New Content: (06/27/2008) Last Addition: (06/27/2008)
Departments
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, (i.e., the "business cycle") the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
If there were ever a time to protest against this corrupt global government -- our Congress, our President, the Corporate Controlled Media and the Global Corporations that call the tune -- (not to mention this this bogus election), this is probably the time. Ron Paul will be there are hopefully, you will be too. Whether you completely agree with Ron Paul is irrelevant. If this republic is to continue then the time to stand up is NOW!!!
The reality of promoting an "issues based" website, or magazine, is that you are really saying the same things over and over again. In my case the focus is the "New Agenda for America" and my "write-in" candidacy for the 2008 Presidential Election.
To that end I am happy to announce that I have just been endorsed for President of the United States by the United States Marijuana Party. Another few thousand endorsement and I might just have snowballs chance in hell of winning
The America people must begin to see who is really pulling the strings attached to Obama. Our future as a free and sovereign nation depends on the success of this wake-up call to America. Our future surely hangs in the balance.
I feel so strongly about this article that I have placed it on it's own separate webpage in hopes that millions of Americans will have the chance to read it before the November election. I am encourage my readers to post a link to this article on their blogs, through their networks of email contacts and by posting a link from their own websites (e.g., MySpace Pages, FaceBook Pages etc.).
Make sure you read "Greenspan's Fraud: How Two Decades of His Policies Have Undermined the Global Economy." This will give you a good overview of how Greenspan, as head of the Federal Reserve, has screwed the American working class over the last 25 years. This book review reveals how his policies were pivotal in the destruction of our jobs and the offshoring of our factories: all for the short term benefit of the elite.
Even more important is the essay "Collapse, & Takedown Of The U.S.A." by Richard Cook. As you will read in my comments (a letter to Richard Cook) this essay both summarizes the history of the globalist agenda and actually goes on to describe an antidote to thwart their agenda. This is one of the most important essays that I have read in many years.
In fact I would consider it required reading along with his other recent writings, that can be found at the following link:
I also encourage my readers to understand and promote the "New Agenda for America." Here are the initial "planks":
(1) Universal Health Care for All American Citizens (2) A 20-year moratorium on all immigration into the United States (3) Legal Marijuana for all Adults and Medical Patients (4) An immediate reversal to the Offshoring and Inshoring of American Jobs (5) A strict enforcement on issues of Separation of Church and State (6) An immediate move from so-called Free Trade Agreements to Bilateral Trade agreements (7) A major R&D project to bring energy independence to the United States and the World through recycling, reuse, ending hyper-consumerism and investing in the development of sustainable energy sources (e.g., solar, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal) (8) No further ownership of US Assets (businesses, homes, ports, stock exchanges) by foreign governments or individuals! (9) Replace the Federal Reserve with a People's Reserve which allows public oversight
Much more (articles, videos) on the "New Agenda for America" can be found through the following links:
Through these links you can better understand the "New Agenda for America." And if you agree with most of it you can use our graphic files to link to the NAC website from your own website, FaceBook page etc. I also encourage my readers to check out the archives additional articles that will further make the case for a "New Agenda for America."
The last thing I ask is for you to get on my mailing list. I would like to start doing more public speaking on the "New Agenda for America" and want to make sure you have an opportunity to attend.
Over the last few weeks both Obama and McCain have been fellating (e.g., the act of performing fellatio) "members" of the various Illegal Alien lobbies: LULAC, MALDEF and LaRasa. Neither are serous about building a border fence. Neither are serous about sending out those "No-Match" letters which would rid this country of 12 to 30 million Illegal Aliens and Visa overstays. Also note that the sending of these letters could "create" at least 12 million jobs for American workers. In point of fact both Obama and McCain have said they will grant all of the Illegal Aliens citizenship as soon as either of them occupies the Whitehouse in 2009.
And all of this is happening at a time when over 5 million Americans will have lost their homes by the end of 2008. All this is happening at a time when millions of American jobs are being lost and our factories are being packed up and offshored to China. All this is happening despite the fact that 80% of Americans are opposed to giving Illegal Immigrants any form of Amnesty.
So when Obama told a crowd, yesterday (07/09/2008), that "American kids should learn Spanish" you should not be real surprised. As the late George Carlin stated so clearly, "You (the American Citizen) are not part of the club!" Both Obama and McCain ARE part of the club and I hope, to the goodness in us all, that we understand this well before the November election.
Of course our founding fathers provided a solution to a government that no longer abides by the will and needs of it's people. They provided a good case study for this solution after signing the "Declaration of Independence" on July 4th, 1776. Today we know that solution as the "American Revolution." I hate to be the one to say it, but it is probably time for the "Second American Revolution" to get underway. Every day that we delay action will increase the likelihood of massive carnage. Failing to act, at all, will result in the complete destruction of our liberties, our Constitution and our way of life. But if we act soon enough -- and that is my hope -- it will result in a bloodless coup and a rejuvenation of our government that is, once again, in sync with the will and the needs of it's people.
I believe that my "New Agenda for America" provides 10 initial planks to begin the rejuvenation of this Republic. Click on the following link for more information and videos which explain the "New Agenda for America" in more detail.
"Curious George is always getting into mischief," says the famous children's book series. And Presidential Candidate Obama is going to create a lot of irresolvable mischief for the American people if we don't wake up immediately. For Obama is nothing less than a shill for the Global Elite. And about the only thing "curious" about this is the fact that the Corporate Controlled Media continues to cover up Obama's complicity in the Globalist agenda.
Let me cite a few examples for you:
I find it curious, Obama, that you support NAFTA and the North American Union. Yet the American people are against it.
I find it curious, Obama, that you support restrictions on the ownership of guns. Yet the American people are against such restrictions.
I find it curious, Obama, that you support granting 12 to 30 million illegal aliens amnesty. Yet the American people are against it.
I find it curious, Obama, that you are against Legalizing Marijuana for the adult Americas . Yet the American people are increasingly for it. And the fact is that legalizing Marijuana (for adults only) would probably destroy the Mexican Drug Cartels without sending a single penny of further support to the Mexican "Narco" Military. It would also destroy many local city drug gangs. But, of course, you continue to support Marijuana Prohibition for Adult Americans.
I find it utterly amazing how the corporate-controlled media continues to cover up the true "globalist" agenda of Barack Hussein Obama. Of course it is in their interests to do just that as he is truly "just what the globalists" have dreamed of: an attractive, articulate, disarming globalist. Only in such a vacuum could so many Americans see him as the "great hope" for steering the United States towards a better future. Only in such a vacuum could so many Americans project their dreams and aspirations on such a false prophet. In point of fact he is likely to become our greatest nightmare. And unfortunately McCain is no better.
