Creating collapse, buying up the USA

[clarkkent14]

I've been thinking about why they would want to create a collapse of the system, and I wanted to start a discussion about a few items. I may be crossing over on a couple of threads, please link them if it's relevant.

We know from history that TPTB benefit greatly from a created crisis, even collapse. "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," - Rahm Emanuel

Rothschilds History: http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_ord ... warnin.htm

I watched a video with Alex Jones mentioning it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng7ZhtltQFs#t=5m40s

I have been reading a lot about Joseph of Egypt lately, there are so many similarities. President Hinckley spoke about this so poignantly as we all know:
1998 | http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?h ... 82620aRCRD
2001 | http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?h ... 82620aRCRD

Genesis 47:13 ¶ And there was no bread in all the land; for the famine was very sore, so that the land of Egypt and all the land of Canaan fainted by reason of the famine.
14 And Joseph gathered up all the money that was found in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, for the corn which they bought: and Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh’s house.
15 And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth.
16 And Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give you for your cattle, if money fail.
17 And they brought their cattle unto Joseph: and Joseph gave them bread in exchange for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle of the herds, and for the asses: and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for that year.
18 When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide it from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands:
19 Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give us seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate.
20 And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh’s.
21 And as for the people, he removed them to cities from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof.
22 Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands.
23 Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land.
24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.
25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s servants.
26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.

So the economy collapsed and we can see who benefited from it. What would the tax have been without Joseph as mediator? This looks like a pattern that might be similar to ours. All of our money is a debt instrument and will be called due. The debt can't be paid.

Swiss has given us a great post to remind us about Christ becoming our Moses as well: http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... es#p102671

I would be intrigued for insights to the Captivity of 400+ years in Egypt, and our bondage currently under the Empire of Debt.

[clarkkent14]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIqKCBL-Qok&NR=1#t=2m00s

18 When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide it from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands:
19 Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give us seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate. Pharoah's Deed for Lease Program!
20 And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh’s.

Deed for Lease Program: http://www.fanniemae.com/newsreleases/2009/4844.jhtml

[clarkkent14]

The more I read on this, the crazier it gets! I found a post by Jason that mentioned this article: The Dirt Road to Serfdom http://www.wallstreetexaminer.com/blogs/winter/?p=2711

Then I found this book: The Road to Serfdom | by F.A. Hayek http://books.google.com/books?id=eTve6X ... q=&f=false, you may have heard of Fredrick Hayek and this book from Ron Paul: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZsZ0_OLer4#t=3m17s

Then I read a little closer the footnotes in Genesis 47:21 And as for the people, ahe removed them to cities from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof. (Fema camps?)

21a Samaritan and Septuagint: he made them slaves, or serfs.

[clarkkent14]

A biblical comparison of ancient Egypt and Jospehs preparation for the famine with USA economic and dollar collapse caused by the Federal Reserve Bank with preparation buying gold & silver and led by the spirit.

[clarkkent14]

Marion G. Romney | The Perfect Law of Liberty | http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?v ... &hideNav=1

We have a classic example of the loss of economic freedom by the misuse of free agency in the book of Genesis. The Egyptians, instead of exercising their agency to provide for themselves against a day of need, depended upon the government. As a result, when the famine came they were forced to purchase food from the government. First they used their money. When that was gone, they gave their livestock, then their lands; and finally they were compelled to sell themselves into slavery, that they might eat. (See Gen. 41:54–56; Gen. 47:13–26.)

We ourselves have gone a long way down this road during the last century. My counsel is that we beware of the doctrine which encourages us to seek government-supported security rather than to put faith in our own industry. Remember Pope’s peasant who, having been served the rich man’s feast and finding the consequences, complained:

“An’t please Your Honour,” quoth the peasant,
“This same dessert is not so pleasant:
Give me again my hollow tree,
A crust of bread and Liberty.”
(Alexander Pope, “The Sixth Satire of the Second Book of Horace,” lines 218–21.)

Journal of Discourses | George A. Smith

In the empire of China provision is made for the general preservation, and one-fifth of the produce of the country is stored in the public granaries against a day of famine. A famine occurred not long since in one of the provinces of China containing thirty-three millions of people—a little more than the whole population of the United States—and they lost their entire crop. China, however, is favored with large navigable rivers, some capable of navigation for over two thousand miles. There are also many canals and seaport towns that are used in the coasting trade; the result is that when this famine came on this province the storehouses were opened, and the grain or rice was carried to its inhabitants, and they were kept from starvation. We are differently situated. We have no public storehouses, neither can we bring sufficient provisions from abroad without it costing more than we are able to pay. A good many of us claim our descent from Joseph, who was sold into Egypt. He was the instrument of the Almighty in saving the Egyptians, through the interpretation of the King's dream of the seven fat and the seven lean kine, and the seven full and the seven blighted ears of corn. He prescribed the means by which the storehouses of Egypt were filled with corn, and when the seven years of famine came the whole people were actually saved from death through the wisdom of Joseph in laying up bread. We expect to be saviors on Mount Zion in the last days. We all exercise faith that God may give to our President wisdom and understanding to foresee the evils with which we may be threatened, and to take measures to avert them. Suppose that he comes forward and tells us how to prepare, and we neglect his counsel, then the watchman is clear, and we are liable to the dangers and difficulties resulting from disobedience. If the King of Egypt had not observed the counsels of Joseph almost the whole people would have been destroyed. As it was, those who did not obey Joseph's counsel were under the necessity of selling all their property, and ultimately themselves, for slaves to the king, in order to obtain that bread which they could have laid up during the seven years of plenty, if they had obeyed Joseph's counsel.
Now, brethren, let us not treat this subject lightly. If we have been neglectful in times past, let us remember that we live in a high altitude, in a country subject to frost and to extreme drouth, that we have several times lost our crops, and that we have twice been reduced to famine or half rations through the crickets or grasshoppers. Let us heed the counsel given about storing up provisions, and, instead of freighting our food away to feed strangers, let us go to work and build good substantial granaries, and fill them with breadstuff, until every man and woman has enough on hand to last for seven years. Terrible destruction awaits the wicked. They will come to us by thousands by-and-by, saying—“Can you not feed us? Can you not do something for us?” It is said by the prophets they shall come bending, and shall say you are the priests of the Lord. What priest could administer greater earthly blessings than food to the hungry, who have fled from a country where the sword, famine, and pestilence were sweeping away their thousands? I look upon the subject of storing grain and other kinds of food as a very religious matter. How could a man who was half starved enjoy his religion? How on the face of the earth could a man enjoy his religion when he had been told by the Lord how to prepare for a day of famine, when, instead of doing so, he had fooled away that which would have sustained him and his family. I wish our brethren to lay this matter to heart, and not rest until they have obeyed this particular item of counsel.

