No such juggernaut has lasted more than 100 years and
so the stage has been set for a "Great Reset" of one sort or another.
If we do not act wisely, either we will have another Great Depression or
another Wiemar Republic in which the middle class is destroyed after
its savings has been wiped out by inflation.
All that we know for sure is that we can not trust the
economics based on what the Federal Reserve says that it is doing.
Economist John Kenneth Galbraith was so exasperated by the failure
of his profession in predicting the future he wondered out loud
if the fed knew what it was doing.
"The jokes are almost as old as the profession itself.
Q: Why did God create economists? A: To make weathermen look good
Did you hear that economists have forecast 8 of the last 2 recessions? "
Economists themselves have been no less critical of their profession's
ability to forecast the future. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith
(Wall Street Journal, Jan. 22, 1993) claimed
"There are two kinds of
forecasters: those who don't know and those who don't know they
don't know."
Because of the poor historical performance of economic forecasting,
many firms have reassessed their need for extensive and personalized
economic forecasts. In the 1950s and 1960s, many firms hired in-house
economists to do their forecasting. Today, almost none of the Fortune
500 companies directly employ economists.
For example, IBM had 26 economists on their staff in the early 1970s,
but today they have zero."
The fed does know what it is doing in keeping its billionaire
foreign and domestic owners in the blood matzo and treating the
American people like mushrooms - keeping them in the dark
and feeding them on what smells and sounds like a bell.
"As is logical, bankers always carried out their violations of general
legal principles and their misappropriations of money on demand
deposit in a secretive, disgraceful way.
this lack of openness
largely protects bankers from public accountability even today. It also
keeps most of the public in the dark as to the actual nature of banks."
The fed does not know what it is doing in terms of managing
the US economy but that is of no consequence to its chefs
of dung. They are secure in their good-old-boy Freemasonic
networks.
To them and to their masters in the fed the United States
is just another cow to be milked. If the cow dies the owners
of the Fed will just get another cow – that is what the IMF, the
United Nations and the "New World Order" are all about - a Ponzi
scheme will collapse if it does not grow.
The dung mongers never ask such questions as:
"What did the United States get for
fighting the neocon/Israeli 7 trillion
dollar phoney 'War on Terror?.'
For they know the answer - a dust bowl!
"Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States,
it can dry up and blow away."
There have been many attempts to explain or explain away and justify the shell game
that the Fed has been playing with the power to create America's money supply and
control its value ever since the US Congress unconstitutionally allowed it
to seize all of the money and credit of the United States in 1913.
The Federal Reserve System: Purposes and Functions and
Modern Money Mechanics explain it in fed-speak. Unlike
new-speak which is designed to make sure that no one can be able to figure
out what people had said in the past, fed-speak is designed to make sure that
no one can figure out what the fed is talking about and doing in
the present.
"I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be
particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood
what I've said."
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan
in a speech to the Economic Club of New York, 1988"
In Web of Debt Ellen Brown claims
that it is not fiat money which is the problem
but the fact that the Fed does not create the
interest to pay back the loans that it makes.
It is the old goldsmith swindle using paper instead
of gold to concentrate the wealth in a few hands.
But if the principle disappears as everyone has been lead
to believe that would cause deflation and it is not deflation
that is the problem but inflation.
Silas Walter Adams explains how it works.
"To keep bank deposit books balanced he debits the borrower's account the amount of the payment,
which "tends" to cancel that amount of bank deposits out, so his bank deposit books nicely balance;
but bankers, as all good business men do keep two sets of books and over in the little black
books the bankers write down the bank deposits which were "tending" to cancel out.
They are not "bank deposits": they are "undivided profits" and are out of circulation, and will
remain out until stockholders meet and vote them into surplus fund (still out of circulation),
or set them over in bank's building fund (still out of circulation until spent) or declare a dividend
which puts them back in circulation as bank deposits subject to cheque to the personal accounts
of the stockholders.