Lets just start with the "Yes We Can" mantra that has followed his campaign over the last year. Few if any Americans understand that this is a calculated code word that has strategically been used to "connect" with the Illegal Aliens that he hopes to convert to full citizenship as soon as he steps into the Whitehouse. When millions of Illegal Aliens filled the streets of American in May 2006, that was exactly what they were chanting: except they were chanting it in Spanish. And what they meant by this was "yes we can" lobby the Corporate-controlled Congress to grant, 12 to 30 million Illegal Aliens, full citizenship through "comprehensive immigration reform. In point of fact Obama is in full support of "comprehensive immigration reform" and has consistently voted that way on every Senate Bill sent his way.
In point of fact Congress is "owned" by Multi-National Corporations that want to destroy the American working class. To destroy the blue-collar work force they are importing an unsustainable number of Illegal Immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America. To destroy the white-collar work force they are importing an unsustainable number of college-educated workers from India, China and numerous other countries. To make sure nothing is done to stop the flow of Illegal Aliens from Mexico they won't build the fence and won't send out those "No-Match" letters that would identify 99.9 percent of them. To make sure nothing is done to stop the flow of foreign H1-B, and other foreign Visa holders, they conveniently fail to track them and send them back when their Visa's have expired.
I found the following Obama video on You-Tube which was obviously done by the Obama campaign, since it draws from multiple simultaneous video sources. Notice how the camera seems to always stop when it focuses on Hispanic-looking audience members.
Here is my annotated transcript of the speech:
I was one of the chief sponsors of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The basic idea was simple. Yes we do have to have genuine border security. I don't think anyone should argue with that. Yes we have to work with Mexico and they've got to take some responsibility to provide jobs for their people and they've got to take some responsibility for the borders.
We have to make sure their is economic there as well as here for all workers. We have to work with employers, so that in a non-discriminatory way, they are enforcing rules in terms of who can work and who can't. But make sure that this system better work in a way that doesn't say that just because your name is Rodriguez suddenly you are not being hired. But those are all legitimate issues.
And then we need to have a pathway for those people that are undocumented (e.g., Illegal Aliens) that are here. Because the truth is when people say "send them all back" we're not sending them all back. People aren't telling the truth. We would have to use all of our law enforcement resources. We couldn't go after gang bangers. We couldn't go after auto theft. We would have to use every single law enforcement officer and go around and round up folks (e.g., Illegal Aliens) who are working at restaurants. And some of the same people that are talking about this stuff are using undocumented workers (e.g., Illegal Aliens) themselves. Right?
And so what we need to do is be honest any say let's pull people out of the shadows. Let's admit they have broken the law and have them pay a fine. I think they should learn English because that will help them. But don't cut education programs and then say to people, "learn English." And they're going to have to go back to the end of the line. They can't get citizenship before people that have been waiting patiently, legally to come here. And fix the broken legal immigration system. The backlog is so long that so many people ultimately just say I'm just going to come here illegally. They can't wait ten years. They might have already been here (e.g., committing a felony in doing so). They may have me someone. They might have gotten married. That person is a legal resident but they can't sponsor them. Now they're supposed to go back for ten years and wait. People (e.g., Illegal Aliens) don't do that.
So we've got to have a realistic and practical system. Strong border security. Get people out of the shadows. And if we do that I think we can be a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants (e.g., Illegal Aliens). Those two things are not incompatible (e.g., especially for the globalists that want to destroy the American working class).
This is going to take leadership, unfortunately from the President of the United States. And right now the language that came out during this last debate. There was some ugly (e.g., honest) language there. It was much more than being concerned about the borders. It was "them (e.g., the Illegal Aliens that are taking our jobs) and us. And whenever we see people talking about "them vs. us" that's a dangerous thing (e.g., to the interests of the globalists that want to destroy the American working class). America is at its strongest when it's just us (e.g., the globalist elitists). It's not "them vs. us." And that's the kind of leadership I want to provide as President of the United States of America. Alright (e.g., you Americans are really dumber than I thought for swallowing this line of crap).
Well I've got news for you. We're not as dumb as a rock, Barrack. We know that if we allow you to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform (e.g., Amnesty for Illegal Aliens) the population of the Untied States will hemorrhage threefold by the end of this century, to over a 1,000 million people. And with water shortages already evident on both coasts such a development will result in famine, internal strife and quite possibly a complete system collapse. Is that the future you intend to create for our children and grandchildren? Well, not if I can help it.
To learn more about Curious Obama's views on immigration I highly recommend this link:
What the America people need to understand, and understand immediately, is that Curious Obama has been groomed for this position by some of the planet's most dangerous globalists, including the worst of them all, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski is arguably one of the most ardent and powerful of the globalists, next to perhaps David Rockefeller. Here is a brief excerpt of "America's Role as the First, Only, and Last Truly Global Superpower" to put this in proper context:
In Zbigniew Brzezinski’s The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997), he outlines his case for how current American global supremacy should be used to further a long running elite plan for the unification of the world under the dictates of the United Nations.
For those who don’t know, among many other things, Brzezinski was an advisor to John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, and Jimmy Carter. He was also the first director of the Trilateral Commission and board member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Currently he is a top foreign policy advisor to the Barack Obama campaign for presidency.
Controlling Eurasia With American Imperial Power
From The Grand Chessboard:
"In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."
I highly recommend that every American read through this full series of articles because it truly illuminates the connection between Obama and the New World Order of Corporate Globalism.
The Grand Chessboard Part 4: Interdependence and the Luxury of War http://www.knowledgedrivenrevolution.com/Articles/200710/20071022_Chessboard_4_Luxury.htm
This series of articles is truly a look beyond the base of the "invisible pyramid" of power. This is the reality behind the unholy alliance of Global Media, Global Governance and Global Corporatism. This, you might say, is the real Matrix.
Frankly I am surprised that Brzezinski has so publicly endorsed -- and admitted to advising Obama -- since it so obviously exposes the fact that Curious Obama is an obvious shill for the New World Order. And, as the article so clearly states, both Brzezinski and Curious Obama have one overarching goal in mind: the "unification of the world under the dictates of the United Nations."
Think about the issues cited at the beginning of this article: Free Trade, Globalization, Gun Restrictions, Marijuana Prohibition, Amnesty for Illegal Aliens and the dissolution of our sovereignty and our borders. All of these positions have been rejected by the American people. Yet all of these positions are embraced by Curious Obama, Zbigniew Brzezinski and the United Nations. And as I speak your federal Senators and House members are making every attempt to move forward with this agenda. That is the real reason that they have the lowest approval rating of any Congress since such statistics have been recorded. They are simply TRAITORS and it is time that we wrapped our heads around that fact.
Of course there is something else that is curious about this 2008 Presidential election. Early on there was record support for Ron Paul who is also opposed to just about everything that Obama stands for. But he was rejected to the Corporate Controlled Media: the Manufactures of Globalist Consent. And it appears that Ron Paul has officially given up on his bid for the Presidency.