Journal of Discourses | Lorenzo Snow

Joseph, in the land of Egypt, was called upon to perform a certain class of duties, which were made incumbent upon him. He was not called to preach the gospel without purse or scrip, but to build granaries, and to use all his influence with the king, nobles, and people of Egypt to store their grain against a day of famine. I have often thought, in reflecting upon this subject, how little proof they had of the importance of doing what Joseph required of them, when compared with the abundance of proof we possess in relation to the importance of the duties required of us. There was Pharaoh—a Gentile, making no profession of religion—he had a dream which none could interpret save Joseph, a stranger in the land, whom no one knew, who had been bought for money, and who was taken from prison into the presence of the king. No doubt the nobles and the people who heard of the interpretation of the dream believed that Joseph made that for his own benefit, glory, and exaltation, and that the king might think well of him; and when they saw him riding round in pomp and splendor, trying to establish granaries all through the country, they, no doubt, thought he was an impostor, and placed no credence in his predictions. In fact, I think I could hardly have believed it myself had I lived in those days. Many of the people placed such little faith in his words that, failing to lay up their food, when the famine overtook them, to save themselves from starvation they had to sell themselves for slaves to the King. Now, supposing that Joseph had gone to work and built an ark, he would not have been accepted of the Lord, neither could he have saved the people of Egypt nor his father's house. When Noah was commanded to build an ark, supposing he had established granaries, he and his house could not have been saved. So in regard to ourselves, when duties are required at our hands, whether it is to go to the southern part of our Territory, to Europe, to contribute to the Perpetual Emigration Fund, or to build temples, or whatever we may be required to do within the pale of the kingdom of the Almighty, we have to walk in the spirit of these requirements, and perform them, if we would gain power and influence with our God.

[Jason]

Nice work! Great allegory with the Egyptians!

[KalelIsbell]

very well done...
interesting but alittle scary

[pritchet1]

One in 5 people are incarcerated in the US today. One in 5 people are unemployed or under-employed in the US today. The two statistics are not the same people.

We read recently of the prisons being used as full competitors to free enterprise (20 cents an hour to $1 per day for labor). And we have the gall to chide Red China for prison camp labor (read products for Wal-Marx)?

[Chip45]

Good books to consider reading, (1) The Road to Serfdom, (2) Skousen's The Naked Capitalist, (3) The Law by Bastiat, (4) Death by Government by R.J. Rummel, can get much of it via internet search .... many will not take the time to read them entirely so I gather meaningful quotes and share them with other, like-minded people. Here's some quotes from the Naked Capitalist, hope it fits;

Quotes from the book, The Naked Capitalist, by W. Cleon Skousen (a review and commentary on Dr. Carroll Quigley’s book, Tragedy and Hope.) Note - Bill Clinton, during his Democratic presidential nomination acceptance speech in 1992, named Dr. Carroll Quigley as his ‘mentor’!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Carroll Quigley wrote his 1,300 page book called TRAGEDY AND HOPE, he knew he was deliberately exposing one of the best kept secrets in the world. As one of the elite ‘insiders’, he knew the scope of this power complex and he knew that its leaders hope to eventually attain total global control. Dr. Quigley makes it clear throughout his book that by and large he warmly supports the goals and purposes of the ‘network’. But, why did Quigley write this book? He says in effect, that it is now too late for the little people to turn back the tide. In a spirit of kindness he is therefore urging them not to fight the noose which is already around their necks. He feels certain that those who do will only choke themselves to death. On the other hand, those who go along with the immense pressure which is beginning to be felt by all humanity will eventually find themselves in a man-made millennium of peace and prosperity. Quigley assures us that we can trust these benevolent, well-meaning men who are secretly operating behind the scenes. THEY are the HOPE of the world. All who resist them represent TRAGEDY ... hence, the title for his book.
Dr. Quigley states, “I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for 20 years and was permitted for 2 years in the early 1960's, to examine It’s papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of it’s aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of it’s instruments. I have objections ... to a few of it’s policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe it’s role in history is significant enough to be known.”
Quigley expresses the utmost contempt for members of the American middle class who think they can preserve what he calls ‘petty-bourgeois’ property rights and Constitutional privileges.
Quigley admits he is telling more than his comrade-in-arms would care to have disclosed. He thinks it is time people knew who was running things.
The real value of TRAGEDY AND HOPE is [first] the rather bold and boastful admission by Quigley that there actually exists a relatively small but powerful group which has succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of practically the entire human race. Of course we should be quick to point out that no small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of people in all walks of life were ‘in on the take’ and were willing to knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the bosses behind the scenes. The network has succeeded in building it’s power structure by using tremendous quantities of money (together with the vast influence it buys) to manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men & women and their institutions on a world-wide basis.

Dr. Quigley says the true dimensions of the whole scheme are better appreciated when it is realized that the far-reaching aim of the dynastic bankers was; “... nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. Each central bank ... sought to dominate it’s government by it’s ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”

Having established how powerful the money-managers of the world have now become, Quigley’s second purpose appears to have been his desire to let us know what the political philosophy of these world giants has turned out to be. This is the most shocking aspect of his book. It is all the more disturbing because the facts in this part of the book fit perfectly with the world of reality in which we find ourselves. Many things which have seemed inconsistent and incongruous suddenly loom up with startling clarity as Quigley provides an insider’s analysis of what has been happening.
There is a growing volume of evidence that the highest centers of political and economic power have been forcing the entire human race toward a global, socialistic, dictatorial-oriented society. And what has been most baffling about it has been the fact that this drift toward dictatorship with it inevitable obliteration of 1000 years of struggle toward human freedom, is being plotted, promoted and implemented by the leaders of free nations and the super rich of those nations whose positions of affluence would seem to make them the foremost beneficiaries of the free-enterprise, property-oriented, open society in which so much progress has been made. Certainly they, above all men, should know that in order for this system to survive, freedom of action and the integrity of property rights must be preserved. Then why are the super capitalists trying to destroy them?
Quigley provides an answer that is so startling that at first it seems virtually inconceivable. It becomes rational only as his scattered references to it are collected and digested point by point. In a nutshell, he has undertaken to expose what every insider like himself, has known all along - that the world hierarchy of the dynastic super-rich is out to take over the entire planet, doing it with socialistic legislation where possible, but having no reluctance to use communist revolution where necessary. [Chip – note, I think more along the lines of fascism which is a kindred philosophy of socialism]
As an example of how a “thread” of this ‘network’ has grown, we trace John Ruskin’s influence (1819 - 1900) on Oxford. “ ... in that year [1870] John Ruskin was named to such a chair [professorship of fine arts]. He hit Oxford like an earthquake ... because he talked about the empire and England’s downtrodden masses, and above all because he talked about these things as moral issues.”

