of violence preventing some competitors, forcing them out of business. When competition is the power exerting the most force then everyone who can compete competes, without the force of aggressive violence preventing some competitors, forcing them out of business. The force of deceit claims that Gold will dominated and corner the market, and monopolize money markets, and it is deceit in play, as a power, as that power forces some competitors that can compete out of business. 1. Dollars 2. Gold 3. Silver 4. Any competitor can invent, produce, and maintain a competitive form of money, absent the force of deceit preventing any one competitor, absent the force of threats of violence preventing any one competitor, and absent the force of aggressive violence preventing one competitor. Which money will be the highest quality and lowest cost of the first 3 on the list, if all other competitors are outlawed? Throw the Gold Bugs a bone. What happens if a very few people start buying up all the gold and in time their plan follows through and the execution phase of the plan completes on schedule, and very few people soon own almost all the gold, and almost everyone is excluded from the club of gold owners? Where do they get the money they need to buy the gold? Is that a vital question? Does it matter if all other competitors are against the law? What if dollars, gold, and silver are all included in the legal competition to gain the most market share in legal money in good ole' U.S.A. Inc. (LLC)? A few people gather up almost all the gold, which causes an effective greater scarcity of gold, and therefore the price of gold will increase, assuming that the demand stays the same, or increases, demand increases, more people born, more people needing money, more people having no money, more people convinced in the belief that they have to pay taxes, more people requiring the stuff needed for survival, more people wanting higher standards of living, and more people wanting lower costs of living, and less, and less, and less gold is available, as fewer people have it, and as a few people buy up as much gold as they can possibly accumulate in time. What happens to the value of the dollar, and what happens to the value of silver, as the plan to manipulate the gold supply follows through the execution phase when those 3, and only those 3, forms of legal money are not made illegal, when tax payers can pay taxes with dollars, or gold, or silver, when all debits (tax debt in particular) public, and private, are legally payable with either of those three legal forms of legal tender, according to the authorities, and the Gold Bugs. 1. Dollars continue to be supplied by the legal criminals running The Federal Reserve System of Extortion, and they continue to double, and cut in half, the dollar money amount in circulation. 2. Gold flows from the many to the few who employ that answer to their problem of loosing control over their victims, as they execute their gold accumulation scheme. 3. Silver offers a competitive quality money, at a competitive cost (until it too is targeted for exploitation by a few powerful people, as those powerful people may or may not have gained their power through fraud, threats of violence, and aggressive violence upon the innocent) As the quality of the dollar plummets during the next BOOM phase of increasing the money supply by any word, or fraud, or deceit, or lie, used, and as Gold is manipulated by a few powerful people into a state of extreme scarcity, and as silver is not yet targeted for manipulation, what happens to the dominance of The Dollar, or Gold, as Silver remains free from deceit, free from threats of violence, and free from manipulation by a few as a means of gaining at the expense of the many? If you happen to be a laborer and you happen to know that money competition is now legal, pretending now that it is legal, and you happen to be watching the horse race, to see which money becomes the best money, you may decide to be paid in Gold, as gold becomes more and more scarce, and what does the employer say about your choice to be paid in gold during that experiment in competitive legal money supplies? I have no gold, my customers have no gold, my suppliers are demanding gold, I can't pay you in gold, but, if you want to keep working here, love it or leave it, you can be paid in dollars or silver. What is the legal exchange rate? You didn't ask. You don't know how to ask vital questions on your own, since you have been trained to be a victim. It is against the law to question the money monopoly, and you obey. The legal money competition race starts hypothetically: 1000 dollar units are worth 1 gold unit 100 dollars is worth 1 silver 10 silver is worth 1 gold How free is the market? The legal criminals give you jobs, they give you pay for allowing you to work, and they now give you three choices, from the depths of their bottomless hearts of gold, and they give you rules governing your money, and they say you can pay your debts with any of those three competitive money supplies, and each will be exactly as valuable as they say, on that first day, until you are told differently. Gold is accumulated according to a plan hatched by a very few powerful people for the next 10 years and the dollar competitor, for some strange reason, does not change the supply of dollars at all, for 10 years, and no one has added to, or subtracted from the silver supply, to any degree of significance, during those 10 years - what happens after 10 years? 2 Trillion dollars in circulation (after The Federal Reserve System of Extortion people ordered the amount doubled in 2008 from 1 to 2 Trillion) and that amount remains 2 Trillion for 10 years. 1 Million units of gold are in circulation at the start and 1/2 a million units are in circulation after the Gold Bugs accumulate half of it, and that half is kept out of circulation by those members of the Gold Bug club. 10 million units of Silver are in circulation a the start and 10 million units of silver are in circulation at the end of 10 years. Start 2T dollars = 1m gold 1m gold = 10m silver 10m silver. = 2T dollars 10 Years later with a fixed exchange rate - fixed by law 2T dollars = 1m gold (half taken out of circulation) 1m gold = 10m silver 10m silver = 2T dollars If the rules handed down to you from your benevolent dictators peg the three legal money competitors to a gold standard, as such above, there isn't any sense in manipulating the supply of gold by buying up and taking out of circulation significant amounts of the whole, no one cares, pay me in either, they are all the same, who cares? You have no gold, who cares, pay me in silver, it is as good as gold. What happens if the benevolent dictators change the rules after 10 years, according to their schedule, and after the insiders follow through with the plan to buy up and accumulate, and take out of circulation, half of the gold supply? Now, they say, it is time to return to a free market? What happens to the value of gold compared to the value of the dollar, and the value of silver at that point in time? 2T dollars = 1/2m gold 1/2m gold = 100m silver 100m silver = 2T dollars Those who have the gold stored can buy up all the dollars, or all the silver, with 1/2 the gold supply. What if they buy up 1/2 the dollars and 1/2 of the silver over the next period of 10 years? Peg the value first? What happens if the value is not pegged at the start? Start 2T dollars = 1m gold 1m gold = 100m silver 100m silver. = 2T dollars Day two, for an example, someone, or some group, buy 1/2 the gold supply on the first day. What happens to the exchange rate as a result of that manipulation of those three legal money competitors during the experimental competition in legal money markets, whereby no law enforces a fixed rate of exchange? Suppose someone blows the whistle, to you, and no one else knows yet, just you and the insiders, just you and those who are causing the reduction of gold in circulation by half the total supply, and you have a choice to pay taxes with gold, silver, or dollars - what do you pay your taxes with, when you are one of the few people who know the current, significant, manipulation of the gold supply? Suppose you have the following saved up after 10 years of hard labor, and then you hear the news about the gold supply manipulation: 1000 dollars worth of dollars saved 1 unit of gold saved 100 units of silver saved Do you pay taxes with gold, since you want the tax collectors to be more powerful in their work, at your expense? Do you choose to get paid in gold, and do you grow suspicious when your employer begins to offer special treatment for employees who choose to be paid in dollars or in silver while the employer keep his, or her, gold closer to their black hearts? Is there a published exchange rate each week in the newspaper, or a clock on the local bank, where the current exchange rate is broadcast to the entire world, including you, and it does not yet show the affect of the insider news you have, as half of the gold supply is secretly stashed away by a select, exclusive, few, very powerful people? Is your pay automatically adjusted to reflect the current exchange rate as the three competitors gain and lose quality and cost, and if it is not done accurately, you simply choose to have your debts paid to you in the currency you think is higher in quality, and lower in cost to you, no matter what the authorities claim? The big leap forward does occur when competition forces the quality of money up and the cost of money down, by any report, by any words, that happens, and I can see that fact, and I don't need Ron Paul telling me, and I certainly don't need the Gold Bugs telling me it is a baby step, I don't need an employer telling me, since that simple fact is self evidently true, as competition does what it does, even if I don't like it, even if I refuse to see it, it is what it is, it does what it does, and it does not depend upon my permission to be what it is, and to do what it does. Why, though, would anyone, ever, claim that any competitor who can compete is not allowed to compete? What is the true purpose of excluding some competitors, forcing them out of business while subsidizing the special interests? Stumped? Remember this: How can I increase my standard of living, reduced my cost of living, and in so doing life perpetuates instead of me allowing the opposite to occur? What is the answer? Remember this: "nobody could be trusted with the power to just print up unlimited numbers of new 100 dollar bills in your basement and spend them on what you want. Nobody can be trusted with that..." If a three way legal competition works to improve money, what is the full measure of force when any money can compete? Remember this: 1. Dollars 2. Gold 3. Silver 4. Any competitor can invent, produce, and maintain a competitive form of money, absent the force of deceit preventing any one competitor, absent the force of threats of violence preventing any one competitor, and absent the force of aggressive violence preventing one competitor. What do you think is a stock or share in a company? What do you think is a personal check? What do you think is good faith and credit? If you want to answer your question with your answer, if that is what you want, how much do you want it, and why can't you print up your own money, at your own cost, and as ong as your good faith and credit is good, isn't it good? Why would your money be any less, or any more, valuable than the next competitor? According to whose authority? If the force that causes you to do good is a force acting on you, shared by no one else, where no one else is punished for your mistakes, and no one forces you to be punished for their mistakes, what do you call that, and if you don't have a word for that, I do, and the word is equity. Suppose you wanted to build Solar Panels for sale? What stops you from printing 100 receipts for one of your Solar Panels each and you sell those to suppliers who can sell those receipts to people who want Solar Panels. You start with nothing, you get the supplies you need, you build the Solar Panels, and your money returns to you as you are the source of your money, and you money is what you produce to start your business, and your money is designed to be used, by your future customers, in exchange for the source of your good faith and credit, in exchange for your competitive production, and you are in business, and you use your own good faith and credit, and if your credit isn't worth anything, your money will be worth nothing, and you go out of business, and you pay the cost, and those who bought your money buy the certain knowledge that you are not an honest productive person, which would be their own mistake, a mistake they don't pass onto anyone else, and you can make good your reputation in some other way, if you want a good reputation, if you can earn one after you had earned a bad reputation by your own failure. No collective punishment. No power expended by any external powers to protect those from themselves, no one to blame, other than those who are responsible for any blame. What is the exchange rate of your money at the start? Why would your first sale of your first 100 receipts, as claims on your future production, measure up to anyone as being of any value whatsoever? No one told them that your money was good, you have to do that, as they may be trained into a belief that only one money is any good, and that is the wall placed in front of you so that you are rendered powerless as a competitor. They are trained to believe that no one can be trusted, they are good subjects. Why can't you convince someone that you can produce something of value, as good as anyone else, or better, if given the chance, and why does it require permission from someone to start down that road? What road block is in the way of anyone offering any competitive answer to the question once it is asked and then an answer is offered to anyone else? What was the exchange rate on a Google share at the start? Why are Google shares not accepted as tax payments? If you buy Solar Panels sufficient to produce more than you consume, enough to sell excess power, why is your power, added to the grid, not a measure of tax payment - legally? Why do you have to wait to save up money to start such a business? If your start up costs are your own printed money, in the form of stocks, shares, or dirty toilet paper with your promise on it, your money will be as good, or as bad, as you can earn your own good faith and credit. You can do that now, what stops you? The move from monopoly to competition is not a baby step, it is the definition of regime change, and it is the peaceful version of regime change, it is the method of regime change that does not resort to deceit, and does not resort to threats of violence, and does not resort to aggressive violence like torture and mass murder upon the multitudes of innocent victims as the collective punishment price paid for the perpetuation of legal money monopoly. The idea that there is a monopoly, despite all the evidence proving otherwise, is the wall in place, and as soon as enough people wake up seeing past that false front, it vanishes. "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." — Henry Ford