And then there is me: Bruce W. Cain. That would be me. I am also running as a "write in" candidate for the 2008 Presidency. And though I also have little hope of moving to the Whitehouse, in 2009, my "New Agenda for America" sets an agenda that is against Free Trade, Globalization, Gun Restrictions, Marijuana Prohibition, Amnesty for Illegal Aliens and the dissolution of our sovereignty and our borders.
Here are the first 10 "planks" of my agenda:
(1) Universal Health Care for All American Citizens (2) A 20-year moratorium on all immigration into the United States (3) Legal Marijuana for all Adults and Medical Patients (4) An immediate reversal to the Offshoring and Inshoring of American Jobs (5) A strict enforcement on issues of Separation of Church and State (6) An immediate move from so-called Free Trade Agreements to Bilateral Trade agreements (7) A major R&D project to bring energy independence to the United States and the World through recycling, reuse, ending hyper-consumerism and investing in the development of sustainable energy sources (e.g., solar, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal) (8) No further ownership of US Assets (businesses, homes, ports, stock exchanges) by foreign governments or individuals! (9) Replace the Federal Reserve with a People's Reserve which allows public oversight (10) Complete support for "Internet Neutrality"
And while I may have little chance of winning I do believe we could use the next 5 months to build a coalition of American citizens that could easily push back against the Globalist agenda that will be put in play with the election of Curios Obama. Here are some additional things that you can do to promote my agenda:
(3) Have your group or organization endorse my candidacy and the "New Agenda for America." So far I have been officially endorsed by the "United States Marijuana Party" and others are in the process of considering my endorsement.
In closing let me just say that Obama is not just curious, he is down right dangerous to the future of the American People and our Constitution. And while it is unlikely that we can defeat Curious Obama (and his opponent McCain) it is possibly to form a coalition to oppose him the minute his "globalist" ass enters the Whitehouse. And if you believe in our future you owe it to yourself to sign up for what I hope is a peaceful Second American Revolution. For if we don't begin to mobilize right now, the window of opportunity could be slammed shut in early 2009.
Yours in Freedom,
Bruce W. Cain
Here are some additional related videos that relate to this article:
Overview of the "New Agenda for America" The "New Agenda for America" and the 2008 Presidency
A 20-year moritorium on all immigration into the United States Why Lou Dobbs Should Demand A Stop To Legal Immigration
Legal Marijuana for all Adults and Medical Patients (under MERP Model) "Why Lou Dobbs Should Support Marijuana Legalization "
Lou Dobbs Demands that Barack Obama Apologize to Him
Ralph Nader criticized Senator Obama for failing to “take on the white establishment.” Obama’s reaction was Nader is “delusional.” Nader’s reaction was Obama is “illusional.”
Obama and his supporters should listen to this criticism and get on course or the seeds of election failure will have been planted in his refusal to challenge the corporate elite that dominate the government.
They should ask – is Nader right? If they are honest they will see it is difficult to point to any issue on which Senator Obama is challenging the establishment – meaning the corporate interests that fund political campaigns and get what they want from the federal government.
Early on Obama sent a signal to the military industrial complex that he would not challenge them with his promise to expand the military by 92,000 troops. Each soldier costs approximately $100,000 annually in training, equipment, housing, food and other items from which military contractors will profit. They can rest assured they will get billions in defense contracts as a result of an even bigger military.
The right wing Israeli lobby has gotten everything they have asked for from Obama. In his speech to AIPAC Obama added to the written text of the speech a promise to do “everything” – repeated three times – to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, essentially threatening military attack on Iran. And, he went further than any president or country and said Israel should have all of Jerusalem – undermining the Palestinians before any peace negotiations begin.
Obama pledged his support to telecom companies with his recent vote to support FISA with provisions for telecom immunity for illegally spying on American citizens. As the new leader of the Democratic Party he could have galvanized sufficient support to filibuster the bill. He only needed 40 of the 50 Democrats – but he remained silent.
The health insurance industry is looking forward to the tax payer subsidies he is promising rather than being challenged by the most cost-effective and efficient approach to ensuring health care security – single payer health care. Single payer would put the unnecessary health insurance industry, which accounts for 25% of the cost of health care, out of business.
Similarly the big lobby energy companies shouldn’t be too worried since he has been a supporter of the corn lobby’s mistaken ethanol fuel, the coal lobby’s phony “clean” coal, and the continued reliance on nuclear energy. The oil companies should be pleased he voted for their tax breaks in the energy bill, and not worry much about his rhetoric now calling for taxes on excessive oil profits.
These, and other positions, are the seeds of Obama’s undoing. This looks like his election to lose –Republicans are unpopular, Obama will have three to six times more money than McCain (now that he has opted out of federal matching funds), and he is showing leads in national and swing state polls. But Obama should know better than any other candidate, inevitable candidates do not always win. His opponent Hillary Clinton proved that point – as did recent Democratic candidates who had big leads in the summer before the election.
The common thread of Democratic Party failure is running to the right when the primary is over. This is the consistent Democratic strategy even though being a flip-flopper or Republican-lite sabotages their candidates. It tells their voting base: “I’m taking your vote for granted, you have nowhere else to go” when he should be exciting them so they work, donate and bring out voters on Election Day. And, it tells the swing voters that this is a candidate that is business as usual. The corporate interests will continue to rule the government when he is elected. And, both groups get the message – this candidate can not be trusted he will say anything to get elected – and ask themselves “what does he really stand for?”
Obama, his strategists and his supporters should stop their knee jerk reaction and ask themselves: Is Nader right? Is he telling a truth I need to hear?
If they are honest with themselves they will see the truth in Nader’s comments. When they do the next question is, what should Obama do about it?
Quite simply, he should put the interests of the people before the interests of the powerful. Some specific suggestions on key issues:
On health care recognize that we need to start from scratch. The health care system is the most expensive in the world, leaves tens of millions with no coverage and leaves those with insurance paying higher premiums, more of the cost of health care and often fighting for coverage they have paid for. It is ruining medical practice as doctors spend 20% of their overhead on dealing with insurance companies. And it is making it impossible for the U.S. businesses to compete as every other developed country has health care for all with single payer as the foundation. Leave an opening so you can consider what you know is the right solution – health security for all Americans through a single payer system.
On Iraq, get specific on a real exit strategy – not just redeployment of combat troops, but removal of private security like the Blackwater mercenaries from Iraq, and the 30,000 to 85,000 non-combat troops that your advisors say you plan to leave in Iraq after redeploying combat troops to Kuwait and Afghanistan. Make it clear you oppose Bush’s effort to get Iraq to agree to 50 long-term military bases, protection of U.S. troops, mercenaries and corporations from Iraqi prosecution; tell Americans that if Bush negotiates such an agreement you will undo it and negotiate a complete U.S. exit from Iraq.