What were his ideas? “He saw that the state must take control of the means of production and distribution and organize them for the good of the community as a whole ... he was prepared to place the control of the state in the hands of a single man.” Ruskin derived most of his ideas and inspiration “directly from the source book of all dictatorships, Plato’s Republic. He read Plato almost every day, and of course, Marx, Engels, Proudhon and Saint-Simon. Plato wanted a ruling class with a powerful army to keep it in power and a society completely subordinate to the monolithic authority of the rulers. The upper dimensions of Plato’s ‘ideal’ society included the elimination of marriage and the family so that all women would belong to all men and all men would belong to all women. Children resulting from these promiscuous unions would be taken over by the government as soon as they were weaned and raised anonymously by the state. There was to be selective breeding under control of the government and children considered inferior or crippled were to be destroyed. Women were to be equal with men - to fight wars with the men.” Ruskin taught that the ruling class of England had a world mission. Cecil Rhodes, one of his students, caught the vision of a world-wide federation. Rhodes (1853 - 1902) exploited the diamond and gold fields of South Africa and “left part of his fortune to found the Rhodes Scholarships at Oxford in order to spread the English ruling class tradition throughout the English-speaking world as Ruskin had wanted.” Rhodes and other Ruskin disciples formed a series of secret societies “ ... institutes of International Affairs were established in the chief British dominions and in the United States (where it is known as the Council on Foreign Relations) in the period 1919-1927 ... the American branch of this organization (sometimes called the Eastern Establishment) has played a very significant role in the history of the United States in the last generation ...”
“Money for the activities of this organization came originally from the associates and followers of Cecil Rhodes ... since 1925 there have been substantial contributions ...[from] ... other organizations associated with J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families ...”
Dr. Quigley bluntly confesses that the International Bankers who had set out to remake the world were perfectly confident that they could use their money to acquire the cooperation and eventual control of the communist-socialist conspiratorial groups. John Ruskin had persuaded ... that the way to federate the world was along socialistic lines, i.e. by having all property, industry, agriculture, communications, transportation, education and political affairs in the hands of a small cadre of financially-controlled political leaders who would organize the world and its peoples in a way which would compel everyone to do what was good for the new world-society.
It may seem somewhat contradictory that the very people whom Marx identified as the epitome of “capitalism” should be conspiring with the followers of Marx to overthrow traditional capitalism and replace it with socialism. But the record supports the Quigley contention that this is precisely what has been happening. The reason is rather simple.
Power from any source tends to create an appetite for additional power. Power coming from wealth tends to create an appetite for political power and visa versa. It is almost inevitable that the super-rich would one day aspire to control not only their own wealth, but the wealth of the whole world.
To achieve this, they were perfectly willing to feed the ambitions of the power-hungry political conspirators who were committed to the overthrow of all existing governments and the establishment of a central world-wide dictatorship along socialistic lines. This was ... a risky business for the Anglo-American secret society. The super-rich were gambling on the expectations that when the violence and reconstruction had been completed by the political conspirators, the super-rich would then take over (like Plato’s philosopher-kings and ruling class) to guide mankind hopefully and compulsively into a whole new era of universal peace and prosperity.
To take such a risk, the cadre of super-rich had to ignore the most elemental aspects of the ferocity of the left-wing conspiratorial mentality. Mao Tse-tung has articulated the basic communist conviction that political power comes from the barrel of a gun and once they seize control it is their expressed intention to use the gun to prevent the super-rich or anyone else from taking their control away from them.
Nevertheless, the secret society of the London-Wall Street axis elected to take this risk. The master-planners have attempted to control the global conspiratorial groups by feeding them vast quantities of money for their revolutionary work and then financing their opposition if they seemed to be getting out of control. This policy has required them to deliberately align themselves with dictatorial forces which have committed crimes against humanity in volume and severity unprecedented in history. It has required them to finance and support international intrigue by the most ruthless kind of political psychopaths. Studies show that many of these totalitarian political demagogues never would have come to power without the financial support of the super-rich.
But for all of this, Quigley pleads that these London-Wall Street manipulators had the best of intentions and were really angels in disguise. Here is the way he says it; “The chief aims of this elaborate, semi-secret organization were largely commendable: to coordinate the international activities and outlook of the English-speaking world into one; to work to maintain peace; to help backward, colonial and underdeveloped areas to advance toward stability, law & order & prosperity along the lines somewhat similar to those taught at Oxford and the University of London (especially the School of Economics and the Schools of African and Oriental studies”.

Note Quigley’s admission that the remaking of the world by the super-rich was to be along the socialist lines taught at those British institutions which look upon global socialism as the hope of the world. Quigley continues .... “These organizations and their financial backers were in no sense reactionary or fascistic persons, as the communist propaganda would like to depict them. Quite the contrary. They were gracious and cultured gentlemen ... who were much concerned with the freedom of expression of minorities and the rule of law for all ... if their failures now loom larger than their successes, this should not be allowed to conceal the high motives with which they attempted both.”
“It is this group of people, whose wealth and influence so exceeded their experience and understanding, who provided much of the framework of influence which the communist sympathizers and fellow-travelers took over in the United States in the 1930's. It must be recognized that the power that these energetic left-wingers exercised was never their own power or communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie ...”.
Once (in the 1950's) the American branch of this secret society barely escaped being exposed ... “Once the anger and suspicions of the American people were aroused, as they were by 1950, it was a fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers. Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following backward to their source, the threads which lead from admitted communists like Whitaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of interlocking tax-exempt foundations.” [The 83rd Congress, 1953, Special Committee to investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with Rep. Reese of Tenn., as chairman] “It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the ‘most respected’ newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the publicity worthwhile, in terms of votes or campaign contributions. An interesting report showing the leftwing associations of the interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954, rather quietly.”
“More than 50 years ago, the Morgan firm decided to infiltrate the left-wing political movements in the United States. This was relatively easy to do, since these groups were starved for funds and eager for a voice to reach the people. Wall Street supplied both. The purpose was not to destroy, dominate, or take-over, but was really threefold, (1) to keep informed about the thinking of the left-wing or liberal groups, (2) to provide them with a mouthpiece so that they could ‘blow off steam’ and (3) to have a final veto on their publicity and possibly their actions, if they ever went ‘radical’ “
Throughout his book, Quigley ridicules the stupid ‘radical right’ (his favorite epithet for ordinary Americans trying to preserve their Constitutional prerogatives) and says they are missing the real target when they blame all subversion and chicanery on the communists. His attack on the ‘radical right’ is primarily because of their ‘ignorance’ in failing to recognize the vast secret network of master planners for whom the communists are working, particular in Europe and the United States.
“There is, however, a considerable degree of truth behind the joke, a truth which reflects a very real power structure. It is this power structure which the radical right in the United States has been attacking for years in the belief that they were attacking the communists. This is particularly true when these attacks were directed as they so frequently are, at ‘Harvard Socialism’, or ‘Left-Wing Newspapers’ like the New York Times and Washington Post ...”
“There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the communists act.”