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 20th, 2011 03:39 pm |
|
33rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1022.html Anyone, I am going to communicate an optional viewpoint that does not follow the left/right or socialist/capitalist script as it has become known, currently, as a polarizing, perpetuating, internalized, conflict. Gary North writes: That's what Dr. Marx taught, too. He called this process the exploitation of labor. He argued that employers – capitalists – extract value from laborers because employers pay them less than they are worth. Capitalists pay laborers only survival wages, and then pocket the difference. To help understand the option viewpoint I will paint a picture for the reader, and once the reader has this picture in view the reader can look from that place to the ongoing left/right conflict. Picture a society whereby the supply of money to the honest productive people within the society is abundant, not scarce, abundant. You may have trouble with that picture. You may have a very hard time conceptualizing such a society. I can help. In such a society as a society whereby the honest productive people have ready access to money, an abundant supply of money, there is a scale by which that abundance, and that ready access flows from the source of the money to the users of the money, and on that scale there are extreme limits on each end, and any honest productive person exists on that scale, and being on that scale from one end, or the other end, is a fact of being honest, and it is a fact of being productive, and it is therefore a fact of being able to employ money on that scale. Those who are very, very, very, and most, extremely, dishonest, are on one end of the scale. Those who are very, very, very, and most, extremely, unproductive, are on one end of the scale. Those who are very, very, very, and most, extremely, honest, are on the other end of the scale. Those who are very, very, very, and most, extremely, productive, are on the other end of the scale. Most Destructive and Dishonest<->destructive and dishonest<-> neither destructive or productive and neither honest or dishonest<->productive and honest<->Most Productive and Honest That is the scale and that scale is the scale by which the flow of money flows from the producers of money to the users of money readily while at the same time the flow of money does not readily flow from the producers of money to the torturing mass murderers and those who lie, those who steal, and those who rob, rape, torture, and murder, and those who destroy as an occupation. Most Destructive and Dishonest<->destructive and dishonest<-> neither destructive or productive and neither honest or dishonest<->productive and honest<->Most Productive and Honest Least access to money, money is most scarce on this end of the same scale above->->->->->->->->->->->->Most access to money, money is abundant on this end of the same scale above You now have before you an easy to see social network whereby the power to produce (money is purchasing power or it isn't money) flows to those who can produce the most power to produce while, at the same time, the power to destroy does not flow to those who are most capable of abusing the power to produce in the work of destroying everything including the power to produce. I've painted the picture, you can ignore it, you can fail to see it, you can fail to ask vital questions concerning what it is, and how to make it work best, but it is, and it will always be what it is, even if you refuse to see it. If you see it, get in it, know it, be it, and accept it, as it exists, and from that point, look back, look back from that point to the social network at work today whereby socialism is set-up against capitalism in it's present form. From here: Most Destructive and Dishonest<->destructive and dishonest<-> neither destructive or productive and neither honest or dishonest<->productive and honest<->Most Productive and Honest Least access to money, money is most scarce on this end of the same scale above->->->->->->->->->->->->Most access to money, money is abundant on this end of the same scale above From there look back to here: Honest Productive People>->->->->->->>->->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->Legal Criminals Those who employ money to make more productive power send the total of their productive work to those who then use that power stolen in the work of destruction to keep the power to do so perpetually There are two ways to prove to you that the social network working now is the second social network above, and those two methods of proving to you are as follows: A. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ B. http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Whenever someone claims that socialism is opposite capitalism, think twice, or think as many times as needed to get out of that hell hole. It is a rigged game. Socialism is not even remotely connected to capitalism, unless you define socialism as an opposite of capitalism, and then, as far as you are concerned, that is what socialism is, as socialism, to you, is the opposite of capitalism, to you, and everyone else who is caught up in that rat trap, clap trap, lie, falsehood, self-destructive merry go round, business cycle insanity, bull expletive. Socialism has a long history, and it was, is, and will be a scientific approach toward the study of society, in the effort to improve society. Like a gun, or a pointed stick, socialism can be employed by honest productive people as well as socialism can be employed by dishonest destructive people any time, any place, right now, or in the next span of time until human beings are no longer living. Capitalism has a long history, and it was, is, and will be a method of pricing and that is about it, as far as I know. Capitalism can be anything any honest productive person wants it to be, and capitalism can be anything any dishonest destructive person wants it to be, any time, any where, from now on. The socialism versus capitalism dogmatic, and false, method of enslaving targeted victims by those who invent, produce, and maintain that false method of enslaving targeted victims is exactly that, and it was that, and it will be that, for as long as it works that way, as long as the targeted victims allow it to work that way. Left versus Right Socialism versus Capitalism Communism versus Fascism Democrats versus Republicans Organized crime group A versus Organized crime group B Legal Crime group A versus Legal Crime group B The labels hide the names of the actual people who invent, produce, and maintain those types of connections, those types of social networks, those types of arrangements that are, without the lies, and are without the false fronts, INVOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS. When there are battles going on whereby those who invent, produce, and maintain VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, are being targeted by those who invent, produce, and maintain INVOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS you have, before you, regime change of a different nature, an different order, and a regime change that cannot be known by the victims; hence the need to invent, produce, and maintain the false battle. If the victims are fighting a false battle, whereby the victims are fighting each other, they have no power being employed in the work that can cause the end of victimization. Do you have that understood? How many ways can that be shown to you, whereby you can still manage to ignore it? Will you ever question the lies that you have accepted as fact? Back to Gary North: That's what Dr. Marx taught, too. He called this process the exploitation of labor. He argued that employers – capitalists – extract value from laborers because employers pay them less than they are worth. Capitalists pay laborers only survival wages, and then pocket the difference. All of that is nonsense. It is abject acceptance of falsehood driving false solutions. You can know this, easily. You don't have to rely upon the expertise of an Austrian Economist to dig your own way out of the mire. When purchasing power flows to honest productive people in abundance, instead of the opposite, whereby purchasing power flows readily, quickly, rapidly, into the hand of the most destructive among us, what happens? What happens if the following is reversed? A. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ B. http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. It won't be capitalism. It won't be socialism. It will be a social network that measurably allows, voluntarily, the flow of power flowing to the people who are most able to use that power in the work of making more power. What happens when power is abundant? It won't be capitalism It won't be socialism Capitalism is just, and only, a method of pricing, and it is a method of pricing that is employed by the person using it to move power to them from someone else, and that is it, and it can be capitalism whenever it works for whomever it works and so what, big deal, it is not something to die for, it is not something to torture people to keep, it isn't worth anything more than any other pricing method at any time, in any place. Capitalism is a pricing method. If it is more to you, it is something else, and you define what it is, to you, and to whomever you share that exclusive definition, whereby your group define capitalism that way, so what, big deal, pat yourselves on the back. Is capitalism the thing you use to excuse legal torture and legal mass murder? Is your pricing method worth that much to you? What is capitalism to you? This: Honest Productive People>->->->->->->>->->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->>->->->->->->Legal Criminals Those who employ money to make more productive power send the total of their productive work to those who then use that power stolen in the work of destruction to keep the power to do so perpetually If that is the bare bones, no false advertizing, no false fronts, no hidden agendas, no secret deals, no dirty compromises, out in the open, true, accurate, real, factual thing you know to be as capitalism, then capitalism isn't just a pricing method, to you. If that is capitalism, to you, and your group, then capitalism isn't this: Most Destructive and Dishonest<->destructive and dishonest<-> neither destructive or productive and neither honest or dishonest<->productive and honest<->Most Productive and Honest Least access to money, money is most scarce on this end of the same scale above->->->->->->->->->->->->Most access to money, money is abundant on this end of the same scale above When the power to purchase moves more readily to those who employ power in the necessary work required to produce more power the end result will be an abundance of power sooner than any other flow of power. When the power to purchase moves more readily to those who employ power in the necessary work required to move power to dishonest people who destroy things, you have this: A. http://www.usdebtclock.org/ B. http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Call that socialism if it makes you feel better about it. It is still it. Call that capitalism, if it makes you feel better about it. It is still it. It is still doing what it does best. Back to Gary North: That's what Dr. Marx taught, too. He called this process the exploitation of labor. He argued that employers – capitalists – extract value from laborers because employers pay them less than they are worth. Capitalists pay laborers only survival wages, and then pocket the difference. The Gold Bugs, and the Austrian Economists, call them conservatives, or call them republicans, or call them friends of Liberty, or constitutionalists, or whatever label works for you, but don't call them late for dinner. They want purchasing power to be scarce. That is their tune. So long as purchasing power is scarce, so long will those who know how to get scarce things be more powerful than those who don't. That is their tune. It is based upon the idea that value, the full and only measure of value, is measured on a scale of scarcity. Like this: Most scarce, very