What do you do when you want to screw only the working people of your nation with the largest tax increase in history and hand those trillions of dollars to your wealthy campaign contributors, yet not have anybody realize you've done it? If you're Ronald Reagan, you call in Alan Greenspan.
Through the "golden years of the American middle class" - the 1940s through 1982 - the top income tax rate for the hyper-rich had been between 90 and 70 percent. Ronald Reagan wanted to cut that rate dramatically, to help out his political patrons. He did this with a massive tax cut in the summer of 1981.
The only problem was that when Reagan took his meat axe to our tax code, he produced mind-boggling budget deficits. Voodoo economics didn't work out as planned, and even after borrowing so much money that this year we'll pay over $100 billion just in interest on the money Reagan borrowed to make the economy look good in the 1980s, Reagan couldn't come up with the revenues he needed to run the government.
Coincidentally, the actuaries at the Social Security Administration were beginning to get worried about the Baby Boomer generation, who would begin retiring in big numbers in fifty years or so. They were a "rabbit going through the python" bulge that would require a few trillion more dollars than Social Security could easily collect during the same 20 year or so period of their retirement. We needed, the actuaries said, to tax more heavily those very persons who would eventually retire, so instead of using current workers' money to pay for the Boomer's Social Security payments in 2020, the Boomers themselves would have pre-paid for their own retirement.
Reagan got Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Alan Greenspan together to form a commission on Social Security reform, along with a few other politicians and economists, and they recommend a near-doubling of the Social Security tax on the then-working Boomers. That tax created - for the first time in history - a giant savings account that Social Security could use to pay for the Boomers' retirement.
This was a huge change. Prior to this, Social Security had always paid for today's retirees with income from today's workers (it still is today). The Boomers were the first generation that would pay Social Security taxes both to fund current retirees and save up enough money to pay for their own retirement. And, after the Boomers were all retired and the savings account - called the "Social Security Trust Fund" - was all spent, the rabbit would have finished its journey through the python and Social Security could go back to a "pay as you go" taxing system.
Thus, within the period of a few short years, Reagan dramatically dropped the income tax on America's most wealthy by more than half, and roughly doubled the Social Security tax on people earning $30,000 or less. It was, simultaneously, the largest income tax cut in America's history (almost entirely for the very wealthy), and the most massive tax increase in the history of the nation (which entirely hit working-class people).
But Reagan still had a problem. His tax cuts for the wealthy - even when moderated by subsequent tax increases - weren't generating enough money to invest properly in America's infrastructure, schools, police and fire departments, and military. The country was facing bankruptcy.
No problem, suggested Greenspan. Just borrow the Boomer's savings account - the money in the Social Security Trust Fund - and, because you're borrowing "government money" to fund "government expenditures," you don't have to list it as part of the deficit. Much of the deficit will magically seem to disappear, and nobody will know what you did for another 50 years when the Boomers begin to retire 2015.
Reagan jumped at the opportunity. As did George H. W. Bush. As did Bill Clinton (although Al Gore argued strongly that Social Security funds should not be raided, but, instead, put in a "lock box"). And so did George W. Bush.
The result is that all that money - trillions of dollars - that has been taxed out of working Boomers (the ceiling has risen from the tax being on your first $30,000 of income to the first $90,000 today) has been borrowed and spent. What are left behind are a special form of IOUs - an unique form of Treasury debt instruments similar (but not identical) to those the government issues to borrow money from China today to fund George W. Bush's most recent tax cuts for billionaires (George Junior is still also "borrowing" from the Social Security Trust Fund).
Former Bush Junior Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill recounts how Dick Cheney famously said, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter." Cheney was either ignorant or being disingenuous - it would be more accurate to say, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter if you rip off the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for them, and don't report that borrowing from the Boomers as part of the deficit."
As the Associated Press reported on April 6, 2005:
"PARKERSBURG, West Virginia. (AP) -- President Bush on Tuesday used a four-drawer filing cabinet stuffed with paper representing government IOUs the president said symbolized the Social Security trust fund's bleak outlook for meeting Americans' future retirement needs. ... "'A lot of people in America think there is a trust -- that we take your money in payroll taxes and then we hold it for you and then when you retire, we give it back to you,' Bush said in a speech at the University of West Virginia at Parkersburg.
"'But that's not the way it works,' Bush said. 'There is no trust "fund" -- just IOUs that I saw firsthand,' Bush said...
"[Susan] Chapman [of the Office of Public Debt] opened the second drawer and pulled out a white notebook filled with pseudo Treasury securities -- pieces of paper that offer physical evidence of $1.7 trillion in treasury bonds that make up the trust fund."
Later, Senator Rick Santorum made an odd admission for a Republican: ""You can't pay benefits with IOUs," he said on the Senate floor. "You have to pay it with cash."
And where will that cash - now nearly two trillion dollars - come from over the next decades as Boomers begin to retire?
Technically (and legally) it's simple - the Social Security Trust Fund will give back its IOUs to the Treasury Department and in exchange for them get cash to pay the Boomers' retirement checks. Practically, though, it'll be a crisis of biblical proportions. In order for the Treasury to come up with that kind of cash will require either massive tax increases or increased massive borrowing - at a time when we're already borrowing so heavily that China is propping up our economy with weekly loans.
Thus, Bush talks about a "crisis" in Social Security with some accuracy. But he doesn't dare tell us what the real "crisis" is, or how Reagan and Greenspan set it up, because when it becomes widely known that the real crisis is that Reagan set the course to steal Boomers' Social Security savings, it will destroy the reputation of both supply-side economics and the Republican Party for generations to come.
That Republicans and "conservative" Democrats have been able to perpetrate this fraud on America for the past 25 years tracks back to the initial and ongoing efforts of one man, Alan Greenspan, says Ravi Batra in his new book "Greenspan's Fraud: How Two Decades of His Polices Have Undermined the Global Economy."
And the Social Security fraud just outlined is only the beginning. Batra shows - in extraordinary (and easily understood) detail - how Greenspan has steadily worked for over two decades to sell out America's sovereignty and economic interests to those of the multinational corporations he so loves, and to sell out the working people of America (and their Social Security Trust Fund) to the super-rich who Greenspan has always represented.
Greenspan manipulated the stock market so his buddies could get rich, then warned them just in time to get out before it blew up. He's kept together tax cuts and pay increases for the CEO class by pumping cheap money into the economy so the Middle Class will go ever deeper into debt, setting up a housing bubble that could crash in a way that would make 1929 look like a mild bump in the economic road. And he's helped engineer and support international "free" trade policies that have disemboweled America's manufacturing and information technology sectors, with the happy result for Republicans that the once-politically-active and heavily unionized middle class is being replaced by a politically impotent mass of the working poor, too busy to worry about politics or challenge corporate news.
Most people, coming across this massive indictment of Greenspan, would probably react with skepticism. Why wasn't any of this in the paper? Why haven't I heard Democrats and liberals attacking Greenspan from the floors of Congress and in the progressive media?