They write cheques and the deposits are back in John Q. Public's hands, where they stay,
being shifted from the buyer's account to the seller's account. They have served the bankers,
adding the principal plus the interest less the cost of doing business to their wealth."
Brown follows the lead of
Steve Zarlenga The Lost Science of Money
in advocating a greenback economy with the federal
government taking over the banking industry but
neither advocate a constitutional amendment to do
so – which is what it would take to do so.
But in The Mystery of Banking gold and
"free banking" advocate Murry Rothbard we get the
notion that deposit money created out of nothing to
make loans does not disappear but remains in the feds'
account books as "reserves" which can be used by its
member banks to pyramid their loans even more. There
is actually very little money, the fed burns cash
that is re-deposited by its member banks. The Federal
Reserve system has given us a truly nothing-backed
economy.
Alan Greenspan, a "free banking" man and advocate of
the "Gold Standard", was wont to say that money
has to be "backed by something." But he knew full
well when he testified before Congress in favor of
a gold standard that the Fed's thin air vaults
were backed only by the US military industrial
complex. He like the Austrian gold bugs preferred
the old gold flim flam to the new fangled make
money with inflation racket.
"Greenspan recommended to a Senate committee that
economic regulations all should be sunsetted.
Senator Paul Sarbanes accused him of
"playing with fire,"
and asked him whether he favored a sunset provision in the
authorization of the Fed.
Greenspan
coolly answered that he did.
"Do you actually mean",
demanded the Senator,
"that the Fed
should cease to function unless affirmatively
continued?"
The >25 trillion dollar and growing US National debt
is financing a world wide financial banker's empire
backed not by gold but by coercion. The "US Department
of War" is now called the "US Department of Defense"
in newspeak. Of course, what they are "defending"
is the world wide Rothschild banking Empire (which
aspires to have Jerusalem as its capital) not the
United States or its people.
What Greenspan was saying, in other words, was that the US would no
longer need a defense department if it did not have to coerce foreign
nations to use Federal Reserve notes to buy middle east oil. Foreign
nations have to use Federal Reserve notes to buy oil because the US
government made a deal with the Saudi royals (brokered by Henry Kissinger)
that the US government would keep the Saudi royals in power indefinitely
in exchange for the Saudis selling oil only for Federal Reserve notes.
This is why Federal Reserve notes are called "petro dollars."
For Iraq to keep accepting US petro dollars for its oil after the US
had destroyed Iraq (at the behest of the state of Israel) may have
been a problem but it fits quite nicely into the Mossad's scheme for
bringing down the WTC in a false flag operation. Israel was created
by the Rothschilds and remains their pet state. So is it any wonder
that Rothschild man Henry Kissinger and Fuji Bank are connected to
911?
Even though the Federal Reserve Act was fraudulently passed on Christmas vacation
without even a quorum of congressmen being present the Congress has had the power
to dissolve it at any time but has failed to do so out of fear, greed and the lust for
power.
In Money Bank Credit and Economic Cycles Jesus H Uerta De Soto
pins the tail on the jackass in showing us what the real economics
of the Federal Reserve is all about - wars, famine, plague and death -
the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. War creates debt - the mother's
milk of central banking. The Fed creates the war monger on the white horse
- the war monger - in his latest incarnation is George W. Bush who claimed
that war is "good for the economy" and is the grandson on his mother's
side of the self-proclaimed "most wicked man in the world" - Satanist
Alistar Crowely.
The war monger is followed by the rider
on the red horse which is war; who is followed by the rider on the black
horse carrying scales which is famine; followed by the rider on the
pale horse which is pestilence - all of these scourges prevaled
during the First and Second World Wars and during the Iraq Wars I and II
to the enrichment of those who owned the Fed.
De Soto reveals what is totally lacking in modern economic blather - that the Roman
Empire had a long history of dealing with the legal responsibilities of bankers - as long as it
was able to maintain the legal principles which made society work it continued to exist.