“This is the group which created the basic structure of the United Nations ... there were 74 CFR members in the American delegation to the U.N. Conference at San Francisco in 1945. They included Alger Hiss (communist spy), Harry Dexter White (Soviet agent), John McCloy (formerly head of Rockefeller Chase-Manhattan Bank), Harold Stassen, Nelson Rockefeller, John Foster Dulles, Dean Acheson ...”
Dr. Quigley contends that the CFR and the Global Establishment have gained such a hold on the elective process in the United States that no matter which political party goes into power, the winner is beholden to those powers to a significant degree.
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers… Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”
The whole concern of the globalist conspiracy is to do their work in such a way that the public will not become sufficiently aroused to use their ‘votes and campaign contributions’ to knock the agents of the Establishment out of political power in Washington. As long as the Constitution remains in effect, the American people still have an opportunity to wake up and ‘throw the rascals out’. Quigley was horrified, along with his fellow ‘insiders’ when this earth-shaking possibility almost became a reality in 1964.
Dr. Quigley admits that nothing panics the international Establishment like the possibility of a threatened exposure. Whenever the public has become dangerously aware of the conspiratorial process operating around them, the vast interlocking power structure of the whole London-Wall Street combine has immediately shifted into high gear and raced to the rescue. Radio, TV, newspapers, magazines, government policy-makers, college officials, and other opinion molders in high places have all commenced a recitation of a carefully prepared ‘line’ designed to pacify the public and put them back to sleep.
Of course, to members of the Establishment, their globalist socialist society represents the ultimate dream in human achievement. Therefore, to them, anti-communist Americans look like reactionary conspirators who are guilty of postponing the communal millennium with our old-fashioned Constitutional concepts of freedom and self-determination.
The political climate of 1964 was such that a capable conservative candidate had an excellent chance of winning the presidency. Money & manpower was thrown into the primaries to try and stop Barry Goldwater before he ever got to San Francisco. The Establishment forces at the Republican National Convention were represented by the Rockefeller-Scranton contingents. To veteran political observers it was amazing how strong the locked-in Goldwater delegates stood up under the pressure. Goldwater was nominated. The Establishment then turned to its own locked-in resources of power. The media were turned on Goldwater with blazing vengeance. In retrospect, it was an amazing demonstration of what a controlled press can do in a free republic. The tactic was to divert the attention of the people away from the real issues and use whatever circumstances became available to frighten the American people away from Goldwater. It was impossible for Goldwater to be heard on the issues when the press, the magazines, the radio and TV were all pounding out a subtle (and sometimes blatant) message of ‘extremist’, ‘racist’, ‘atomic-bomber’, ‘trigger-happy’, ‘war-monger’ and ‘he will scrap social security’. The election did not hinge on the popularity of Lyndon Johnson. He was a secondary figure. It was not a testament to his wisdom or leadership, but rather an indication of the violent dislike for Goldwater generated largely by the hundreds of magazine articles, the derogatory remarks of the columnists. It will be recalled how hysterically Dr. Quigley reacted to the Senator Joseph McCarthy situation? Goldwater did the same thing to him. The possibility of the American people turning their backs on the trend toward socialism and actually longing for the open fields and blue sky of a free society, practically sent Quigley into a frenzy. Note how he feels compelled to explain Goldwater support only in terms of ignorance, stupidity ...”

“His [Goldwater’s] most ardent supporters were of the extremist petty bourgeois mentality driven to near hysteria by the disintegration of the middle classes and the steady rise in prominence of everything they consider anathema, Catholics, Negroes, immigrants, intellectuals, aristocrats and educated men generally, people from big cities, or from the East, internationalists and above all, liberals who accept diversity as a virtue.”
In the best tradition of Marx and Lenin, Quigley insists that the small property owner is a roadblock to progress and must be eventually eliminated. Goldwater’s supporters were “petty bourgeoises” (note the key words in the first sentence of the above quotation) It makes one think be might be reading Karl Marx or Lenin.
Dr. Quigley is certain that the Global Establishment has the brains and the resources to put down any Americans like McCarthy or Goldwater who have the audacity to suggest that America can restore the basic Constitutional concepts on which she was built and eliminate from public life those who have been subverting them.
“On the whole, the neo-isolationists discontent was a revolt of the ignorant against the informed or educated, of the 19th century against the insoluble problems of the 20th ... of the simple absolutes against complex relativism ... of frontier activism against European thought, a rejection out of hand, of all the complexities of life which has arisen since 1915 in favor of a nostalgic return to the simplicities of 1905 and above all, a desire to get back to the inexpensive, thoughtless and irresponsible international security of the 1880's.”
In this quotation, Quigley clearly sets the stage for the coming conflict between traditional Americans and the powerful secret combination of the Global Establishment. Quigley has no doubt in his mind as to the final outcome. He equates hope and progress with the Establishment, tragedy and horse-and-buggy backwardness with traditional Americanism.
Of course, if you go to Washington, New York, the United Nations headquarters, or to the capitals of any major nation in the world, you will find massive evidence that Quigley has a basis for his bias. His people ARE everywhere. And, they ARE running things!
As I see it, the great contribution which Dr. Quigley unintentionally made by writing TRAGEDY AND HOPE was to help the ordinary American realize the utter contempt which the network leaders have for ordinary people. Human beings are treated en masse as helpless puppets on an international chess board where giants of economics and political power subject them to wars, revolutions, civil strife, confiscation, subversion, indoctrination, manipulation and deception as it suits their fancy and their concocted schemes for world domination. But this mass of world humanity is precisely the source of latent power which terrifies the Establishment. There is the constant fear that the masses might awaken and frustrate their gigantic schemes, particularly where they acquire an education and accumulated a little property (which gives them a highly significant degree of independence). The great middle class is recognized to be the backbone of our society, the most important segment of the population in maintaining a progressive, self-governing, secure and freedom-loving people. But ... if you are trying to set up a virtual dictatorship, this group is an enemy. This group will resist a dictatorship. At least, it will do so if it knows what is happening.
So this is the fact of life which the super-rich collectivists of the Establishment face today. Everything they do must be accomplished in an atmosphere of propaganda and deception. Otherwise they keep running into a groundswell of resentment and resistance as they try to compel middle class Americans to give up their independence, their property and their Constitutional prerogatives.
Pressure from the top and pressure from the bottom ... the current tactic is to create revolution, violence and extremely serious social dislocation at the bottom while creating an ever-increasing pressure at the top for the monolithic power by demanding that the executive branch of the Federal government be given massive power to “solve” all these problems.