As Batra points out, the truest testament to the power Alan Greenspan holds is that he's been able to do so much of this behind the scenes. He gently encourages and nudges, argues and lectures, leaks and pontificates. He suggests, rather than orders. And, of course, he holds the levers of the nation's money supply in his hands - making him a more fearsome threat to a sitting president or political party than J. Edgar Hoover ever was.
And, Batra documents, Greenspan has not been at all reluctant to use his considerable power to the benefit of those in office.
One example: During the Reagan and Bush presidencies, he was in favor of tax cuts. During Clinton's he was against them. During Bush Junior's he was again in favor of them.
Ravi Batra's book "Greenspan's Fraud" is not only required reading for all Americans because it so clearly lays out the crimes this man - and the Republican Party - have committed against the United States of America, but also because it's such a brilliant primer in macroeconomics overall. If you never were able to figure out, for example, what interest rates had to do with unemployment, or how the rich get richer in America while the poor get poorer, or why when the minimum wage is increased the economy gets better, Batra explains it all with elegance, wit, and comfortable clarity.
"Greenspan's Fraud" is one of the most important books you can read this year. Get two copies, because you're sure to have at least one friend you'll want to read this book, but your own copy will be so marked up and beloved that you'll not want to let go of it.
I finally got the chance to read through your article, "Collapse, & Takedown Of The U.S.A.," last evening and was stunned at the similarity it has to my "New Agenda for America." Well, I doubt it will seem quite so similar to you.
But for many years I have been playing around with this "puzzle" of global realpolitik that has always struck me as a "riddle within a mystery." My first epiphany occurred when my drug policy interests focused attention on Iran Contra. I recall very well the conversations I had with John Kerry's assistants that were involved with the investigation (Subcommittee On Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations (1988)." Specifically I recall how they all felt that the content of this investigation would lead to the impeachment of Ronald Reagan for committing what Moyer's would call a "High Crime" in his later summary of the Iran Contra investigation. In fact they sent me a complete copy of the subcommittee transcripts which I hold onto till this day.
Possibly the most troubling event that I witnessed -- far more serious than the administrations willingness to ignore the Boland Amendment -- was the little incident of Inouye (HI) insisting on not talking about the "Continuity of Government" program that Oliver North was also involved. It was almost as if someone had stuck him in the hinee with a cattle prod. 'This cannot be discussed within the context of these hearings" Well, these were not his exact words, but that was definitely the intent of those words. And I recall thinking at that moment, "something is badly amiss here."
It was during this time that I sensed that something was very wrong with our government.
In the 20 years that has passed I have sensed the need to derail this process. To that end I have authored a "New Agenda for America" which, at first, seems like a hoge poge of political planks. But what I really have in mind is steering this once great republic towards the industrious commonwealth that I have always believe that Washington, Jefferson, Franklin (and a host of others) foresaw.
Here is the list of planks for the "New Agenda for America"
NEW AGENDA FOR AMERICA: Preliminary Planks ========================================== Help Influence the 2008 Presidency [More info: http://www.newagecitizen.com and click on topic] [Video: http://www.newagecitizen.com/NAA.htm]
(1) Universal Health Care for All American Citizens (2) A 20-year moratorium on all immigration into the United States (3) Legal Marijuana for all Adults and Medical Patients (4) An immediate reversal to the Offshoring and Inshoring of American Jobs (5) A strict enforcement on issues of Separation of Church and State (6) An immediate move from so-called Free Trade Agreements to Bilateral Trade agreements (7) A major R&D project to bring energy independence to the United States and the World through recycling, reuse, ending hyper-consumerism and investing in the development of sustainable energy sources (e.g., solar, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal) (8) No further ownership of US Assets (businesses, homes, ports, stock exchanges) by foreign governments or individuals! (9) Replace the Federal Reserve with a People's Reserve which allows public oversight (10) Absolute support for Net Neutrality ==========================================
Though I have never read Douglas's book "Economic Democracy" his ideas, which you summarize, are exactly the intuitive conclusions that I had reached years ago. "Why should the elite be the only beneficiary of the technologies that make up our collective legacy as a species?" "Why have our founders caveat against Central Banking been so completely ignored?"
And then there is the 2008 Presidential Election. Ron Paul appears to have been systematically eliminated despite such a groundswell of support. And it is abundantly apparent that neither McCain or Obama have the will, or wisdom, to forge a new path. See my recent essay on Obama to understand that he is nothing more than another mouthpiece for the globalist agenda:
This essay of yours is the most succinct answer, to these questions. Not only does it summarize the motives of the global elite: it also provides some solutions. I suppose the big question is what can we do, as mere mortals, to thwart the further progress of this global juggernaut?
Much has been written about whether a worldwide plan exists to control events and steer them in the direction profitable to an elite of the rich and powerful. Is this a "conspiracy theory"? While it is difficult to be specific about who exactly may be behind such a conspiracy, if it exists, it is at least clear that the privately- managed system of global financial capitalism gives ample opportunity for the world's richest people to combine for their mutual benefit. Further, global financial capitalism itself is based on the monopolization of money-creation by a world banking system that is largely privately owned, even while working through the central banks of the largest and most prosperous nations. This article postulates the existence of a coordinated and longstanding matrix set up by the controllers of money to dominate the movements of history. The article focuses particularly on what seems to have been an attack that has been going on for over a century against the independence of the nations of Russia and the U.S. The article also suggests a series of monetary reforms whereby the U.S. , or any other nation, can regain its economic identity and preserve its political freedom. The article was written a short distance from the reconstructed colonial capitol building in Williamsburg , VA. On this site on May 15, 1776, the Fifth Virginia Convention voted unanimously to instruct its delegation at the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia to enter a motion for independence. It may be time to do that again.
Russian philosopher P.D. Ouspensky (1878-1947) wrote, "It is a mistake to think the times we are living in are like any other. These are extraordinary times."
Ouspensky, with his mentor, G.I. Gurdjieff, escaped from Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution, during the Russian Civil War. Though academia has failed to acknowledge it, this epochal convulsion was financed in part through the monetary resources of the international financial elite operating out of London, Amsterdam, New York, Paris, Hamburg, and Frankfurt.
It was this elite, acting through Western banks, which appears to have surreptitiously provided the wherewithal for Lenin and Trotsky to destroy the Russian nation after the fall of the Tsarist regime at the end of World War I. Support by the Western financiers is discussed by Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson in his revisionist history, The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism & Orthodoxy. (The Foundation for Economic Liberty , Washington , D.C., 2003)
The present analysis postulates that the takeover of Russia, whose backbone was the alliance among the House of Romanoff, the Orthodox Church, the land-owing nobility, and thousands of self-governing peasant communes, was one of two major projects which the financiers set out to accomplish early in the 20th century in a longer-range plan to dominate the globe. The other was the control and eventual destruction of the United States of America. That project may be reaching fruition through the ongoing and seemingly purposeful financial meltdown of 2008.