The Roman Empire in the West collapsed only when Roman law was subverted
by the kind of fractional reserve system which we have today - an outgrowth
of the money power gaining control of the government as revealed to us
by Zarlenga,
So seduced are our so-called "economic experts" that they go to
the extreme of advocating wars and pestilence to prop up the bankers'
fractional reserve scam.
"The age of 'The Canticle of the Sun gave way to the age
of the Danse macabre... according to Cipolla, the recession lasted
until,"thanks "to the devastating effects of the plague, which
radically diminished the population...
Cipolla's thesis that it was the Black Death that eventually resolved the
shortage" of money is highly debatable, since money shortages tend to
correct themselves spontaneously through a general drop in prices
Even if there had been no plague, once the investment errors made
during the boom had been corrected, the process of economic
decline would have ended sooner or later, due to an increase in
the value of money...
This process undoubtedly coincided with, yet occurred
independently of the Black Death 's effects..."
"it is still very significant that these defenders of an inflationary
interpretation of history continue to point out the "positive effects"
of wars and plagues and consider them the key to recovery from
economic crises."
The Black Plague which wiped out a third of the European population
was probably the result of the practice of sending the remains of dead crusaders
for burial back home. Rats fed on the dead bodies of the crusaders;
the plague bacillus would infect the rats.
The rats' fleas would get infected from slurping the blood of the rats. When
the rats died from the plague the fleas would jump off of the dead rats and
on to live uninfected rats, live crusaders and other Europeans. More food for the
rats and more dead bodies for the Yersinia pestis to grow in.
After a while, the crusaders started to boil the remains of their comrades in
an attempt to try to preserve them until they got back home. Boiling will kill
Yersinia pestis - the causative agents of the plague - but apparently this practice
was not instituted soon enough to stop the plague from rampaging through Europe.
"I saw some rats running from under the dead men's
greatcoats, enormous rats, fat with human flesh. My
heart pounded as we edged towards one of the bodies.
His helmet had rolled off. The man displayed a
grimacing face, stripped of flesh; the skull bare,
the eyes devoured and from the yawning mouth
leapt a rat."
The custom of bonfire burials that the Romans practiced was probably an
effort to control the disease spread by the corpses of their rotting soldiers.
The Romans knew nothing about bacteria but they probably associated rotten meat
with disease. They knew that they got sick when they ate stinking meat and
probably associated the disease spread by their constant warfare with the
bad smell which came from their dead soldiers.
Because of their hostility toward Christians and their practice of usury as in the demanding of
a pound of flesh in payment for a debt in the "Merchant of Venice" and their occupation of
Christian Spain for 800 years along with the Moors Jews were suspected of poisoning the
wells with plague.
"The Talmudic government of the nation-within-nations was continued from Spanish soil. The
Gaonate issued its directives; the Talmudic academy was established at Cordova; and sometimes,
at least, a shadowy Exilarch reigned over Jewry.
This was done under the protection of Islam; the Moors, like Babylon and Persia before, showed
remarkable benevolence towards this force in their midst. To the Spaniards the invader came to
bear more and more a Jewish countenance and less and less a Moorish one; the Moors had
conquered, but the conqueror's power passed into Jewish hands. The story which the world had
earlier seen enacted in Babylon, repeated itself in Spain, and in later centuries was to be re-enacted
in every great country of the West.
The Moors remained in Spain for nearly eight hundred years. When the Spanish reconquest, after
this long ordeal, was completed in 1492 the Jews, as well as the Moors, were expelled. They had
become identified with the invaders' rule and were cast out when it ended, as they had followed it
in."
"The Jews . . . have become great lords, and their pride and arrogance know no bounds . . . Take
not such men for thy ministers . . . for the whole earth crieth out against them; ere long it will
quake and we shall all perish . . . I came to Granada and I beheld the Jews reigning. They had
parcelled out the provinces and the capital between them; everywhere one of these accursed ruled.