scarce, pretty scarce, kinda scarce, not scarce or abundant, kinda abundant, pretty abundant, very abundant, most abundant Most valuable, very valuable, kinda valuable, not as valuable, even less valuable, nearly absent any value, hardly worth anything, worth nothing That is a very flawed economic theory, as it ignores, on purpose, the value of generosity, and it ignores, by willful ignorance, or just plain stupidity, the value of power. If power is abundant it is more powerful. If power is scarce it is only more powerful for those who have the power to get more power than anyone else. So, that is the measure of error in that viewpoint, as anyone with a brain can see, assuming, of course, that the man hears more than just what he what's to hear. I've spilled the beans. I've blown the whistle. What can the capitalists do, once they know the truth about their pricing methods? They are trained to accept only one option, which is to move closer to socialism. That is the insanity of the left/right falsehood. That is the brilliancy, or genius, of the left/right falsehood. Are you an insane victim. Are you a member of the legal crime syndicate? How do you earn your living? Who pays the bills? If your brilliant, genius, left/right falsehood fills your bank account, you may find out soon, that you are just another one of the insane victims, and you have fair warning, from more than just another conscientious objector, your even have warnings offered to you from above, and I don't mean Gold. Back to Gary North: That's what Dr. Marx taught, too. He called this process the exploitation of labor. He argued that employers – capitalists – extract value from laborers because employers pay them less than they are worth. Capitalists pay laborers only survival wages, and then pocket the difference. I return to that because that says so much. What happens when power flows readily, abundantly, to those who employ power best at the work of making more power? That is a vital question, and therefore an accurate answer is required, a must have, and failing to have the accurate answer can be worse than failing to ask the question, since the wrong answer can invent, and produce, a wrong path, a path heading further away from the right path, while the person who has not yet asked the question may yet ask it, and may yet gain the accurate answer. What happens when power flows readily, abundantly, to those who employ power best at the work of making more power? Jobs, employment, opportunity, and an abundant supply of new, productive, things to be done can be what happens when power flows readily, abundantly, to those who employ power best at the work of making more power. What happens when there are many, many, many more job opportunities than there are people who are ready, willing, and able to fill those job opportunities? The shoe is on the other foot. A worker becomes the employer. Like this: Joe is a person needing help to complete a large work load, failing to gain the help need will be total failure as another competitor does not fail in this work of finding, hiring, and paying workers to work. Jack is a person deciding which job to take, among an abundant supply of jobs, not wanting to be too generous, not wanting to give up too much for too little. Joe interviews Jack: Joe: "Jack, sit down, please, I'm offering you less than the minimum wage required by law, because I can." Jack: "Stuff it." Back to Gary North: That's what Dr. Marx taught, too. He called this process the exploitation of labor. He argued that employers – capitalists – extract value from laborers because employers pay them less than they are worth. Capitalists pay laborers only survival wages, and then pocket the difference. If the Gold Bugs get to keep a monetary system that manages to make purchasing power scarce to everyone except those who are best able to deceive targeted victims, or threaten targeted victims, or injuring targeted victims, or torturing targeted victims, or mass murdering targeted victims, then power will remain scarce, on purpose, because power can't be allowed to reach a level that is even remotely close to abundance, because abundant power will find it's way into the hands of honest productive people, and that will result in honest productive people doing what they do best, which is production, which will be powerful, which will move the production of power more toward abundance, including the production of an abundant supply of job opportunities. Joe interviews Jack: Joe: "Jack, sit down, please, I'm offering you less than the minimum wage required by law, because I can." Jack: "Stuff it." Back to Gary North: [Note: the phrase "pocket the difference" is the very heart of the endless debates among all schools of economic opinion. Why? Because nobody keeps the money in his pocket for long. He does something with it. So, to understand economics, follow the money: into pockets and out of pockets.] Please don't get the wrong idea. I'm not blowing the whistle on Gary North. I think that Gary North knows the facts as good as anyone I've read living today. Gold may dominate a free market as the highest quality legal currency taking most of the market share because it is higher in quality and lower in cost than all competitors combined. I don't know. I think not. I think that electricity is a much better legal currency. The trouble with electricity as money, not currency, is that electricity is a use it or lose it form of legal currency. Storing electricity is yet another market. Electricity is a very productive form of legal currency. Electricity is a very high quality legal currency, because it is exactly what it is, and it is therefore a very exact standard of purchasing power. That is what I think, not what Gary North thinks. I may be alone in my thoughts. You can be the judge. You are. Back to Gary North: Therefore, Marx concluded, the way to get rich is to set up a business in India and China, where there are enormous pools of labor to be exploited. Oops, sorry; that's not what Marx taught. He said that the way to get rich was to imitate his partner, Frederick Engels, who ran a factory in Manchester. Well, he did not actually admit that his partner was a capitalist exploiter, but he knew how the man made enough money to put him on the dole for 30 years. So, Marx argued, the way to get rich is to set up a business in a growing economy – a capitalist economy – where there are fewer laborers than in Asia, and who live far better than Asians did in 1850. Exploit richer workers – that's the ticket to wealth! I want to explore the optional viewpoint much more than I have the time at this time, so I have to cut this short. The above quote reminds me of a lesson learned. The lesson I learned had to do with the two default viewpoints combined into the one conflict viewpoint, and how, historically, that played out. In the Communist Manifesto there are quotes that may be attributed to Marx or Engels. Confusing the two may be a bad idea. In those quotes the message is clearly marking the differences between the false conflict and the option. The false conflict was said to be, specifically, COMMUNISM versus Capitalism, and in The Communist Manifesto the option viewpoint was spelled out as Socialism, and even that was specified as the Socialism spoken of by specific proponents of Socialism. Here: http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html PREFACE TO 1888 ENGLISH EDITION Down here: Yet, when it was written, we could not have called it a _socialist_ manifesto. By Socialists, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand the adherents of the various Utopian systems: Owenites in England, Fourierists in France, both of them already reduced to the position of mere sects, and gradually dying out; on the other hand, the most multifarious social quacks who, by all manner of tinkering, professed to redress, without any danger to capital and profit, all sorts of social grievances, in both cases men outside the working-class movement, and looking rather to the "educated" classes for support. Whatever portion of the working class had become convinced of the insufficiency of mere political revolutions, and had proclaimed the necessity of total social change, called itself Communist. It was a crude, rough-hewn, purely instinctive sort of communism; still, it touched the cardinal point and was powerful enough amongst the working class to produce the Utopian communism of Cabet in France, and of Weitling in Germany. Thus, in 1847, socialism was a middle-class movement, communism a working-class movement. Socialism was, on the Continent at least, "respectable"; communism was the very opposite. And as our notion, from the very beginning, was that "the emancipation of the workers must be the act of the working class itself," there could be no doubt as to which of the two names we must take. Moreover, we have, ever since, been far from repudiating it. Note the use of the following term: social quacks The Enemies of Communism, therefore, are known. Owenites Fourierists Those were the enemies of the Communism versus Capitalism battle. Those were the optional viewpoints. Those where the ones opting out of the false paradigm. I have learned a lesson about those options. From those options, in America, the following option was invented: http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf That was explained further, in historical context, by the following: Owen, Fourier, St. Simon, and more, have worthily sought to solve the problem of a harmonious human society; and although they have all tailed to discover the true methods of reform, they have done, in the effort to do so, other and most valuable work. They have laid bare the vices of the old règime with a terrific fidelity. They have, like Carlyle, disgusted mankind with their own portraiture. At the same time they have sketched with a potent hand an enchanting picture of the “golden age of the future,” which contrasts in all men’s minds forcibly, at this day, with the antagonism, the wasteful expenditure of means, the ignorance, and crime, and sickness, and squalor, and filth, and wretchedness, and the broad and painful but ludicrous diversities of poverty and wealth, and the mercenary degradation of all classes, which disgrace the existing state of our social organization. Fourier has done even far more than this. His masterly analysis of the human passions is an invaluable contribution to man’s knowledge of himself. His daring but shadowy outline of a science of universal analogy, which would be entitled, if once put fairly upon the firm basis of a known science, to the denomination of “The Science of Sciences,” is eminently worthy of estimation, if regarded as merely suggestive, and stimulating to more sedate and systematic investigations in the same direction, and equally dangerous if accepted for what it claims to be an ascertained basis from which to reason in practical science. http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm The lesson is such that other people know the same lesson, in other words: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/pilgers-law-if-its-been-officially-denied-then-itrsquos-probably-true-959206.html Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it’s probably true' The Communist Manifesto officially denies Socialism and not ambiguously, there is a specific reference to a pre-corruption Socialism. Owenites in England, Fourierists in France That was imported, improved, and that became such things as Equitable Commerce. There are other examples: http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm Mutual Banking (look up The Parasite City please) And here: http://lysanderspooner.org/node/40 A New System of Paper Currency Listen up. Those are American versions of options that are outside of the Left/Right conflict, so, what does the "Right" have to say about those American born options, and keep in mind Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it’s probably true' You have to go to the Right sides official mouthpiece, and you probably don't even know who that is, so I can offer to you a very competitive competitor for the official, no bones, free market, mouth piece, the literal horses mouth, for the established right. Here: http://mises.org/books/egalitarianism.pdf Murray Rothbard Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature 13 THE SPOONER–TUCKER DOCTRINE: AN ECONOMIST’S VIEW Remember a few things here please, before I begin quoting: 1. The mouth piece of the free market right do not touch Equitable Commerce with a 10 foot pole, as far as the Free Market Right (tm) is concerned the author of Equitable Commerce is persona non grata. 2. The closest I have ever found of any spokesperson of the Free Market Right (tm) challenging Equitable Commerce by Josiah Warren is the quotes I am going to now quote. 