Naturally, many fine, well-meaning people support the broad ramifications of social legislation because they think they are supporting ‘a good cause’ ... but as time has gone by ... it has gradually become alarmingly apparent what all this social legislation is doing to us. Americans are losing control of their destiny. Furthermore, many of the people whom we have been calling our national problem-solvers have been secretly engaged in actual problem-making.
Actually, what we are witnessing is a very carefully and methodically executed program designed to destroy constitutional government as we have known it and make a shambles of the society which has wanted to keep the Constitution alive. Only then can a highly centralized, socialist state be established.
To achieve this, the middle class in America must be ruthlessly squeezed out of existence. That is the message which looms large from many passages in Dr. Quigley’s book and which will be found as a favorite theme in the books, magazines and newspapers of the Establishment’s liberal press. Just as Marx and Engels waged war against the middle class to set up a socialist state, so does Quigley and the global network.
Middle-class values are represented by the Constitutional concepts of limited government, states rights, rights of property, a competitive economy, the solving of problems on the lowest level. However, one might ask Dr, Quigley, “If the middle class in America is to disappear, where will all these masses go?”
The Establishment has provided the answer in it’s millions of pages of socialist-oriented literature. The doomed members of the middle class are promised that they will become the carefully nurtured, carefully housed, carefully educated, totally dependent class of government wards in a man-made paradise of a one-world state.
Through the eyes of Quigley, the sheer size and power of the world-wide, super-rich network is now too big and too well entrenched to be overturned, or even resisted effectively. Its members will go right ahead financing revolution, moral depravity and social dislocation at the bottom and then sanctimoniously and energetically promise to solve all these problems if we will just delegate to them total power at the top.

[Chip45]

Another person I like to read is Thomas Dilorenzo ... here's an article from him. Also, I read Lincoln's first inaugural address to see if DiLorenzo accurately portrayed it ... I think he does (you decide).... I add this information only as an example of how we must continue to educate ourselves as best we can, regarding such things as our history and the proper role of government.

The Greatest Presidential Reflection Since Lincoln?
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

The neocons have spun into fits of Lincolnite hysteria over President Bush’s inaugural speech, in which he promised to rid the planet of tyranny. William Kristol informed a Fox News Channel audience that it was the best presidential speech "since Lincoln freed the slaves." Just what speech of Lincoln’s he was referring to remains a mystery. Then on National Review Online, Michael Novak declared that Bush’s speech was "without question the greatest presidential reflection since Lincoln about the meaning of liberty to the nature of the United States."
When the neocons and other Lincoln Cultists refer to Lincoln’s inaugural addresses they almost always refer to his second address, in which he absolved himself of all responsibility for the war, claiming that the war simply "came," totally unexpectedly. He then blamed the whole bloody mess on God. The Lord was punishing America for the sin of slavery, he said, presuming to know what was in the mind of God. (He did not propose a theory as to why the British, Spanish, Dutch, French, and Danes were not similarly punished for the same sin). But Lincoln’s first inaugural address is much longer, much more substantive, and more revealing of the real Lincoln.
Most of Lincoln’s speeches were the tongue-twisting stem winders that are the mark of a diabolically clever politician. One usually has to read page after page of confusing but slick political rhetoric before getting to the substantive point, which is eventually exposed. So let’s try to translate some of his first inaugural address into plain English.
The first point he made was to defy anyone to find any evidence in any of his speeches or statements that he ever had any intention at all to disturb southern slavery. He pledged his undying support for the protection of southern slavery, and said that it would be criminal of him to not do so. In his own words, he quoted from an old speech of his: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
Furthermore, he said, the Republican Party was certainly aware that he did not favor interfering with southern slavery when it nominated him. "Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them."
To make the point even more forcefully, Lincoln quoted the Republican Party Platform plank which pledged the defense of southern slavery: "Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential . . . and we do denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes" (emphasis added). "Domestic institutions," of course, meant slavery.
"I now reiterate these statements," Lincoln then announced to the world. He next pledged his "cheerful" enforcement of the constitutional protection of slavery, including the Fugitive Slave Act. He mentioned that all members of Congress swore an oath to obey the Constitution, which included the Fugitive Slave Clause, and proposed that a law be passed to further codify the responsibility of the federal government to see to it that runaway slaves were "delivered up" to their owners, as he put it. Such a law, he said, would command unanimous support. (Keep in mind that, on the day of Lincoln’s first inauguration, the seven states of the lower south had seceded and their senators and representatives had left Washington. The overwhelming majority of Congress was comprised of northerners who, Lincoln was sure, would unanimously support the stronger enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Clause.
Indeed, just two days earlier the Northern-dominated U.S. Senate passed a proposed constitutional amendment that would have forbidden the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. This "first thirteenth amendment" read: "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State’ (U.S. House of Representatives, 106th Congress, 2nd Session, The Constitution of the United States of America: Unratified Amendments, Document No. 106-214, presented by Congressman Henry Hyde (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 31, 2000).
This amendment had passed the Northern-dominated House of Representatives on February 28, 1861. Two days after the amendment passed the senate, Lincoln pledged his support for it in his first inaugural address: "I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution . . . has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose, not to speak of particular amendments, so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable" (emphasis added). Coming from the president of the United States, this was a much stronger defense of slavery than was ever made by John C. Calhoun or any other southerner.
On the same day that the U.S. senate passed this "first thirteenth amendment," President James Buchanan signed into law the Morrill Tariff, which more than doubled the average tariff rate. The U.S. House of Representatives had passed the bill during the 1859–60 session, long before Lincoln’s election or the secession of any southern state. It received only one vote from a congressman from one of the states that would eventually secede (Tennessee).
Lincoln was a protectionist for all of his political life; he owed his nomination to Pennsylvania protectionists; told a Pittsburgh audience two weeks before his inaugural that no issue – none – is more important to Congress than raising the tariff rate; and would further raise the tariff rate ten times during his administration. He was also aware that the last time the Whigs – which by then had been politically morphed into Republicans – attempted to double the average tariff rates, South Carolinians nullified the tariff, refused to collect it, and forced President Andrew Jackson to compromise and lower the hated 1828 "Tariff of Abominations." Lincoln, however, was not about to back down as Andrew Jackson did. On the issue of slavery, he was one hundred percent accommodating, even going so far as to support the enshrinement of southern slavery explicitly in the Constitution. But on the issue of tax collection he was one hundred percent uncompromising. "Pay up or die," he essentially told the South. Not in these exact words, of course, but in the weasel words of a skilled trial lawyer/politician.
Here’s what he actually said: "[T]here needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority." And how might it be "forced"? Failure on the part of any state to collect the newly-doubled tariff, that’s how. After stating that he assumed the power to "possess the property and places belonging to the Government," he said he was also obligated "to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using force against or among the people anywhere."
The Confederates had offered to pay for any federal property on southern soil (federal forts were there for their protection anyway), as well as their share of the federal debt. Lincoln refused to even discuss this with them. Fully 95 percent of all federal revenue came from tariffs in 1860, and with the southern states seceding a large portion of that amount would go uncollected. The seceded states were not about to send any checks to Washington, D.C. Fail to pay the newly-doubled tariff tax, Lincoln said, and there will be an invasion. He would not back down to the South Carolina tax resisters, as Andrew Jackson did. (Two weeks after Fort Sumter, where no one was wounded or killed, Lincoln announced a naval blockade of the southern ports and gave only one reason for it: tariff collection).
This would be the equivalent of President Bush saying, "My fellow Americans, we have decided to double everyone’s federal income tax rate. And if you refuse to pay, federal soldiers will be sent en masse to make you pay, burning out your homes and destroying your cities, towns, business and farms if necessary." The south refused to pay, and Lincoln kept his word, launching a full-scale invasion of all the southern states and waging total war on them for four years, eventually killing 300,000 of them out of a population of approximately 9 million. This was three percent of the southern population. Standardizing for today’s population of roughly 280 million, that would be the equivalent of 8,400,000 American deaths.
Lincoln proclaimed that the Union, which he always spelled with capital letters, was "mystic." This was a surprise to most Americans at the time, who believed that the union was voluntary and not mystical and perpetual. Indeed, when the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union the words "perpetual union" were dropped and appear nowhere in the Constitution. This sudden insistence on keeping the union, which was in reality a compact of the free, independent, and sovereign states, intact at any price only makes sense in light of Lincoln’s statements and actions regarding the tariff. Slavery was more secure in the union than out of it, as both the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison and Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens publicly admitted. But the union needed to be kept intact if sufficient taxes were to be collected for success of the Republican Party in fulfilling its 1860 Platform promise of massive corporate welfare spending on the railroad corporations and road-building companies ("internal improvements"). Without southern tariff collection this could not be accomplished. Worse yet, the Confederate Constitution had outlawed protectionist tariffs altogether, creating a free-trade zone in the South. Much of the commerce of the world would have been diverted from Northern to Southern ports, which is why Republican Party-affiliated newspapers were calling for the bombardment of southern ports before Fort Sumter. Abraham Lincoln’s political career would have been ruined, and that was just unacceptable.
It appears that neocon pundits like William Kristol and Michael Novak are largely unfamiliar with Lincoln’s own speeches and, more importantly, his actions, and of much of American history of that period in general. Instead, what they seem to "know" about the period is what Harry Jaffa has written about it. A hallmark of all of Jaffa’s writings on Lincoln is that they are largely devoid of facts regarding actual American history. Instead, they are largely "Straussian" reinterpretations of political speeches. He claims to find myriad "hidden meanings" in Lincoln’s speeches that Lincoln himself never revealed. These reinterpretations are used to literally rewrite or reinvent history, even when they are flatly contradicted by actual historical facts and events. And they result in absurdity piled upon absurdity, like this statement in Jaffa’s latest book on Lincoln: "Negroes have voting rights and serve on juries today owing in large measure to the fact that Lincoln in the 1850s disavowed any intention to make them voters or jurors." Your guess is a good as mine. Only someone who believes such nonsensical doubletalk could also believe George W. Bush when he claims to be capable of eliminating tyranny from the face of the earth.
January 24, 2005