They collected the taxes, they made good cheer, they were sumptuously clad, while your garments,
O Muslims, were old and worn-out. All the secrets of state were known to them; yet is it folly to put
trust in traitors!"
The Caliph, nevertheless, continued to select his ministers from among the nominees of the
Talmudic government of Cordova. The Spanish period shows, perhaps more clearly than any
other, that the Jewish portrayal of history may be nearer to historical truth than the narrative
according to the Gentiles; for the conquest of Spain certainly proved to be Judaic rather than
Moorish. The formal Moorish domination continued for 800 years and at the end, in keeping with
precedent, the Jews helped the Spaniards expel the Moors.
Nevertheless, the general feeling towards them was too deeply distrustful to be assuaged. This
popular suspicion particularly directed itself against the conversos, or Marranos. The genuineness
of their conversion was not believed, and in this the Spaniards were right, for Dr. Kastein says that
between the Jews and Marranos "a secret atmosphere of conspiracy" prevailed; evidently use was
being made of the Talmudic dispensation about feigned conversion.
In spite of this public feeling the Spanish kings, during the gradual reconquest, habitually made
Jews or Marranos their finance ministers, and eventually
appointed one Isaac Arrabanel administrator of the state finances with instructions to raise funds
for the reconquest of Granada. The elders, at this period, were dutifully applying the important
tenet of The Law about "lending to all nations and borrowing from none", for Dr. Kastein records
that they gave "financial help" to the Christian north in its final assault on the Mohammedan
south.
After the reconquest the stored-up feeling of resentment against the Jews, born of the 800 years of
Moorish occupation and of their share in it, broke through; in 1492 the Jews were expelled from
Spain and in 1496 from Portugal.
Today's Zionist historians show a remarkable hatred of Spain on this account, and a firm belief in
a Jehovan vengeance not yet completed. The overthrow of the Spanish monarchy nearly five
centuries later, and the civil war of the 1930's, are sometimes depicted as insta1ments on account of
this reckoning.
This belief was reflected in the imperious words used by Mr. Justice Brandeis of the
United States Supreme Court, a leading Zionist, to Rabbi Stephen Wise in 1933:
"Let Germany
share the fate of Spain!" The treatment accorded to Spain in the subsequent decades of this
century, in particular its long exclusion from the United Nations, has to be considered in
this light."
People have to get out of their minds that Judaism is a religion. If
Judaism was a religion there would be no Jewish atheists. But
half of the people who call themselves "Jews" also claim to be
atheists.
Jews are not a race but a tribe. Judaism is tribalism
with a political agenda - world domination - with war Communism and
war Zionism funded by the Rothshchild central banking scam as
its driving force.
"The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith has issued a series of leaflets
for Fireside Discussion Groups. Number 7 is entitled:
"Three Questions Jews Must Answer."
The question
"Are Jews a Race?"
is answered, briefly, with the conclusion that Jews are part
of a
"general admixture"
of races.
"Are Jews a Nation?"
is answered with the idea that Jews form parts of all nations; that some
of them have the Zionist ideal of a Palestinian nation but
"Jews have a consciousness of world unity." [of Rothschild largess and that they are on a mission from God]
To quote:
"Jews are “definitely a type, and consciously a unity, we are an
historic people - a world community."
The question "Are Jews a Religion?" is answered by the assertion that
"There are hundreds
of thousands of Jews who are unbelievers.
Yet they still consider themselves Jews."
"The true start of this affair occurred on a day in 458 BC which this
narrative will reach in its sixth chapter. On that day the petty
Palestinian tribe of Judah (earlier disowned by the Israelites)
produced a racial creed, the disruptive effect of which on subsequent
human affairs may have exceeded that of explosives or epidemics. This
was the day on which the theory of the master-race was set up as
"the Law"...