3. Spooner was a spokes person contemporary to, or at the same time as, Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews, all of which came after Owen and Fourier, all of which are contemporaries with Marx and Engels, more or less, and then following Josiah Warren the work of Benjamin Tucker, with his publications of Liberty, for example, the time line is thereby reported. So Murray Rothbard has to skip over Josiah Warren, as if Equitable Commerce didn't exist, so as to then discredit Spooner and Tucker. Here are the quotes: Actually, in contrast to collectivist anarchists and to many other types of radicals, Spooner and Tucker tried to use economics rather than scorn it as excessively rational. Some of their fallacies (for example, the “law of cost,” the labor theory of value) were embedded in much of classical economics; and it was their adoption of the labor theory of value that convinced them that rent, interest, and profit were payments exploitatively extracted from the worker. In contrast to the Marxists, however, Spooner and Tucker, understanding many of the virtues of the free market, did not wish to abolish that noble institution; instead, they believed that full freedom would lead, by the workings of economic law, to the peaceful disappearance of these three categories of income. The mechanism for this peaceful abolition Spooner and Tucker found—and here they unfortunately ignored the teachings of classical economics and substituted instead their own fallacies—in the sphere of money. That is bait and switch, combined with a Man of Straw product. There is no argument possible as to the cost principle which is Josiah Warren's observation reported in Equitable Commerce. Rothbard baits with an inaccurate reference to the cost principle by twisting it and replacing it with his own construction of "law of cost" and then his own Man of Straw in "The Labor Theory of Value (tm)". So, politically, destructive politics, or resort to deceit is a play here in measurable ways. A. Do not mention that which must not be acknowledged, which is the same thing happening right now as the Legal Criminals do not mention Ron Paul. Murray Rothbard, and all the right side dogmatists do not mention Josiah Warren and Equitable Commerce, at all. B. Corrupt the message that does manage to become currently aware by a significant number of people, despite refusal to even mention that which must not be acknowledged. In other words if the message does get out, despite all effort to keep the message censored, the next best thing is to alter, corrupt, and spin the message. C. Attack the corrupted message, and misdirect all attention away from the actual message. A Man of Straw is constructed with an obvious flaw, and then the constructor of the Man of Straw has power over that weak opponent, while the actual opponent is thereby hidden. More from Murray Rothbard: The two basic interrelated fallacies of Spoonerite theory (and the theory of all schools of writers who have unkindly been labelled by economists as “money-cranks”) are a failure to understand the nature of money and the nature of interest. First off, you can read Spooner's actual work, if you care to, and you can know that it is sound, and his work is far closer to capitalism, it is capitalism in fact, it employes the same pricing method, based upon scarcity, and therefore the whole attack on Spooner is ludicrous, laughable, or even stupid - certainly ignorant. Secondly the actual alternative, the cost principle, and individuality principle based Equitable Commerce competitor, the actual target of Rothbard's false political spin, the same thing that inspired Tucker, is again misrepresented by Rothbard, entirely side stepped, with the reference to "monetary-cranks". Thirdly, notice the tactic of claiming to blame the use of derogatory, and inflammatory herbage on other people. Rothbard claims that it is unfair to call his Straw-Man "monetary-cranks", while he does it. Forthright, the concept of interest is not "understood" in any sense of the word, and all the ambiguity of "interest" according to Rothbard is the full measure of it. The interest is ambiguity, and the idea is to keep "interest" a trade secret, something known only by a few, and something not knowable by the many, it is, fine print, it is too complicated on purpose. Interest is simple. Interest is nothing but the price on money. If competition is legal, then the price is driven down, and that is simple. It is simple to know why some people work to make money scarce. Once money is made scarce, the price on money can reach for the highest known limit ever in the history of human existence. That is simple stuff. It is interesting to know that capitalists want money to be scarce, on purpose, so as to make money prices go higher, and higher, and higher, in inverse proportion to money scarcity. If no one but a few have it, everyone else will pay anything to get it. Isn't that interesting? Here is Rothbards dodge: 4For the sake of simplicity, we will here continue the practice of the classical economists of lumping “interest” and “profits” together. Actually, the rate of profit on the market tends, in the long-run, to equal the rate of interest. Short-run profit (and losses) would continue to exist onthe market even if Spooner had his way and the rate of interest (and of long-run profit) fell to zero. The true nature of the distinction between interest and profit was not discovered until the work of Frank H. Knight, Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit (Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin, 1921).
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Aug 27th, 2011 04:29 pm |
|
34th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Im trying to help people get out of the false left right paradigm many people I know seem to view our Puppet Presidents as Heroes I think it is a cult of personality how do I help both Democrats and Republicans see that our Presidents are just Puppets ? southernmissouri2007, I think in terms of a power struggle. If you are now using the power you have to avoid being victimized by the power that does target you for exploitation, then you will run into this problem, as a matter of fact. Those who support the people I call Legal Criminals are almost as much an enemy of yours as the Legal Criminals themselves, for without the support of the "tax payers" the Legal Criminals are powerless. Just because the goal of Liberty is difficult is no reason to join the other side, and although the work may appear to be ineffective, at first, you will, in time, realize benefits. Those of us who have been on this path for decades all appear to agree that the power is shifting in a big way. Examples: Seeing Alex Jones being interviewed on Legal Crime Network Television (a.k.a. Main Stream Media). A member of our group (sharing the common goal of Liberty) running for president and being measured, by Main Stream Media (Legal Crime Network Television), as a contender for the throne of the head of Legal Crime Inc. (LLC) (a.k.a. The United States of America). If you were on this road 30 years ago, you would probably have said that these examples, witnessed today, would not be happening this soon. Each seed you plant in each mind that is not yet closed will add to the power of Liberty. Do not despair, there is no other choice, either you work toward Liberty or you will fail to realize the benefits of Liberty. If despotism if fine for some people now, they will realize their error soon enough, or die still licking the boots of their masters, and of those who do learn to be intolerant of abject slavery to their own falsehoods, in time, you will be able to help them, since you have remained diligent, choosing Liberty despite the powers working against it.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 29th, 2011 10:54 am |
|
35th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
papikhu, If the human condition is understood as a power struggle, the pieces fall into place, producing a reasonable, and accurate, measurable picture. Those who can manage to cause other people to believe lies, for example, have access to the power in falsehood, and those who fall victim to falsehood are powerless against it. When each victim is thereby weakened they can even be directed by lies to give up even more power as they are led to believe that the power they give up is going to be used in their own defense, when in actuality their power is being used to injure them, by taking even more power, and that is a closed loop - providing the means by which we suffer. As the injured become weaker, they are inspired to give up even more power, still thinking that the power they are giving up is going to cause their defense, when the power given up makes them even weaker instead. That can be seen when following the single legal money. I call it Legal Crime. The fact that words often have two opposite meanings, such as Liberal, and Capitalist, should spark the necessary chain reaction that can break the closed loop, as the victims slowly realize how language has become the device the transfers falsehood from the producers of falsehood to the victims, and not the other way around. Language is a medium of exchange, a currency. Someone earlier had suggested a need to start at money, or finances, and from that beginning, or from that sound foundation, the current human situation can be better understood, or in other words a similar message was offered. What if words have been corrupted to a point of making language weak? The tool that is needed for self defense can be turned around into a tool used to weaken us even further. "The British are Coming." can turn into "Fight the Global War on Terror", or "Spread Democracy". That can, in a way, bring you up to speed. Like this: http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. If the victims are conditioned to obey, and they are then told to never question their orders, the loop closes. Like this: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Do you understand how the power struggle shifted in that example above? How about the following battle lost? http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html AMENDMENT XIV Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868. Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. A place where, supposedly, the people retain the right to throw out abusive government changed to a place where the same people pay for their own demise, legally, and how can that be understood when the victims no longer are in command of their own language? Even if there were many ways out of this jam, which there are, those who know can't reach those who are as yet dumfounded, stupefied, and caught in that closed loop. The enemy is here, it isn't the British, and a look in the mirror can begin the full measure of that enemy, in this power struggle. From that foundation, that deep, relentless, internal exposure of every trace of falsehood, is a good foundation to start from, since it then, over time, builds the necessary power that may currently be wasted chasing our tails, as ordered, and as we obey the order not to question those orders. Someone can argue the point, that the battle is internal, first, but those types, it seems to me, are dictatorial, they know better than you do, they are your judge, and I see things quite differently, having won that power struggle. Question everything. At some point progress has to be made forward, expediently, and some things must be taken for granted, but it may yet be a good idea to reserve the right to sever your connections (to things taken for granted) when they begin to smell like a rat. If you care to hear more from me, I can go on, and I think the best way to unravel the whole mess is to offer one obvious workable solution, and then have that base of operations to compare that which is the working power struggle now. A. That which is now. B. That which can be. But, and again, how can any of those communications occur if language itself has been twisted beyond meaning - for the victims? The Legal Criminals know the lies, or they too are soon to know the full measure of their powerlessness.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 29th, 2011 02:57 pm |
|
36th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
A caller brought up the subject that has the false, and misleading, label: "Illegal Immigration". This is one of those human conditions that, in my opinion, Alex Jones is working on the wrong side. I cannot find out what must be found out to uncover the required information needed to know if my opinion is accurate concerning which side Alex Jones is on in this subject that has the false, and misleading, label: "Illegal Immigration". I don't know what Alex Jones thinks, or what Alex Jones proposes, as a means of solving the "Illegal Immigration" problem. I can offer my take on it. In an operating Democratic Federated Republic, not what we have at the "Federal" level, the separate and sovereign State governments solve their own internal problems, and the better solutions can be examples to those who have yet to solve the problem, and that is how a Democratic Federated Republic is supposed to work, by that designed competitive feature. Think about how that would work compared to how the current situation is playing out now. A. The Nation State (the actual legal crime government that pretends to be a Federal Government, but it is not one) operators use the power they steal to cause the phenomenon that they then falsely advertise as: "Illegal Immigration". B. The Democratic Federated Republican competitive State Government operators handle the phenomenon of imigration their own inventive ways, and each separate and sovereign State deals with the problem one way, or the other way, and some operators of some States solve their problems better than other operators of some other States, within the operating Democratic Federated Republican form of government. The example of what is, or A above, not B above, is a method by which Legal Criminals (Globalists) employ the power they steal (they steal power through involuntary taxation including the tax of "inflation") to steal more power, and the phenomenon that they falsely advertise as "Illegal Immigration" is just another method by which they, the Legal Criminals, use the power they steal in the work of stealing more power. They, the Legal Criminals, use the money they steal to import voters, they employ voters, they hire mercenaries from foreign lands, like Mexico, and these hired mercenaries are hired to move to this land, and to then follow orders, including the order to help steal more power, by voting for more stealing, and that is an accurate report of the phenomenon that is falsely advertised as the "Illegal Immigration" problem. It is not a problem to the Legal Criminals (Globalists), it is a method by which they spend the power the steal in the work of stealing more power. The example of what can be, or B above, not A above, can be illustrated with inventive, free, thinking. Think. What would happen if the operators of the operating Democratic Federated Republic allowed each Sovereign and Separate State government operators all the responsibility they need to solve their own problems, including the influx of people from other lands outside of their own legal boundaries? Imagine, for example, the following situation: 1. Mexico is the place where a new revolution occurs and they begin to solve their own internal problems, and they see the mutual support that is gained by joining an operating Democratic Federated Republic, and they, the operators of the newly liberated Mexican State, petition the operators of the operating Democratic Federated Republican government for Statehood, so as to become the 51st State of The United States of America, as another Separate and Sovereign State within that voluntary Union. 