Why Russia and the U.S. ?
Events affecting nations have their roots in history, and people underestimate how what happens today is conditioned by the past. The respective fates of Russia and the U.S. have been linked for a long time.
The two countries had a close relationship during the American Civil War, when the Russian fleet anchored in New York and San Francisco harbors. In 1867, Russia sold the huge expanse of Alaska to the U.S. Later, the U.S. provided engineering support for Russian industrial development.
The two continental giants were, during the latter part of the 19th century, becoming the greatest land powers in the world. With Germany , Great Britain 's chief rival for economic might, added to the mix, the hegemony of the financiers' power base in Britain and northern Europe was threatened in a way not seen since Napoleon.
Both Russia and the U.S. were largely Christian nations, with a sizeable portion of the American population, especially recent immigrants, being members of the Roman Catholic faith. For centuries nothing had been a greater obstacle to the financial control of nations through war and finance than the Christian religion and its teachings against usury.
Plus neither the U.S. nor Russia had a central privately-owned bank. The U.S. had long since gotten rid of its own central banks, the First (1791-1811) and Second (1816-1836) Banks of the United States . The whole concept of commercial banking having control of a nation's economy was alien to the Russian and U.S. mindset.
Instead, wealth came from work. This was expressed by President Abraham Lincoln in a December 3, 1861, address to Congress when he said, "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."
Lincoln could make such a statement because the U.S. economy, as was the Russian, was deeply rooted in the soil. The backbone of the two cultures was the Russian peasant and the American yeoman farmer, as Thomas Jefferson called him. The merchant and artisan economies of the towns and cities in both nations were founded upon the wealth of the countryside which was derived from human and animal labor and from working the land. Even when industrialization began to flourish in the latter part of the 19th century, it was fueled in both countries largely through savings and retained earnings, not bank credit created "out of thin air" through fractional reserve lending.
Banker Domination
By the early 20th century, the bankers of Europe had a mission before them. If Russia and the U.S. could be controlled, nothing would stand in the way of the rule of humanity by the materialistic pseudo- religion of power and wealth by which the financiers were obsessed. As Max Weber (1864-1920) wrote in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, the acquisition of wealth was viewed as a sign that a person was one of the "elect." The financiers' sphere of influence was centered in northern Europe , where the anti-usury doctrines both of the Roman Catholic Church and Martin Luther (1483-1546) had been undermined through the teachings of John Calvin (1509-1564).
As is well known, banking in Europe began in the medieval period with store-front gold merchants who invented fractional reserve banking by lending certificates against a gold reserve held for their customers on deposit. By the time of the Renaissance, banking was centered in Italy and Germany , then spread north and west to the Netherlands , France , and England .
By this time the Catholic prohibition against usury was well- developed. Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) said charging of interest was "detestable to God and man, damned by the sacred canons and contrary to Christian charity." Theological historian John Noonan wrote that "the doctrine [of usury] was enunciated by popes, expressed by three ecumenical councils, proclaimed by bishops, and taught unanimously by theologians." ("Development of Moral Doctrine," 54 Theological Studies, 662, 1993)
Lending of money at interest was often left to the European Jews, where statements in various scriptures, such as the Talmud, appeared to allow the practice when dealing with non-Jews. Some argue that the Vatican worked behind the scenes by using Jews as fronts for their own lending operations.
In England , the Tudor and Stuart monarchs made a stand against the rise of bankers as issuers of currency. As Susan Boskey writes in her book The Quality Life Plan: 7 Steps to Uncommon Financial Security, "the Mixt Moneys Case of 1604 in England determined money as a public measure to be regulated by the state." According to Alexander Del Mar, head of the U.S. Department of Weights and Measures in the late 19th century and author of the book, History of Money in America From the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the Constitution, the Mixt Moneys Case determined that "the state alone had the right to issue money."
Boskey continues: "For over half a century, this ruling alarmed the merchants of London who attempted to defeat the Mixt Moneys decision. The East India Company was the main instigator in the effort, because they were eager to turn a profit by shipping silver to India in exchange for gold. Success was achieved with the British Free Coinage Act of 1666, which, according to Del Mar, 'altered the monetary systems of the world.' He wrote: 'The specific effects of this law were to destroy the royal prerogative of coinage, nullify the decision in the Mixt Moneys case, and inaugurate a future series of commercial panics and disasters which to that time were totally unknown.' Moneylenders known as 'strong room keepers' began the practice of making interest-bearing loans that were not backed one- hundred percent by the gold reserves remaining in their strong room."
"The British Free Coinage Act of 1666," continues Boskey, "marked a turning point in the role of currency creation as a public measure to one dominated by moneylenders. No longer was the act of putting money into circulation directly connected to the actual, existing material riches of a nation."
About this time, Samuel Pepys (1633-1703) was writing his now-famous Diary. According to Canadian monetary expert Martin Hattersley, Pepys "was describing in surprised delight the new institution of banking, by which the smart investor, instead of paying the goldsmith for warehousing his valuables, opened an account, and was actually paid interest for having his money looked after!"
Pepys was captivated by the familiar but pernicious notion that, instead of working for a living, a person could have his money "work for him." Aristotle had spoken against this concept 2,000 years earlier: "The most hated sort of wealth getting and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of all modes of getting wealth, this is the most unnatural." (1258b Politics)
Hattersley continues: "Who paid for Samuel Pepys' remarkable new service? Basically, the public did. Pepys, leaving his gold with the banker, enabled the latter to lend it out to a third party. Pepys had his 'money in the bank,' and the borrower took the gold. The borrower naturally paid interest on the loan. Pepys received interest on his deposit. The same money being (notionally) in the possession both of Pepys and of the borrower meant an increase in the monetary mass of the nation. All the holders of money in the nation, therefore, had the value of their holdings very slightly diluted. There was a profit to the banker on the 'spread' between borrowing and lending rates. There was a profit to Mr. Pepys, who at one and the same moment had both money in the bank and an interest bearing investment. Yet the borrower also profited. His loan would be at a lower interest rate than that on capital that had had to be saved up. 'Smart' bank financing put him ahead of conventionally financed competitors. All three parties gained, at the expense of the general public, the value of whose money was diluted through inflation of the monetary mass."
Finally, concludes Hattersley, "Skipping forward three centuries (past events such as the South Sea Bubble, tulip mania, the railway boom and the 1929 market crash) we find that the little spot of inflation that Mr. Pepys indulged in has become a universal way of life. The extensive capital development of Canada [and the U.S. ] in the post-World War II boom has been largely financed, not by personal savings and investment, but by the inflation of the money supply. This has left the thrifty who invested their little savings from the hard times of the Great Depression in mortgages, bonds, and life insurance deprived of most of the rewards of their thrift, and has caused the profits of inflation to benefit all who could borrow, build, and then repay their capital in deflated dollars later on."