[clarkkent14]

bump...

[reese]

D & C 103: 15-18
15 Behold, I say unto you, the redemption of Zion must needs come by power;
16 Therefore, I will raise up unto my people a man, who shall alead them like as Moses led the children of Israel.
17 For ye are the children of Israel, and of the seed of Abraham, and ye must needs be led out of bondage by power, and with a stretched-out arm.
18 And as your fathers were led at the first, even so shall the redemption of Zion be.

[BroJones]

Along similar lines:

By Giordano Bruno

Neithercorp Press – 08/17/2010

“From now on, depressions will be scientifically created.” — Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. , 1913

Everyone loves money. Even people like myself who abhor the abuse of money and commerce, who understand the fraudulent nature of the system we live in, still work hard and save so that we might attain a sense of stability within that system. Many people see money as a focal point to their existence. But is it really money that they are after, or is it something else entirely? In truth, money represents ‘security’ in the minds of the masses. Money affords us the ability to survive, and the more of it we have, the safer we all feel. Because we subconsciously associate the extension of our very life with the variable health of the economic structure in which we live, we tend to become unwitting devotees to its continued existence, even if it is corrupt and condemned to failure. We gullibly deny the system or the currency that supports it is doomed to the contrary of all evidence because, even though it has beaten us bloody, we have never known anything else.

In light of this entrenched way of perceiving things, especially in the U.S., it is difficult enough to convince some people that the economy is in fact not providing the security they desire, but is actually destroying their future completely. To explain to them that this is deliberate, that the economy is designed to self-destruct, that is another prospect altogether.

Many people hit a proverbial wall on this issue because they simply cannot fathom that certain groups of men (globalists and central bankers) view money and economy in completely different terms than they do. The average American lives within a tiny box when it comes to the mechanics and motivations of finance. They think that their monetary desires and drives are exactly the same as a globalist’s. But, what they don’t realize is that the box they think in was BUILT by globalists. This is why the actions of big banks and the decisions of our mostly corporate establishment run government seem so insane in the face of common sense. We try to rationalize their behavior as “idiocy”, but the reality is that their goals are highly deliberate and so far outside what we have been taught to expect that some of us lack a point of reference. If you cannot see the endgame, you will not understand the steps taken to reach it until it is too late.

In the past we have covered numerous instances in which global bankers have admitted to fraud on a massive scale, fraud which is now crushing our already fragile economy. We have covered the private Federal Reserve and how it knowingly facilitated the creation of the housing bubble, as well as how it is now inflating a Treasury bubble which is soon to implode. We have covered Goldman Sachs and its efforts to promote and sell toxic derivatives all over the world while at the same time betting against those derivatives on the open market. We have covered the manipulation of gold and silver markets by companies like JP Morgan, which have recently been exposed by whistleblowers and GATA investigations. And, most importantly, we have executed in-depth analysis on the growing weakness of the U.S. dollar in preparation for severe currency devaluation. These revelations raise questions, which is natural, but they also elicit misconceptions and reckless knee-jerk reactions, especially when broaching the fact that the illegal strategies of international banks are part of a greater agenda.

Below, we will examine some of the most common narrow minded responses to the issue of engineered economic collapse, as well as why people think the way they do when the “semi-sacred” subject of money is involved…

1. The economy is too complex to be controlled by just a handful of people…

This response often comes from people who make presumptions on economics, rather than actually educating themselves on how the system works. From the outside looking in, the world of finance appears chaotic; a mixture of mathematical and legal standards swirling in a void of mass psychology. Many Americans are either frightened off by the seemingly complicated field of study, or they find it rather boring and not worth their time. This, however, does not stop them from assuming that they know how money works.

The problem is that just because a person participates in his economy daily, it does not mean he has any understanding of how it operates. Many watch television on a daily basis, but few have any idea how the picture actually gets onto the screen, or how to fix a television once it is broken. Sadly, our egocentric culture has led a substantial portion of the public to imagine that they are experts on EVERYTHING, and thus, true researchers in the fields of economics and globalism get reactions like the one above constantly.

At bottom, once all the quasi-technical biz-babble used by mainstream talking heads is removed from the equation, economics is rather simple. Supply and Demand will always be at the center of any and every economy, regardless of the political atmosphere it exists in. These two fundamental factors can be manipulated to a point, by the creation of artificial supply, or the conjuring of false demand. This is achieved in many ways by global bankers, but primarily through domination of the issuance of currency, the ability to change interest rates at will, as well as the ability to inject or remove incredible sums of money from any market.