2. California undergoes a wrong turn, as the operators of that Separate and Sovereign State side with the Legal Criminals (Globalists) and those operators of California begin to hire mercenaries to enter their boarders and start working to use the power they steal to steal more power, inside California. 3. Texas State operators begin to show signs of moving closer to the Legal Crime business, and further away from the Liberty business, and they too begin to hire mercenaries to enter their boarders to carry out their plans to steal more power and then use that stolen power to steal even more power, by voting for Legal Crime, and other bad things. 4. Arizona State operators solve the problem. Now that you have something other than the Script to work with, can you invent the way that the Arizona State operators solve this false problem? What do the operators of the Federated Democratic Republic voluntary Union of Separate and Sovereign States do in each case illustrated above? 1. What do the operators of the effective, competitive, Federated Democratic Republican form of government do about Mexico? Does Mexico ever reach a point where it can be accepted into the United States, as a competitive example of that which is the best that can be, reaching for Liberty? What do the operators of the Federated Democratic Republican form of government do when a new State petitions for admission into the voluntary Union? That is not the same question as "What will Obama do?", since Barry if the false leader of the false government. Barry is the puppet false front in front of the monopoly Legal Crime organization hiding behind a false legitimacy - not the same question. 2. What do the operators of the effective, competitive, Federated Democratic Republican form of government do about California and Texas? What is the role of the legal fiction operators of the Federated Democratic Republican form of government, and what do they do when one of the Separate and Sovereign State legal fiction operators are making crime legal, and hiring foreign mercenaries, importing them, so as to enforce legal crimes within their own boarders? 3. What is the plan invented, produced, and maintained by the operators who solve the actual problems of immigration, and what do the operators of the Democratic Federated Republican form of government do with that plan once that plan is working in Arizona? What is the plan Alex Jones promotes on the false issue known as "Illegal Immigration"? Alex Jones can't, reasonably, say that the current National government can fix the false "Illegal Immigration" problem that has been invented, produced, and is being maintained by the people who operate the National government. That is like saying that cutting off my head will solve my toothache. Which state operators, of all the states ever to have existed, solve their immigration problems best? How do they solve those problems?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Aug 29th, 2011 08:42 pm |
|
37th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
However, what if the dollar was not the currency of choice used in international oil transactions? BobR, There are those, including me, who perceive a version of that dollar hegemony plan that includes regime change; whereby The Dollar Hegemony is going out, on schedule, and going in will be a new regime. It looks to me to be a Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and South American alliance, on schedule, to retake monopoly power. And as you point out, correctly, the shoe (money monopoly enforcement) will be on the other foot. Those advantages that were realized by American consumers (not just, or only, the honest productive consumers, but including all consumers in America) will have the leverage working against them, not for them, so long as the legal monopoly, from the new regime, is enforceable, which is why the Legal Criminals (Globalist) must resort to Global war to usher in an effective regime change. All forms of power will be made scarce by those who have an abundance of power in America, and that will happen on schedule, unless the honest productive people, in America, decide to retake the power stolen from them, at which time power can then be used to produce an abundance of power, in many competitive forms, to an as yet not ever realized state of abundance. All that is needed is for the Honest Productive Americans to avoid the impending doom day parade: is to sever the connection to the Legal Criminals, and have ready a working competition to invent, produce, and maintain higher quality power sources, and lower cost power sources, not limited to oil, gas, coal, solar, wind, lunar, algae, food, metal, land, water, oxygen, labor, and legal money. I disagree with the notion that this can't be avoided. The Doom Day Parade can be avoided easily; it is merely a matter of perception, followed by enough people sharing the awakening, and then acting upon that new dawn of accurate understanding. I keep going back to the following quote: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henryford136294.html It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning. Are you aware of the work done by Lyndsey Williams? http://www.reformation.org/energy-non-crisis.html Are you aware of the link between the original oil legal criminal monopolists as they caused the false "prohibition" campaign to eliminate alcohol as a viable alternative to the oil monopoly? Are you aware of the use of water as fuel to lessen, if not eliminate petroleum based fuel consumption? Are you aware of the evidence that supports the hypothesis that oil is not created by "fossils"? Do you know about the progress in work on using algae as fuel, both from private, independent home producers, in Modular Vertical Farming Units, and commercial interests utilizing vast ponds of algae, for cheap, cost effective, and high quality, competitive motor fuel? Can't you see, and accurately measure (rather than be duped by the false propaganda) the move to electric motor fuel produced at independent home sources of cheap electric power? Where your viewpoint and my viewpoint part company is where your version says this: There is no way out at this point. The Legal Criminals routinely target all forms of power mediums within the targeted social networks, waters supplies, power stations, roads, bridges, sewer services, medical services, legal services, information services, and financial services, when the targeted social network those supplies are made scarce, on purpose, on schedule, as the targeted social network is on the bust cycle. Stop following orders that cause those power supplies to be severed, in the targeted social networks, and who is left to follow those orders, and carry out those willful legal crimes? There are as many more ways out as there are grains of sand in the universe. The doom day parade is a very costly road that is traveled by design, and one obvious, easy, and reliable way out is to stop traveling down that road. It is not only very costly to travel down that road, it is very difficult to actually maintain that destructive direction; the direction is unnatural, forced, and can only be traveled by way of those huge expenses ordered by those few people who have managed to invent, produce, and maintain this monolithic path to doom. Simply stepping off that path, one person at a time, or all those who realize the need at once, is all that is needed. Honest productive people, when not misdirected into providing the means by which we suffer, figure out how to make power make more power, when not following the scripted path to doom day, and the Honest Productive People know how to produce abundance, how to produce prosperity, how to produce valuable things, how to produce things that turn less power into more power, and how to maintain liberty, and then that is what they do, which is what they do best - once unleashed from the bond to the parasites. You can claim that oil power must flow, without which there will be dire consequences, if that is your claim, or you can claim that dollars must flow, without which there will be dire consequences, and those situations can be made to happen just that way, so long as replacement power sources are not allowed to compete for filling the demand for more power; as oil and dollar power throttles down into a managed scarcity, on schedule, there will be power expended in the necessary work required to eliminate competition, and that too is part of the managed road to doom, invented by, produced by, and maintained by the few who run Legal Crime. What stops honest productive people from inventing, producing, and maintaining competitive alternatives to the monopoly powers? Do you fail to give credit to those who earn it? There is an unnatural absence of accurate perception, and there is an abundance of narrow minded, self defeating, abject obedience to falsehood, in my opinion, and as you have done, with accurate measures of physical data, there are ways to measure the accuracy of a competitive viewpoint which does compete in opposition to your stated viewpoint: There is no way out at this point. That is the scheduled future down cycle, or bust part of the cycle, designed to occur in America, as hegemonic power moves to the new regime, which may or may not be based in China. All that is needed, for anyone, anywhere, is to invent, produce, and maintain a competitive alternative, and the more who manage that simple process, the more obvious will be the best inventions, which can then polarize all who are lagging behind. Belief in abject obedience to falsehood, it seems to me, is a closed loop, a self fulfilling, self evident, road leading exactly where those who invent, produce, and maintain those falsehoods desire the victims to march, and march faster, as they are told. If you say there is no way out, does that mean, as far as you are concerned, there will be no way out? How about some numbers? What would happen if each Honest Productive American were to agree to work toward a new Liberty Day on July 4th 2012, and on that day everyone who agrees will no longer send another cent of their hard earned power to any of the Legal Criminals currently holding positions of power within the Legal Crime Network that has become known as The Federal Government, which is a false front, since it is not Federal, it is National, by design. This was not intended to be a Federation, this was intended to be, by design, a Nation State, or Consolidated Government, and the Honest Productive Americans have that lie, too, working against them, and therefore the sooner that the Honest Productive People understand the full measure of that lie, the sooner they will be working to sever the links that cause them to provide the means by which we suffer. Giving notice, from today, until the new declared day of Independence, affords all who have a vested interest in The Dollar Hegemony, time to move their investments out of that Pyramid Scheme and onto competitive alternatives, and by July 4th, 2012 there will have been time for the various competitors to compete for market share, and higher quality and lower cost alternatives will be the rule, rather than the exception, and even if the Legal Criminals continue to use the power they steal (through involuntary taxes that include the non-federal income tax, which is a sure fire measure of a despotic Nation State, and involuntary taxes that include the employment of a legal money monopoly induced business cycle whereby involuntary taxes flow from the Honest Productive People to the Legal Criminals on the bust part of the cycle during planned inflation, and involuntary taxes flow to the Legal Criminals as ownership of real property, commodities, stocks, bonds, and other forms of interest, during the boom parts of the managed business cycle), and even if the Legal Criminals continue to use the power they steal to enforce their monopoly power supplies, as they work to forcefully defeat competition, their actions will no longer be hidden behind the thin veil of legitimacy, or moral authority, their crimes will be known as crimes, and their potential victims will be blowing the whistle like a modern day Paul Revere. If everyone, but me, and a few other self-censored individuals, do not declare their full intention to make a new independence day real, or make a Day of Liberty happen, on schedule, as you appear to claim, then of course, that is what will happen. There is no way out at this point. If that is the goal, that goal can certainly be reached. If, on the other hand, the goal is to work toward a new independence day, a new Liberty Day, then who can stop anyone from reaching that goal? How about a new slogan too? I will take back Liberty, die if you prefer that goal. You words may trump mine now, being more powerful now, but the year is not over, and the next year hasn't even started, and many things are up in the air now, that were well suppressed by willful resort to deceit not long ago. Even Alex Jones manages to gain currency on the Legal Crime Networks (a.k.a. Network Main Stream Television), and there is now a contender to the throne of U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) (a.k.a. The United States of America), and he is one of us, an Honest Productive American, not one of them, not a Legal Criminal. The game is not over yet. Which side are you on?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Sep 1st, 2011 11:42 am |