Dr. Kastein, a fervent Zionist, holds that the Law laid down in
the Old Testament must be fulfilled to the letter, but does not
pretend to take the version of history seriously, on which this
Law is based. In this he differs from Christian polemicists of
the "every word is true" school. He holds that the Old Testament
was in fact a political programme, drafted to meet the conditions
of a time, and frequently revised to meet changing conditions."
"Today, though barely 2% of the nation's population is Jewish, close to half
its billionaires are Jews.
The chief executive officers of the three major television networks
and the four largest film studios are Jews,
as are the owners of the nation's largest newspaper chain
and most influential newspaper, the New York Times."
If there is any truth to the story Jews would have been throwing
dead bodies into the wells as the Zionists did at Deir Yassin as a form
of biological warfare. Such warfare is required by the Bible. According to
the Talmud, the rabbis are to carry out God's will on earth; Jehovah's
jurisdiction is restricted to the heavens.
The above is a photo of Dier Yassen after the Zionist massacre;
the explanation for the massacre is given below.
"Literal Judaism is ultimately based on terror and fear and the list of curses set out in chapter 28 of The
Second Law shows the importance which the priesthood attached to this practice of cursing (which literal
Judaists to this day hold to be effective in use). These curses, be it remembered, are the penalties for
non-observance, not for moral transgressions!
"If thou will not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God,
to observe to do all his commandments and statutes. . . all these curses shall come upon thee ..."
The city and the dwelling, the children, crops and cattle, are to be cursed "until thou be destroyed and until
thou perish utterly". Plague, wasting, inflammation, mildew, botch, emerods, scab, itch, madness, blindness,
famine, cannibalism and drought are specified. Men's wives are to lie with other men; their children are to
be lost into slavery; any that remain at home are to be eaten by their parents, the father and mother
contesting for the flesh and denying any to the children still alive...."
To the terror inspired by "all these curses" the Levites added also an allurement. If "the people"
should "return and obey the voice of the Lord, and do all his commandments. . .", then "all these
curses" would be transferred to their "enemies" (not because these had sinned, but simply to swell
the measure of the blessing conferred on the rehabilitated Judahites!)
In this tenet Deuteronomy most clearly revealed the status allotted to the heathen by The Second Law. In
the last analysis, "the heathen" have no legal existence under this Law; how could they have, when
Jehovah only "knows" his "holy people"? Insofar as their actual existence is admitted, it is only
for such purposes... to receive the Judahites when they are dispersed for their transgressions
and then, when their guests repent and are forgiven, to inherit curses lifted from
the regenerate Judahites.
True, the second verse quoted gives the pretext that "all these curses" will be transferred to the heathen
because they "hated" and "persecuted" the judahites, but how could they be held culpable of this when the
very presence of the Judahites among them was merely the result of punitive "curses" inflicted by Jehovah?
For Jehovah himself, according to another verse took credit for putting the curse of exile on the Judahites:"
"And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other . . .
and among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest?"
So the problem is "getting the snake out of the house", as
Zarlenga put it or getting rid of Shylock, as Shakespear might
have phrased it - in a constitutional manner.
His solution is to separate the 2 functions of banks into
what Rothbard called "deposit banking" and "loan banking":
The former being made part of the United States Treasury
in conformity with the powers of Congress to create
money and regulate the value thereof, and the latter
being the responsibility of the states in their capacity
to regulate corporate entities.
Adams does a much better job than Rothbard in explaining the issues
perhaps because he had no training in "ecomonics" and because
he had access to information in a Federal Reserve publication which
the Fed has since done a deep-six on. But you have to work out the
examples for yourself as I have done below.
"Analysing this story we find there are five steps in
the process of creating bank deposits:
1.Reserve authorities buy corporation secu ities or Government Bonds,
giving to the corporation a cheque against no funds in payment.
2.The corpoation deposits the cheque in its home bank, creating new bank deposits.
3.The bank re-deposits it in its Reserve Bank,creating new bank eserves which are
credited to its reserve account on the Reserve Bank's books.