A perfect example is the suppression of silver prices by JP Morgan:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/whistl ... ion-scheme

Gold and silver represent competing currencies to the fiat dollars created by the Federal Reserve, and suppressing the value of these commodities helps to ensure that the public will never see them as a viable alternative to paper assets. JP Morgan, who along with other international banks has the ability to throw around massive quantities of capital wherever they please, suppresses the value of physical silver by issuing paper securities for silver that doesn’t actually exist (creating an artificially high supply), and naked short selling silver markets to drive them lower (creating the false impression of low demand).

Another good example of economic manipulation is the private Federal Reserve’s strategy during the 90’s under Alan Greenspan to artificially lower interest rates, allowing banks to issue credit at historical levels for over a decade. Linked below is an article from Ron Paul’s ‘Texas Straight Talk’ dated March, 2007, before the housing market even began its full swan-dive. In it, he discusses the Federal Reserve’s direct role in the creation of the housing bubble:

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst031907.htm

Men like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Jim Rogers, and many others were able to predict long before hand that the Federal Reserve’s actions were creating an explosive mortgage and credit bubble, yet, we are supposed to believe that the Federal Reserve had “no idea” that their actions would result in a debt implosion?

Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Commissioner of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development under the first Bush Administration stated conversely that the mortgage bubble was absolutely not an accident, and that she had witnessed outright and deliberate fraud on the part of the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve Bank in creating the bubble. The fact that disturbed her most, however, was her discovery that only a small handful of international banks were responsible for the perpetuation of toxic mortgage debt, not just in America, but around the world:

http://solari.com/blog/?p=2058

Goldman Sachs (one of the primary globalist banks involved in the igniting of the debt crisis) was caught red-handed selling toxic derivatives to investors and governments all over the planet while at the same time betting against those derivatives on the market. Goldman even bet against mortgage securities the bank itself created!

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... -says.html

This is sort of similar to a car maker selling vehicles without brake lines, then placing bets that their clients will crash and burn. Essentially, it is blatant and sociopathic fraud! Goldman’s actions directly contributed to credit collapses in numerous countries, including Greece, and here in the U.S.

The idea that global banks can turn the economy on and off like a light switch may be a stretch, but the vast majority of evidence shows that they do have the ability to shift the direction of markets to a point, as well as the ability to spur the growth of bubbles that eventually lead to recessions, depressions, and beyond. In fact, if one examines the U.S. economy from the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913, they would find that the past century has been nothing but a series of engineered equity bubbles designed to slowly hobble, but not completely cripple, our financial system and our currency, at least, until recently. Like a steam locomotive on a collision course with a bottomless canyon, globalist banks can slow or speed up the pace of our descent, but the final destination never changes.

Now that we have established that market collapses can be created by a small handful of bankers and done knowingly, lets move on to the next most common sheeple-like talking point.

2. Yes, international banks triggered the meltdown, but the “greed of Capitalism” is truly to blame (i.e. Its all the Republican Party’s fault)…

First off, if you’re parroting the fiscal debate points of two dimensional socialist gatekeepers like Michael Moore, then you’re already hopelessly lost in the mind warping hedge maze of the false left/right paradigm. You should stay as far away as possible from adult conversions on economics, especially if you plan on associating the “greed” of capitalism and corporatism with the Republican Party alone.

News Flash! Barack Obama received far more in corporate campaign donations (including donations from BP and Exxon) than McCain did. Both Bush Jr. and Obama increased government spending to record levels meaning Neo-Conservatives are in no way “conservative” (as a true Republican is supposed to be). Obama has consistently surrounded himself with banksters and corporate lobbyists, including various hobgoblins from the bowels of Goldman Sachs. BOTH major parties are owned and operated by global banks. This is a cold hard undeniable truth of our political system. There is no way around it. Learn it, accept it as reality, and stop trying to blame one side or the other for problems that both sides created! If you cannot do this, your view of our cultural state of affairs will always be horribly skewed and your insights on our social problems will be utterly worthless.

While wannabe socialists desperately clamor to point fingers at the free market ideology as the cause of all our ills, the fact is that none of us have ever lived in a truly free market system. Since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913, all markets and even our own currency have become more and more vulnerable to manipulation by the banking elite. We have lived our entire lives in a rigged market, not a free market. To blame the very concept of Capitalism for our current dire circumstances is not only naïve, it is dangerous. Globalists would like nothing better than to promote the illusion that “too much freedom” led us to this disaster, and that severe controls must be put into place to ensure that it “never happens again”.

3. Global banks would never engineer the collapse of the U.S. economy or the Dollar. It makes them too much money…

This often heard song and dance ties in with the number two comment above. Again, the assumption is that the globalists only do what they do out of an “uncontrollable greed for money”. This perpetuates a couple fallacies. First, it encourages the false belief that the end concern for the Elite is the accumulation of riches. Central bankers have the ability to PRINT all the money they want from thin air! Remember, the Federal Reserve has never been subjected to a full audit, meaning they could easily create billions if not trillions without any oversight whatsoever. Greed for money, to them, is surely an absurd notion. What they do want, more than anything else, is social power. They want control over every living human being without question. All other concerns are secondary.

The next fallacy underlying the above argument is the conjecture that the U.S. economy is somehow indispensable to global banks. This is simply not so. Where we see the economy as an extension of our culture and ourselves, the Elites see financial systems as mere tools in the pursuit of a greater goal: World Government. Imagine you are building a house. Once your saw has fulfilled its intended role of cutting the wood, do you cling to it, or do you throw it aside and pick up a hammer? This is how globalists look at financial systems. They are perfectly willing to cast off the U.S. economy like a snake shedding skin if it brings them closer to attaining their ultimate aim.

The same goes for the Dollar. The Greenback may be the premier world reserve currency now, but that can and likely will change very quickly over the next couple years. The Dollar is a device that has outlived its usefulness as far as global bankers are concerned. The IMF has on several occasions made it clear that they eventually intend for the SDR (Special Drawing Rights) to replace the Dollar as the world reserve currency, and they have openly admitted that it will one day be established as a global currency. IMF press releases make this development sound far off and away, but SDR accumulations by countries around the world have risen dramatically in the past year. This along with other factors we will cover (namely China’s preparations to dump their U.S. T-bond holdings) show that IMF actions indicate they are preparing for a collapse of the Dollar now!

4. China would never dump U.S. Treasuries because it would hurt them as much as it hurts us…

The theory that China is somehow fused to the U.S. in a kind of symbiotic seesaw relationship that can never be broken is so ingrained among mainstream American financial analysts it simply will not die, regardless of how much contradictory evidence you show them. It really is like a mental disease which causes MSM pundits to go into involuntary Tourettic convulsions every time you mention the words “Treasury bond dump”. America and China are not conjoined twins, and one can survive without the other. We have covered the China issue over and over again, and I will not rehash all that evidence here. To lay it out simply: China has re-engineered its economy towards consumption and importation rather than relying on exports. The IMF has talked about this on many occasions with apparent excitement:

http://www.imf.org/external/np/tr/2010/tr072910c.htm

China has also finalized the ASEAN trading bloc which has combined export markets at least equal to that of the U.S. Meaning, China already has another place to send its exports besides America.