|
38th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.garynorth.com/public/8431.cfm Anyone, The title for the article above is: World Trade Center Building 7 and Conspiracy Theories When a liar can no longer tell when their words are lies, the loop closes, and a case can be made for a rewrite of an old saying. Live by the lie, die by the lie. The term "Conspiracy Theorist" is a lie. The words are mere symbols, and the meaning is false. The words can be Fried Chicken, so long as the false meaning remains as destructive to the victims of the lies; including the liars who can no longer tell that they are lying. A quote from the article: Only a handful of experts have ever publicly argued that the cause of the bildings' collapse was a system of controlled demolition. Anyone who dares to mention the pancake collapse of the third tower is rejected derisively as a conspiracy theorist. That is cut and pasted so the misspelling isn't mine. Note the use of the word handful, which is ambiguous, and likely to be ambiguous so as to be plausibly deniable. What is the number of people who have... hold on, there is another word worthy of noting. Note the use of the word argued. How about a factual statement instead of a theory, argument, expert opinion, or otherwise less than a specific, accurate, truthful statement? Following are a list of links to people who have uncovered, or discovered, conclusive evidence in support of a guilty verdict, beyond a shadow of doubt, were there ever to be a trail, so as to judge the perpetrators of the crimes involving the destruction of 3 buildings in New York city on September 11 2001, and in this list the people who have accomplished these tasks are numerous, many people, and the number of the people who have accomplished this task are knowable as that exact number, since they all have names, they all live on Earth, they have addresses, phone numbers, and they breath oxygen. http://www.ae911truth.org/ http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ http://www.911truth.org/ Returning to the quote from the article by Gary North: Only a handful of experts have ever publicly argued that the cause of the bildings' collapse was a system of controlled demolition. Anyone who dares to mention the pancake collapse of the third tower is rejected derisively as a conspiracy theorist. How many people can fit into one hand? Who decides if a person is an expert or if a person is a "Conspiracy Theorist"? Who decides if the authorities are criminals? If the criminals get to decide that they are the authorities, then words can become meaningless for the victims, while words are still effective and useful tools used by the Legal Criminals. Think please. Who ever, in your entire life, has ever used the term Legal Criminal. One person, so far, and you may want to know why language has escaped your command on this one. Dictatorial regimes invent, produce, and maintain one way forms of exchange media. The victims are the subjects of the one way exchanges that flow through the one way exchange mediums. Those who invent, produce, and distribute the media, which are words, images, symbols, language, money, and all forms of media, flowing one way down the channels of exchange, command those one way forms of media that they alone invent, and the victims are subject to those demand notices, those dictates, those one way communications, those orders, those commands, those crimes against humanity. The victims get the smelly end. The Legal Criminals know that there is a smelly end, so they at least know better than to obey, they no how to avoid avoid getting only the smelly end of those one way forms of media, the victims cannot know, if they are allowed to know, they would have a choice, and the only one's choosing to be victims, once they know, will be those who like to be victims, and then, by definition, if language isn't corrupted, they are not victims, they are merely people who like, who choose, to be injured in some way. Love your lies. Lick the boots of your oppressors. Dig faster, die faster, cover the grave of the slave who died sooner, he won, it is now your turn. Hurry up. Obey. There is no choice. You can't even invent a word, and have the word gain currency, since the word has to pass through the gauntlet of self-appointed authorities who process the new word and either reject it, or accept it, and then the word either gains currency, or the word is sent into the memory hole. Terms are similarly filtered internally and externally. Legal Crime. If a word does manage to get past the authorities, despite all the costs expended in the work of censorship, the word is then targeted for destruction, so as to regain control over language, and so as to keep the power of accurate communication out of the hands of the targeted victims. Note, how difficult it is for you to read simple English right here, and know what I am talking about right here, right now. This is English, like: See spot run. It depends upon what run means. How do you interpret the word see? Conspiracy was once a word used by the victims so as to rally the victims, and polarize the victims, of the conspiracy, so as to afford the victims the power to avoid further victimization. Note how I carefully avoid the use of the words justice, punishment, and I even try desperately to avoid the use of the terms trial, law, order, and judgement. For lack of accurate currency, what power do the victims have left? Grin and bear their condition of victimization, since no single victim has enough power alone to stop an organized crime ring that has managed to infiltrate and command the power of government. Conspiracy fact is rendered powerless. How about a modern day reference to a past event? Paul Revere is riding down the street yelling, in English: The British are coming, and all who hear his message shoot Paul Revere (the messenger) as a Conspiracy Theorist. What would have happened to Common Sense? Those who are well trained victims would have shot that messenger too, as Thomas Paine is branded as just another Conspiracy Theorist. Burn the book for fuel. Who published it? How much was the price of it? I, for one, can't get past the censors in your brain. What happened to Patrick Henry? You may have remembers Give me Liberty or give me death, but his later message was shot down, and you will refuse to know it. Patrick Henry was one of the first conspiracy theorists in U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) before the ink dried. What happens if someone tries to blow the whistle on capitalism? They are called Monetary Cranks, Conspiracy Theorists, and that message of dire warning is rendered powerless as a means of rallying the troops in the effort to defend against organized victimization by a few powerful people; with or without badges. Why not give credit where credit is due? There is no exclusive profit in it; at someone's exclusive expense. Call someone a socialist, and the same shot goes through the heart of the message, killing the message. Where is the book titled The History of Socialism (by Steven Pearl Andrews)? I keep looking, but it may have been burned for fuel. What happens when the message, despite all the forces aligned against the message (all the collective powers of censorship), when the message does manage to gain currency? The Revolution will not be televised. The shots aimed at the message are aimed at the messenger, when the message does make it past the censors, when the message threatens to gain currency, and threatens to consume market share. A few cases in point, can be pointed out. MLK, JFK, and conspiracy facts from then on become even more difficult to crush, kill, and censor. Resort to deceit, threats of violence, and violence. Produce an abundance of fear. I like these two: 1. http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/jimbellap.htm 2. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8403350824865189566 Fact: In case 1 the person was sent to prison Fact: In case 2 the person suffered a premature death When your closest dear loved ones are targeted, then, you may think twice about obeying the conditioned responses, jerking your knees upon command, the bell rings, you salivate, socialism is mentioned, you fear, you are angered, you seek retribution, punishment, bark like a dog, bark louder, and then when you are targeted you may invent your own new lies to escape the inevitable realization of the facts, you are the victim, you are not, you are, you are not, you are, anything but the truth, an argument you can't win, on purpose, for your own profit, while you die a miserable, horrifying, torturous, twisted, death. I can't say, you may be joining in, and targeting, while that is an option, while you keep a close eye out for fellow members of the targeting group, as they may target you while you target the victims given to you, until the supply of victims run out. Live by the sword, die by it. The road is going away from liberty when messengers are shot, figuratively, and literally; hence concepts like those expressed in one of the Bill of Rights. As such: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Patrick Henry was right, that was an impudent last ditch effort to salvage the power of liberty in the face of legal crime, of the day, which was Nationalism, hidden behind the false front of Federalism. Patrick Henry was one of the Federalists, by definition, but not by the terms of the times. He was then known as an Anti-Federalists, and that measures the power of falsehood, since "The Federalists" (tm), of that time, were the Nationalists, they had built and effective false front. The meanings of words are rendered meaningless when language is rendered powerless. What is a conspiracy? What facts can be known about any conspiracy? Who has the authority to officially recognize anything? What have you been smoking? How much will you pay me for this bridge in Brooklyn? Back to Gary North: Conclusion: the following is not true. "All three are clearly controlled demos. Everyone that views it knows it." Almost no one who views it knows it, and anyone who points out the obvious -- the pancake collapse of all three -- risks either ostracism or patronizing smirks. Why choose the word pancake, and the word collapse? Is Gary North salivating, and barking like a dog? Building 7 falling free is as obvious as the need to avoid staring at the sun. Blindness is the cost of failing to know the truth. Building 7 did not collapse, nor pancake. The accurate term in English is free fall. Remove the accurate term in English and what is placed in place of the accurate term, and why is the accurate term removed, and why is the other term put in place of the accurate term? Ask Alexander Hamilton? I can pretend to do so. Joe "Al, set me straight here: why did you call yourself a Federalist when you were obviously a Nationalist? Al "I'm dead now, and turning in my grave I might add, so I can tell the truth now, but the accurate term then was Monarchist. I was a flaming Monarchist, and that would not sell, or rather the victims would not buy into a Consolidated Government, or Monarchy, since the intended victims had just suffered greatly in the despicable work of getting rid of a Monarchy, so we had to choose the label of our worst enemies The Federalists." Joe "I know, I know, Al, I'm just working you for a confession. So, seriously, did you laugh all the way to your State Bank when the intended victims started calling their fellow friends of liberty Anti-Federalists, when they were the actual Federalists?" Al "LOL" Joe "All the way to your monopoly bank?" Al "ROTFL" Once there were 3 buildings, scraping the sky, they fell into holes in the ground, freely. Look at the sun. Look at the sun. Stare at the sun, until you go blind. Buildings may, some day, pancake. Where is one that has done so? Buildings may have collapsed. Where is one that has done so? Stone age buildings? Even during the free fall of the buildings in New York the news reporters hired to spread falsehoods were reporting Controlled Demolition as the obvious events were obvious as yet to be rendered false. What explains a common falsehood such as this? What explains a naked emperor strutting around with his weeny dangling as all the sycophants busy themselves in the creative work of imagining fashionable attire figuratively placed upon the naked Emperor? Gary North explains, while he participates. What is at the end of this road is well documented by Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn in his work titled with Gulag. Talk about terror. It has been said that one of the highest quality, and highest cost (to the victims) Legal Crime boss, a man names Joseph Stalin, spoke, and when he was done speaking the audience in the room applauded, and each in the room knew not to be the first to stop applauding. How long did they suffer the clap? Fear is the current regime. Why accept that sentence? You have been told to do so. Is it past time to stop being abjectly obedient to falsehood? Stick your hand in a fire. Stick your hand in a fire. Where do you want to be by July 4th 2012? The road you are on leads somewhere, and you can fear it, or you can choose, by your own power of perception, and your own power of will, a higher quality, and lower cost option. Back to Gary North: "I wonder what else they lied about." They lied about The Constitution. Who are they? Alexander Hamilton is one of the set of people used in the accurate sentence above referring to they who lied about The Constitution. Call me a conspiracy theorist, and call me a revisionist historian, call me late for dinner, I don't want to eat that meal, nor drink the cool-aid being served. They lied about legal money. Who are they? They are some of The Austrian Economists; within their group some lie, some do not, and they have names, and they leave paper trails, where their lies are documented facts. When each and every Honest Productive American knows the full measure of their victimization, at the hands of the Legal Criminals, they will begin to mount a defense, and on the laundry list of things to do will be the invention, production, and maintenance of accurate, high quality, and lower cost mediums of exchange, such as accurate language, so as to be able to convey accurate meaning from one Honest Productive American to another, and such things as accurate money, accurate currency, which will be high quality, powerful, and low cost, but not for Legal Criminals. Not this: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ That is interestingly low cost to a very few, at the expense of many. If that is good enough for you, then that confesses which side you are on, even if it does not confess accurately within your own infected brain. Good luck.