Hattersley captures the essence of the modern usury-based economy. No longer is life based on honest human labor and the resources of nature, but on financial manipulation. This is why religious people have always viewed usury as a crime. Aristotle placed the usurer in the same category as others who "ply sordid trades," such as pimps.
Returning to the march of history, in 1688, James II, who had become a Catholic, fled the British throne. Through the "Glorious Revolution," he was replaced by the Protestants William and Mary of the Dutch House of Orange. The main instrument of power of the financiers who supported them was the Bank of England, founded in 1694.
The next two centuries saw the financiers' control of world commerce spread through the instrumentality of the British Empire . The bedrock of British policy was "free trade," which allowed British manufacturers who paid their workers a pittance to undersell their competitors elsewhere. This was aided by having the British pound become the world's trading currency.
With the First Zionist Congress of 1897, one of the financiers' geopolitical goals became to support the creation of the nation of Israel , at least partly to dominate the world's crossroads in the oil-rich Middle East . The oil was needed to fuel the British navy.
The nature and origins of Zionism have been hotly debated in recent years, as the role of Israel on the world stage has grown. One thing seems certain: The Jewish religion is by no means monolithic. But its followers, many of whom opposed the philosophy of Zionism, would now be drawn into the financiers' power game. From this point on, anyone who even questioned Zionism would be labeled "anti-Semitic."
As the 20th century advanced, the financier elite became heavily involved in getting rich off world war and the manufacture of the new weapons of mass destruction that modern technology made possible. Warfare and weaponry, combined with control of credit manufactured through the leveraging of industrial production, were to be the primary means of putting nations and their populations into debt. A materialistic slave society was being created, which books like 1984 warned against. Humanity was lured into compliance through the fantasy world brought about by the mass media by means of advertising, cinema, and television. Another enticement was the growing availability of mass-produced consumer goods.
How It Was Done
While World War I and the Russian Revolution still lay a few years in the future, the international financiers quietly took control of the U.S. economic system in 1913 through the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment to the Constitution which provided for the federal income tax. The purpose of this tax was to use citizens' earnings to pay the interest on the "funded" national debt. As with the debt owed by the British people to the Bank of England, this would be one so large the principle could never be paid off.
Russia was allied with Britain and France during World War I (1914-18). But the war against Germany and Austria-Hungary had reached a stalemate until the tide was turned by entry of the U.S. on the side of the Allies. Fighting on the eastern front between Germany and Russia was savage. By the end of the war the Russian Revolution broke out, and, after a terrible Civil War, the Soviet Union came into being.
It was the financier-controlled press which goaded President Woodrow Wilson into taking the nation into World War I on the side of England and France. But it was also part of the financiers' plan to shift the apparent focal point of their financial power from London to New York . This was done through the financing of the war by loans made to the European combatants by the New York banks.
It seemed to be in accord with a plan spelled out decades earlier by Cecil Rhodes, whereby the U.S. would not only be "recovered" for the British Empire, but would appear to become the senior partner in the enterprise. By the start of the 1920s, this objective had been accomplished. German, English, French, and other European taxpayers were all deeply in debt to the U.S. banks for the costs of the war.
Also during the war years the financiers had secured the issuance of the Balfour Declaration signaling British support for the establishment of a Zionist state in Palestine. The 1917 Declaration was made in a letter from Arthur James Balfour, British Foreign Secretary, to Walter Rothschild, Second Baron Rothschild, for transmission to the Zionist Federation.
During and after World War I, world financial power shifted to the New York banks through which, however, it would be the London-based elite exerting de facto control. It might also be said that starting with U.S. entry into World War I, once you look past the patriotic slogans, the U.S., its vast productivity, and the blood of its population have been used in making this country the worldwide military enforcer of international financier domination.
World War II became the means of consolidating financier control. Prior to that, during the years of the Great Depression, both Russia -aka the Soviet Union-and the U.S. were slipping away from the fold. Stalin had shown his "Bonapartist" tendencies by favoring "Socialism in one country," as well as by his deadly purges of the financier-controlled Trotskyite faction and his shocking rapprochement with Hitler in 1939 that seemed to foil the financiers' intent to play off Nazi Germany and the Soviets against each other.
In the U.S., President Franklin Roosevelt had taken steps during the Great Depression to rebuild the U.S. economy by exerting an unaccustomed degree of control over the Federal Reserve System and providing credit at low rates of interest to homeowners, farmers, and businessmen. This made Roosevelt seem to many wealthy Americans "a traitor to his class."
Roosevelt saw that a healthy and self-sustaining domestic economy is essential for the well-being of a sovereign nation. But instead of looking for ways to create a monetary system based on the productivity of the economy, as Lincoln had done with the Greenbacks during the Civil War, Roosevelt left intact the debt-based system overseen by the Federal Reserve. He added to this system the Keynesian idea of government deficit spending for public works to create employment. This was essentially a system whereby government would try to pay its debts by engendering inflation, a policy that has continued until today.
But World War II thwarted even these stirrings of nationalism in both countries. In both the Soviet Union and the U.S. , the financiers worked the levers of debt to build massive war machines. They were also working through the Western banks, including Brown Brothers Harriman in New York, to achieve the same ends in Nazi Germany. Eventually Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, and the U.S. entered the war. Both during and after the war, operatives from the international financial elite centered in London were the linchpins of a worldwide matrix of spying, assassination, terrorism, industrial espionage, psy ops, media manipulation, and monetary control. This included financing the founding of Israel as the Western bridgehead in the Middle East in 1948.
Despite the creation of an appearance of conflict between the West and the Soviet Union through the Cold War, the financiers continued to work both sides of the fence through their London-based operatives. In the U.S. they created the modern national security state with both the National Security Agency and the CIA firmly under their control. Then, after President John F. Kennedy moved to forestall the neocolonialist Vietnam conflict and replace the Federal Reserve with a U.S. system of silver-backed Treasury currency, he was shot dead in Dallas 's Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
In charge of convincing the public that the Warren Commission was correct in concluding that Kennedy was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, supposedly a lone deranged gunman, were figures associated with the financier elite from the New York Times, Washington Post, and Yale Law School . (See The Kennedy Assassination Cover-Up Revisited by Donald Gibson, 2005.) But in 1979, a report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations stated that Kennedy was killed by a "probable conspiracy."
It has been thoroughly documented that since World War II the Western intelligence agencies, all with close ties to the financial world, particularly the New York and London investment banks, have been responsible for engendering wars, revolutions, and mayhem in countries around the world, causing the deaths of millions of people in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and southeastern Europe.
Meanwhile, the worldwide arms industry, also under financier control, have produced the greatest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction ever seen. After Kennedy was killed, the U.S. moved to arm Israel as the leading military power of the region. Today nuclear weapons have proliferated, with Israel , Pakistan , and India becoming nuclear powers in addition to the U.S. , Russia , Britain , China , and France .