Most importantly, China must increase their currency’s value if their new consumer based system is to survive. Allowing the Yuan to rise sharply in value will revitalize the buying power of the Chinese populace making greater consumption possible. Indeed, China MUST dump their Treasury holdings and pump up the Yuan if they are to hold their economy together. And, the Federal Reserve has given China every reason to turn its back on Treasuries through never ending liquidity injections. This is not to say that a U.S. collapse will not affect them, it would negatively affect the entire world. However, China has positioned itself to survive, and perhaps even thrive with their economic expansions into Africa, and their new financial agreements with Germany.

Finally, the Chinese have been very forthcoming over the past week about plans to drop Treasuries. China has dumped over 7.7% of their U.S. T-Bond holdings since January, including the biggest T-bond dump on record this month. They have openly admitted to a plan to diversify away from the Dollar:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-1 ... cline.html

I’m always fascinated by those economists who vehemently deny China will ever turn away from the U.S. Dollar while they are doing so right in plain view. Are MSM analysts simply crazy? I don’t know, but it would explain a lot…

5. Sure, bankers took advantage, but it’s really the American people’s fault for getting suckered…

Yes, a sizable portion of the American public can be gut wrenchingly stupid. It hurts my head and my feelings to see people act so idiotic, it really does. The problem with this argument though is that when it is taken too far it becomes an attempt to divert blame away from the criminals and place it on the victims. If you knowingly leave your front door unlocked in a bad neighborhood and you find your home ransacked the next day, then you are partly responsible. But, we cannot forget that the neighborhood is “bad” in the first place because of the criminals, not the people who don’t lock their doors.

Just because global banks can sucker the public doesn’t mean they should, or that they cannot be judged for it. The crime ultimately rests on those men who made the conscious effort to destroy this country, and the blame rests with them as well. I see the attempt to parlay the economic collapse into the lap of the American people very often lately, especially from bankers who now claim that it’s the American public’s fault entirely. Why? Because they will not spend more, they will not take on more debt, they will not take on more risk, and they will not believe hard enough in the recovery that never was. Imagine a serial rapist behind a podium admonishing women for carrying pepper spray. It’s eerily similar…

6. Ok, maybe the banks are causing a collapse, but to say the government is helping them is just crazy conspiracy theory…

Why is it that the Federal Reserve has never been fully audited? Why is it that when Ron Paul tried to pass HR 1207 Federal Reserve Transparency Bill, it was muddled in committees and then eventually derailed? Why is it that banks like Goldman Sachs have been caught, yes caught, setting the stage for an economic implosion in this country, yet no government indictments have been formed to criminally prosecute them? Why are these men still roaming free like locusts to continue pillaging at will? Are we supposed to feel lucky that we get table scraps like Bernie Madoff behind bars while the Federal Reserve commits Ponzi fraud on a scale that dwarfs his?

Our government, both major parties, is owned lock stock and barrel. This is why there are no satisfactory answers for the questions posed above. Elements of the U.S. Government including almost every president since 1912 have not only turned a blind eye to Globalist activities, they have offered their full support to the bankers.

Nixon removed the Dollar from the gold standard in 1971 giving the Fed free reign to print as much fiat as they wished without limitations. In 1980 the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act was passed placing all banks essentially under the rules of the Federal Reserve. The Glass-Steagall Act which kept investment banks and depository banks separate was repealed under a Republican majority in the Senate, and then finalized by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1999. 30 years ago, banks that held your home mortgage were for the most part required to keep that mortgage until it was finally paid. But, a series of government decisions spanning that period and influenced by global banks allowed for the “securitization” of mortgages, leading to the creation of “derivatives”, which were then used by corporate mobsters like Goldman Sachs to destroy our financial system. Last, but certainly not least, both the Bush and Obama Administrations pressured Congress into passing highly unpopular bailout legislation which basically rewarded the same banks that created the credit crisis with trillions in taxpayer dollars (yes, the bailouts are now actually in the trillions, not billions). This led to the coining of the term “too big to fail” (or “too big to jail”). Our Government has been nothing but complicit in the banker takeover of this country. To debate otherwise is to invite embarrassment.

I haven’t even scratched the surface of government involvement in the collapse of our economy. Cases like the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980’s led to serious prosecutions and jail time for more than 1100 criminal bankers, but this only caused the government to respond by changing investigation rules to make it even more difficult to catch the high level fraudsters in the act! Linked below is an interview between Max Keiser and bank regulator Prof. William K Black who outlines our government’s complicity in the breakdown of the country it is mandated to protect:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Bf5Frx1lZk

Elites destroy cultures to make way for new philosophies; their philosophies. Its not so much “conspiracy theory” as it is a widely admitted methodology. Corporate globalists believe in global government on their terms and they barely try to hide it. If someone thinks this sounds “fantastical” then they haven’t been paying the slightest attention. When one understands how Elites view economy, and realizes their primary motivations, the fact that they purposely triggered a collapse is perfectly logical. Nothing besides all out war inspires more fear and desperation in a society than a financial upheaval. Such elements on a mass scale allow changes in our collective psychology that were never possible before. Most people tend to falter under such an overwhelming threat and turn towards any authority (or fake authority) to save them from harm. Some people scoff at this idea, but it is likely they have never actually been in the wake of a real national catastrophe before. Men, especially those who know little of themselves, can change quickly in the face of calamity. The Elites recognize this, engineer tragedy, then waltz into the aftermath to merrily lord over the rubble.

Will their plan work? I think not, but I’m an optimist (no, really). The pursuit of total control and total power seems rather infantile to me, be it on an impressively psychotic level. Although, if we are made to forget who the real enemy is, then I think they do have a chance at success. That is how they have remained successful to this point. Only now does the average man have such immense knowledge at his fingertips, the knowledge to bring down a line despots and tyrants that have reigned for centuries. If only the average man was not so easily deterred by WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Distraction). The Elites will likely ignite some wars, tempt us into in-fighting, and fabricate enemies like Al Qaeda out of the ether. As the slogan goes, “Order Out Of Chaos”. Whatever happens, our eyes must remain fixed on the root of the problem; the bankers, and nothing else.

Globalists are not invincible, they are not untouchable, they are not even all that brilliant. They are human, and they have made many mistakes. The engineering of an economic meltdown really changes nothing. Hired thugs, useful idiots, corrupt officials, even hyperinflation, all tiny obstacles when considering the world we could have if the Elites were finally made to face the reckoning they deserve. Americans once took on the greatest empire on Earth. We once took a feared king to task. Are a bunch of frothing corporate bankers really so daunting? All that is needed is a principled movement with the will to see justice done, and I believe we have that already.

You can contact Giordano Bruno at: [email protected]