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Sep 2nd, 2011 09:21 am |
|
39th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1028.html Anyone, Gary North has just published another article on the September 11, 2001 crimes that have so far managed to work better unsolved; which is a clue for the clueless. As a trained historian, I am interested in lots of major events in history that served as national or worldwide turning points. I ask the following questions:
I am going to field all 10 questions before reading another word from the official mouth piece of The Austrian Economists. 1. What happened? I was driving a car to accomplish some errand for some productive work and I heard a radio broadcast interrupting the normal flow of music, which usually inspires me to turn the volume up, and commercials which usually inspire me to turn the volume way down low, and the interruption had to do with reports of events in New York. When the reports described the Legal Crimes of September 11, 2001, in progress, on that day, my first thought was False Flag, on the order of dressing up like Cherokee, or Lenape, or any bothersome group of undesirable people, and then conducting a False Flag Operation, or Black Ops, whereby a few innocent victims (of the home team) are massacred, or 2000 innocent victims (of the home team) are massacred, and then the massacre is blamed on "Indians" or "rag heads", so as to begin reporting a false version of the ongoing slaughter of the bothersome group. False Flag Operations have been around for ages, and it isn't news for those who can recognize the routine. What happened is what happened, what I make of what happened doesn't change what happened. 2. How do we know what happened? "We" don't know precisely what happened, but some people do. Those who planned what happened planned what happened, they knew, and some still know, did they forget? The facts of what they knew, and when they knew it, can be pieced together beyond a reasonable doubt, or not, depending upon how well those who planned what happened cover up what happened. Those who suffer physical injury know their physical injuries in the form of pain. Survivors of those who died, suffer emotional pain, for example. First responders, suffer, the know what happened, they still know. 3. What led up to the event? Some people went to work in places that were targeted for destruction, others did not. Some bet heavily against rising Airline stock for Airlines involved in the event, others were not as clued in on the pending events. 4. How did the government report the event? Gary is resorting to an abuse of language. Gary is lumping every person into the one monolithic set of people called government, or not, I can't tell. We, in America, are self-governed as no other people ever in human history, if numbers of people are factored into the measure, so as to avoid comparing us to small tribes of people here, and there, now and then, and as such We the People govern, and some of us are Legal Criminals, and some of us are Honest Productive Americans, and some of us are hired by the Legal Criminals to lie, and some of us hire the people who lie by voting for people to lie for them. Gary may be using the word government to mean those people who are hired to lie, and so the answer to the question by Gary North, if that is his use of that word, is that they lied; they did what they were hired to do. They lied. That is what the people who vote for them hire them to do, and that is what they do, so that is what they did, and their lies are the official reports published as the official lies. If Gary North's question applies to any of us, in the group of We the People, then some of us asked questions as a means of reporting the events, so as to better understand the facts concerning what happened, so as to know the facts, and in so doing, from a position of knowledge of the facts, it is more likely to be in a position to avoid being similarly injured in the future. My first question, while driving in the car, was to ask what would be the next event after the False Flag event, since False Flag events are used to begin reporting a new false version of ongoing Legal Crimes, such as the events in the past whereby the Legal Criminals mass murdered the indigenous, or native, people here in this land we call America. The next event was not known until it happened, and it is still happening, the targets are rag heads who happen to be the indigenous population, the natives, who live in lands that are rich in oil supplies, and oil power is the power that backs the fraudulent dollar power, also known as The Dollar Hegemony, or The New World Order, or The New American Century, or take your pick from any number of false fronts for those Legal Criminals who operate from this land that we call America, for as long as America works as a home base, which isn't much longer. 5. How did it subsequently explain the event? It is a mythical beast, or it is a list of names, or something in between. If it is the list of names that make up the top 10 or top 100, most destructive Legal Criminals, or the top 100 Legal Criminals who perpetrated the events on September 11, 2001, in New York, and elsewhere, then the answer remains the same: cover-up. The events are coverups, or False Flags, so as to lead into further cover-ups, such as a new aggressive war for profit in The Middle East, and even to cover-up Legal Crime at home, such as the falsely named Patriot Act. In the old days the Legal Criminals called their Acts by names like Alien and Sedition Acts, but today they resort to deceit, the old employees where too honest, over time the new employees lie more. Legal Criminal A "What should we call our latest Legal Crime?" Legal Criminal B "How about The Patriot Act?" Legal Criminal A "LOL" Legal Criminal B "ROFL" Legal Criminal A and B in unison: "All the way to their BANK!" 6. How did the major media handle the government's explanation? Gary North is being stupid? I don't think so. What does Gary North mean by the use of the term major media? I know of one reporter who reported a report on a subsidized television broadcast network, a legal fiction company that is awarded a license to broadcast on a few official government sanctioned broadcast channels, whereby the person hired to report on one of those government subsidized television channels reported controlled demolition while a sky scraper in New York went down in free fall, just like every other successful controlled demolition. Many reporters are hired to report things on many media outlets, and if Gary North is narrowing down the number of media outlets to only those who are subsidized, licensed, by U.S.A. Inc. (LLC), then he should be specific, not ambiguous. What does Gary North mean? Does Gary North mean to be ambiguous, so as to afford plausible dependability for his own personal satisfaction of avoiding accountability for his questions? 7. Who has benefited from the event? Some of those who benefited are those who cashed in on their put options. Others who have benefited have published their desire to benefit from a New Pearl Harbor, and they did so before it happened, and their wishes came true, remarkably. If the question is asked in earnest, the answer can be realized accurately. Paper trails still exist. Physical evidence still exists, despite all the tax dollars spent in the cover-up. A new False Flag may very soon replace the old one on the priority list, since the old one failed to polarize the victims against the Legal Criminals, hold the actual perpetrators to account, and that failure leaves them in a position of power to repeat the same type of False Flag Operation, perpetually. The last False Flag, the September 11, 2001 False Flag, managed to polarize the victims against other victims, the cycle is primed for repetitive, or cyclic, perpetuation, and that isn't random, unless the victim has a vested interest in remaining victims, then the victims can make themselves believe that False Flags are random events, at which point, deep down into the mire of falsehood, the victim is no longer innocent, and therefore no longer a victim, the former innocent victim goes beyond plausible dependability and on into actual accountability along the paper trails, and digital trails that link those who produce the power that is then sent to the Legal Criminals who then use that power to keep the power flowing in that direction. Those who hire the liars, get what they pay for, and claiming otherwise can be trusted to be exactly what such a claim is, in fact. 8. Who has benefited from the official government explanation? Who benefits from candy coating the lies produced by those who are hired to lie for those who hire them? Even the word "candy coating" is not accurate. Why does Gary North lie for the Legal Criminals, is Gary North paid to lie for the Legal Criminals, or is he working pro-bono, as a liar for the Legal Criminals, helping cover-up a decade old crime? Will Gary North wipe his brain clean during the next False Flag, so as to be ready, on schedule, to lie when prompted, again? 9. What are the alternative explanations? A False Flag Operation is a well known fact. The sun is a well known fact. Daylight is a well known fact. Is Gary North constructing a Man of Straw? Where is this impending Conspiracy Theorist with these "alternative explanations"? A sky scraper accelerating to earth in free fall is exactly that, it is what it is, a sky scraper accelerating to earth in free fall is a sky scrapper accelerating to earth in free fall. There is but one explanation, and it is the same explanation that has worked every time a sky scrapper accelerates to earth in free fall, falling into a hole in the ground where the building's foundation once supported all that mass that constitutes a sky scrapper. Some people may require an explanation for the Sun, having grown up, to this point, without the necessary information required to know what the sun is, in fact; but not necessarily having to know the exact physical make up, or the exact process by which sunlight is produced, on a molecular level, but the damn thing orbits every day, so far, and being stupid about the sun is about as excusable, these days, as being willfully stupid about the False Flag Operation perpetrated by known criminals who confess, openly, and who happen to be hired to commit crimes by the people who hire them, and who happen to be hired into positions of almost absolute power, as far as the power that an individual human being can command. I can't, for example, legally double the supply of dollars in circulation around the world, and get away with it, but the people who are hired to command that much power do, and that is another known fact, like knowing that the Sun is a source of power, it isn't brain surgery, or rocket science, for modern, ordinary, examples of mankind. What game is Gary North playing? Is he another presstitute in the inventive vernacular offered by Gerald Celente, or is Gary North actually that stupid? Is there another explanation for Gary North publishing stupid questions? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=presstitute Gerald is not given credit? He may not be the inventor, but he is working to make the word more current, as the word gains currency. Some day people will be using the term Legal Crime, hopefully to be recording past events, in history books, back when Legal Crime was common, and even ubiquitous, before Liberty Day. 10. Who would benefit if any of them became widely accepted? Gary North is leading into a reverse of the common use of finding motive when investigating, and discovering, exculpatory evidence, leading to the accurate identification of those responsible for crimes, so as to hold those responsible for crimes accountable for the crimes that the criminals have committed, even if they happen to hold licenses, and have badges. I used a word above that can help the reader understand the process. Exculpatory evidence leads to a verdict of innocence as someone assumed to be innocent, before being convicted, beyond a shadow of doubt, is found to be innocent, and is not found to be guilty, because the evidence found proves innocence, beyond a reasonable doubt. An example would be the discovery of a solid alibi. Joe was accused of stealing half the purchasing power of every dollar used by everyone who uses dollars. Joe was never hired as the chairman of The Federal Reserve System of Extortion. That is my alibi. Even if I could double the entire supply of dollars from my garage, I can't get away with it, legally. I can't print up enough money to hire people to destroy 3 buildings in New York full of people, and print up enough money to get away with it, either. I have an alibi. 10. Who would benefit if any of them became widely accepted? That is in reference to this: 9. What are the alternative explanations? The best alternative explanation I've seen so far is the mini-nuke explanation; which explains the odd burned cars around "ground zero". Who benefits from the truth? Is that what Gary North is asking? I don't think so. I think that Gary North is constructing a Man of Straw, and the Man of Straw will have a name placed on it, and the name will be Conspiracy Theorist, and all those who are duped by that brainwashing, like Pavlov's dogs, will salivate on command when that bell rings. I can read on, to see what Gary North actually publishes next, in this second offering on the subject of the Legal Crimes of September 11, 2001. These are all legitimate questions. The toughest one to answer is #1. You might not think that this is the case, but it is. Gary North is the authority there, obviously, but I'm going to ask a competitive question after repeating Gary North's version of the toughest question. 1. What happened? 1. What happens next? Which is tougher? On with Gary North: If a rich person or organization gave me a large amount of money to investigate 9-11, what would I do with it? I can make another guess at what Gary North is doing with this second article he has just published on the subject of the Legal Crimes committed on September 11, 2001, and my guess is that Gary North is finding his way past some of his reliance upon an abject belief in falsehood, and if that is happening, then this is a very good study. People pass through a time when there is no more room for abject belief in falsehood, and that point at which that happens the person's perspective can no longer tolerate obvious falsehood, but it is a troubling time, as the old stupid self is replaced by the new more accurately perceiving self. It, to me, is like walking from one dark room, through a one way door, into a room where things can be seen, things that once were well hidden, and well hidden on purpose, and well hidden for profit, and no longer are the purposed, and the profits realized, and there is no way back into the dark room, the door closes, and while the door is open, at that moment, how ever long it takes, the door can be shut as the person in the open doorway decides to stay in one, or the other room. Gary may have that door open, and that is my guess, for now. Something has to explain the behavior of the sycophants who actually think that the Emperor's cloths are beautiful, while the Emperor's weenie is swinging around as he struts. You can take me to task for repetitively resorting to this figurative illustration, a weenie fixation, but the illustration works well. The naked truth is as obvious as a naked man, or the sun, or the pain as you stick your hand in a fire. What explains the fact that so many people are violently defending abject falsehood, placing clothes that don't exist on naked men, legitimizing torturous mass murder? Anyone of us, any person alive today, can be captured, legally, and before a few hours are over, any one of us, can be secreted away into a torture chamber, never to be seen by any of our loved one's ever again, all done legally, and picture your own hide in that position 6 hours from this moment. You are here now, 6 hours later, you are in a situation that is unspeakable, unbearable, and it is worse because human beings, or nearly human, beings, are working to make your pain as extreme as is humanly, or inhumanly possible, and it is unthinkable. It is unspeakable. It is unthinkable. It is intended to be unspeakable, unthinkable, and unbearable, on purpose, for the profit of a very few, at the expense of everyone who produces anything that can be expended in that way. Some people have actually lived through such things. They warn the rest of us in no uncertain terms. Read Alexander I. Solzhenitsyn. You have been warned. What explains the behavior of the massive numbers of sycophants? Here is the definition of the word: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sycophant a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite. Here is another definition: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sycophants A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people. That source traces the word back to informer, or accuser, but even that should read: false informer, and false accuser. Paul Revere, and Thomas Paine were people who informed, as they informed the impending victims, and informed the current victims, as to their plight at the hands of those who caused the suffering. Thomas Paine was especially informative, in an accurate, and not in a false, way: http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. The army of sycophants, which are not the American Military (not as an institution, and not as a measure of the mean average membership), would shoot (figurative and literally; in the back), a modern day Thomas Paine (Gerald Celente) or Paul Revere (Alex Jones), as a Conspiracy Theorist. What explains the army of sycophants? They have slammed the door shut, as the door may have once opened a crack, and as the light shined in, they saw the dungeon that they know to be used on the victims, and they new, at that moment, that going through that door moves them up in the line, as the victims are picked through, and the next in line to be tortured is taken, and they will be taken sooner, rather than later. The door is slammed shut, never to be opened again, and anyone caught trying to open the door will be shot on sight, even if the sight is off by a wide margin, shoot first, ask no questions. Go through that door, into the light, into the naked light of accurate perception, responsibility, and heaven forbid, accountability, into active, meaningful, moral conscience driven consciousness, and be one step closer to the inevitable verdict of disfavor, and hell on earth at the hands of the emperor. What explains the army of sycophants? They volunteer to be victims, and that is where they decide to stay, and it is a lie, and that one lie leads to two lies to cover up that one lie, and then another lie for each new lie, and that is a non-linear, or exponential, increase in the number of lies required to cover up the first one, and eventually the person who slams that door shut, by hook or by crook, must keep it shut, and it is then a closed loop. What explains the army of sycophants? Among the Austrian Economics group is a person named Hans Herman Hoppe, and he offers information, an informer, on the subject of time preferences. "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" Something for nothing is the lie that covers up the desire for something at the expense of someone else. Not just the desire for something. Not just for the desire for something falling out of the sky, winning the lottery, or the object of someone else's incredible generosity. Not that. Not gambling by random chance. The game is fixed. The cover-up is specific. The cover-up is a desire for something, specifically something, and something that is gained at the specific expense of someone else. It is the same lie as the lie of might making right. The same lie used to create the illusion of legitimacy for every crime: Legal Crime. The victim deserves to be victimized, and I am helping the victim, by teaching the victim to learn to avoid being a victim: tough love. I kill them to save them from death. I deceive them to save them from deception. I hate them to save them from hate. I offer them abject slavery to save them from abject slavery. I torture them to save them from torture. I mass murder them to save them from mass murder, who else can? How many lies can be hatched from that one lie? What explains the army of sycophants? If you can't beat'em: join em'. Take a number. The hamburger can be had today, which is a stay of execution, to be paid on Tuesday. That is the false cover-up deal. In reality, the accurate explanation, call it a theory from my end, is that those who shut the door are those who want to play a minor role in being a tyrant today, even if it means being a victim on Tuesday. To understand this, call it a theory, you have to know yourself. Why did you shut the door? Which room are you in? Were the crimes on September 11, 2001 ever investigated officially, so as to actually hold those responsible for those specific crimes specifically accountable to those criminals who perpetrated those specific crimes? No, power is diverted into exposing the conspiracy theorists who don't exist. Is it good enough to punish rag heads for those crimes, so as to get a perceived benefit in lower prices at that gas station? If you are still reading, there may be hope yet. On the subject of random number generators that Gary North links as he ends his second offering on the subject of the Legal Crimes of September 11, 2001 I can ask: How do the "random" generators in question work? If they do not have a means by which a random occurrence, such as very precise room temperature change, perhaps, any random thing that triggers the "random" number being generated, then the "random" generator isn't random, it is programed, not random. Flipping a coin, for example, is not random when the person flipping the coin can flip the coin a fixed number of turns each time. Fixing the number is fixing the number. Random is random. Confusing the two, on purpose, requires willful intent, and if there is someone willfully intending to confuse the two, they do so with a specific goal in mind, which isn't going to be self-confusing, it is going to be, by definition, a goal to confuse a targeted person other than the person who willfully intends to confuse the two things. Who has a desire to cause someone else to confuse the fixing of a number with a random number? Who invented the shell game? Why did someone invent the shell game, or the pyramid scheme, or legal crime? What inspires someone to deceive their own power to perceive accurately?
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Sep 2nd, 2011 10:33 am |
|
40th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
southernmissouri2007, I do not agree with you because the deception involves a deeper confusion of reality. There can be voluntary associations, and those associations can be called government. There can be a voluntary association that can be called a socialist government. There can be a voluntary association that can be called a capitalist government. There can be a voluntary association that can be called a mixture of a socialist and a capitalist government. A person can be anti-government when a person is against a voluntary association. What would a person who is anti-government (when a person is against a voluntary association) be for, or what would someone against a voluntary association be supporting as someone was thinking and acting in ways that are measurably against voluntary associations that are called governments? The majority of voting Democrats inside the legal power of The Nation known as The United States of America are against voluntary associations which can be called governments and therefore they are anti-government. The majority of voting Republicans inside the same legal fiction boundaries are against voluntary associations, for the same reasons as the Democrats. Both Democrats and Republicans are anti-government when the governments they are against are characterized by their voluntary nature. What are they for? What do they stand for, as they stand against voluntary associations? They stand for involuntary associations that they call government. They are pro slavery, by that definition. They are anti-liberty, by that definition. Just ask one, or yourself, to measure the thoughts, and the actions, of the person, the individual person in question, if they support the enforcement of involuntary taxes. When you respond, I can then find out if I agree with you or not. Your response can clue me in on your thoughts and actions that let me know if you are a friend of liberty, and therefore my friend, of if you are a foe of liberty, and therefore my enemy, and your responses can clue me in on what you do support, and if you support enforced involuntary taxes, then you are one of the Legal Criminals, by that definition, as you define yourself in that way, and I can know better from then on as to who I need to avoid, and why I need to avoid you, and your kind, if that is how you define yourself, as someone who supports involuntary associations through involuntary taxation. If I get no response, what does that indicate?
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 09:07 pm | Page: 1 2 3 4 |
| Power Independence > Good News > Good News > Prison Planet | Top |