4.The commercial bank enters on its books as bank credit a sum five times
its reserves on Reserve books.
5.The bank creates the $100 million new bank deposits by making loans to
its customers or by buying investment obligations,in above example.
Summerizing, we reveal these astounding figures:
Corporation securities offering 6%
$20 million
Reserve cheque in payment
20 million
New bank deposits to corporation
20 million
New bank reserves, credit of bank
20 million
New bank credits on its books
100 million
New bank deposits to credit of customer
100 million
New active monetary values
$140 million
In the process the banks created $120 million bank
deposits, came into ownership of the $20 million
corporation stock and $100 million in personal notes,
mortgages, bonds etc.
They will re-sell the corporation
stock and add the $20 million bank deposits they receive
for them to their profit account, for the stock did not cost
them a thin dime.
In due course of time the bankers get bank
deposits for all loans and will re-sell all securities,
and add this $100 million plus interest to their account,
making a total of $120 million plus interest and dividends
the bankers add to their profit accounts when the cycle is
completed.
The $20 million Reserve cheque,
the $20 million corporation stock,
$20 million bank reserves,
the $100 million bank credit - none of it
cost the bankers one thin dime; therefore
the $100 million in notes, mortgages, etc.,
which they bought with the bank credit cost
them not one thin dime. Then the $120 million
profit they added to their account cost them
not one thin dime.
Their customers got the use of the
$100 million at heavy interest cost, for just
a short time, then it became the permanent
assets of the bankers. The whole process was
just simple bookkeeping. That's what Sir Josiah
Stamp meant when he said"
"bankers would with the flick of
can create enough money to buy the
world back again!"
But Adams ignores the constitutional definition of a dollar
as a fixed number of grains of silver. His objection to metals
as being too heavy and inconvenient does not hold water.
All metals have the property of being able to be drawn into
sheets of nano-size dimensions (as anyone who has ever
read the DC comic book "The Metal Men" as a kid knows) and
coins may be made of various amounts of the precious metals
such as electrum which is an alloy of gold and silver.
Further, in not doing away with the idea that money is an
imaginary figure on paper or, in today's parlance,
a digit on a hard disk, he invites the same sort of
flim flam that the fed is famous for.
A constitutional dollar is the proverbial stick in the mud:
An anchor for a stable monetary system. True, silver is
more minable than gold and its production can half the
value of a constitutional dollar in a short time. But
this problem can be addressed by the power of the congress
to regulate the money supply - the power to tax upon inflation
and the power to grant dividends to the bank accounts upon
deflation under an Adams' system.
But the problem which has to be addressed which neither Adams,
nor the greenbackers, nor the hard money advocates address is how to
keep their systems from becoming corrupted - not just in
getting rid of Shylock and the snake but in keeping them
out for good.
After all, we have had 3 incarnations of the Bank of
the United States; Jefferson got rid of the first but
it came back as the Second and Jackson had to get
rid of the second but that came back as the Fed.
This was because the problem was not in the United States
but in the City of London which even today holds a monopoly
on the supply of gold and fixes that price on a regular basis
by the same folks that gave us the privately owned
"Federal Reserve" and the First and Second privately owned
"Banks of the United Sates" (not to mention all of the major
wars, recessions and depressions of the last two centuries.)
And who owns the gold and silver mines in the United States
and the rest of the world? Should they all be nationalized?
Private interests which control these mines could
destablize any monetary system based on metal for their
own profit and power over the nations. These questions
have to be resolved by new laws and new treaties.
If the rest of the nation follows Florida in its
legal tender laws then the time will be ripe to consider
these questions with a constitutional convention
held with the proviso that the US constitution shall be
amended so that no treaty that the United States makes
with any other nation shall be interpreted as allowing
the violation of the sovereignty of the United States
or the sovereignty of any other nation.
This will plug the loophole that the banksters
slipped into the US Constitution which they had
planned to use for their "New World Order" -
a one world government by the banks, of the
banks and for the banks.