But warfare and weapons cost money, and by the late 1960s the Vietnam War was sinking the U.S. deeper into debt. The U.S. war machine was to be the main tool for financier enforcement of their worldwide plan of domination, but the nation was going broke. The problem was made worse by heavy federal expenditures for the poor and elderly through such programs as Medicare and Medicaid.
But President Richard Nixon's Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had a plan. The government worked out an arrangement whereby Saudi Arabia and the other OPEC nations would gradually increase the price of oil, with the profits to be used by the oil-producing nations to buy U.S. Treasury debt securities. By 1980 the cost of oil would be ratcheted up from about $3.50 a barrel to $39.50.
The drastic increase of the price of gasoline at the pump acted as a de facto tax on the U.S. economy. But the plan worked. The "petrodollar" and "dollar hegemony" were born, with the dollar becoming the world's reserve currency. Dollars could flood the world only because in 1971 the Nixon administration had abandoned the dollar's gold peg as a basis for international currency exchange. Now currencies floated freely in world markets with speculation and inflation rampant. The economies of the world were no longer based on production, but on financial manipulation. It was also the start of the era of monetarism, where the Federal Reserve thought it could regulate the economy by the raising and lowering of interest rates.
The Kissinger plan also made the U.S. dependent on Middle Eastern oil and turned it into the muscle behind the financiers' ambition for Israel to dominate the region. So now Americans, who had liberated Europe from the Nazis, had to fight and die for the financiers in the Middle East . The final conquest of Iraq , starting in 2003, and the planned war against Iran are the latest phases.
Meanwhile, through the financiers' control of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, the producing economy was shattered through the Fed- induced recession of 1979-83, where interest rates were raised to the highest in history to combat the inflation the financiers had themselves caused by the oil price shocks. By this time, as some allege, the controversial concept of "peak oil"-whether it really existed or not-was being used as a cover for financier manipulation of oil markets by limiting production in order to maintain prices.
By 1992, when Bill Clinton was elected president, the U.S. producing economy had been devastated by the shutdown of factories and the export of jobs. The work of wrecking the economy was completed by Clinton 's embrace of NAFTA, which has largely eliminated family farming in favor of financier-controlled agribusiness in the U.S. , Canada , and Mexico . Deregulation of the financial industry began in earnest during the Reagan years from 1981-89 and accelerated under Clinton .
By this time, the U.S. economy was being kept afloat only through financial bubbles that allowed the purchase of consumer goods to take place through more family and household debt. We had the merger- acquisition bubble of the 1980s, followed by the George H.W. Bush recession which led to Clinton 's election in 1992. During the 1990s we had the dot.com bubble fueled by foreign investment. Capital gains taxes on stock price inflation and counting trust funds like Social Security as budgetary assets allowed Clinton to balance the federal budget the last three years of his presidency.
But the dot.com bubble also burst with the loss of $7 trillion of wealth through the crash of 2000-2001. Next came the Bush bubbles-in housing, equity funds, commercial real estate, and hedge funds that have been deflating while threatening to destroy altogether the economic viability of what was once the world's greatest industrial democracy.
After this, the only bubble left for an economy that appears to be entering terminal depression may be the current fuel/food bubble that could result in the starvation of millions worldwide. Now the longstanding ambition of the financier elite for the destruction of the American republic may finally be realized-with a lot of help, of course, from their American friends.
"End Times"
Can it be that the last stage of the U.S. takedown is "The Project for the New American Century"? Is this ambitious plan for "global leadership" through military might that was seemingly invented by the "neocons"-many with dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship-a Trojan Horse?
It certainly appears that with 9/11 as a pretext, the neocons suckered the U.S. into the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq as a means of military occupation of the Middle East . Certainly 9/11 and the Iraq invasion benefited Israel, as some Israeli politicians have frankly stated.
Were the neocons also acting on behalf of the financial controllers in London and elsewhere? And was one reason the neocons were so eager to engage in a "clash of civilizations" against the Islamic world the Koranic prohibition of usury which states, "Those who charge Usury are in the same position as those controlled by the devil's influence. This is because they claim that Usury is the same as commerce. However, God permits commerce, and prohibits Usury." (Koran, Al-Baqarah 2:275)
Prior to 9/11, the Bush administration got Congress to cut taxes for the highest income brackets, reversing Bill Clinton's budget surpluses. The tax cut remained in effect, even as the massive expenditures on the Middle Eastern wars mounted. The consequence has been to bring the federal government to the brink of bankruptcy.
The last official act of this phase could well be the ultimate insanity of a U.S. attack on Iran . If successful, this would complete the Western conquest of the Middle East but may start a larger conflict that could eventually force the U.S. to withdraw its forces once the money runs out. Israel would then be at liberty to sweep in to dominate a region that U.S. military power had devastated.
Whatever may happen overseas, the U.S. economy at home is on the verge of collapse. It if does, we will have to retreat to our own shores and face here the edifice of a ruined nation with no manufacturing base, a crumbling infrastructure, an aging population, insufficient food, poorly developed resources, and the collapse of the dollar. Of course the prophets of doom who claim that overpopulation must inevitably lead to Malthusian scarcity will take all this as justification of their prejudices. The rumored North American Union, with its currency the amero, could then follow, both under the control of the financiers.
Meanwhile in Russia, things took a surprising turn when the Russian people threw out their communist controllers in 1991 and established a Russian republic. The financiers immediately took over through the government of Boris Yeltsin and began to divide up the nation's resources through their local allies, the "oligarchs." But the Russian people refused to comply. Despite desperate poverty, they elected Vladimir Putin, a nationalist leader who moved quickly to establish a self-governing Russian state that the financiers and the Western press clearly intend to take down. Russia is now back on the world scene, and a revival of the Orthodox Church is taking place. The drama in that country has not been entirely played out it seems.
As far as the U.S. is concerned, the financiers will have used us for a century, then thrown us in the trash. The U.S. may well be replaced by China, which the financiers seem to be grooming as the world's next military enforcer. China has the advantage of an absolutist one- party system which has achieved remarkable success in terrorizing its huge population into obedience and passivity. The financiers would not hesitate to sacrifice hordes of Chinese to fight both Russia and what may remain of the U.S. By this time, the European Union will likely have its own unified nuclear deterrent to protect the financial centers. The time may come when there will be Chinese bases in the U.S. as occupiers/military police.
The wisest and safest course for U.S. foreign policy could be a new alliance with Russia that would rekindle our affinity with that nation from over a century ago. But how likely is this in a world ruled by the financiers where the destruction of the two nations is a long-term goal?
One of the tools of financier domination in the meantime will likely be worldwide famine engineered by artificial shortages. This has already started and may cause hundreds of millions of people to die and their resources to be seized. The smokescreens for this will not only be peak oil but also global warming as a means of dealing with the world's "surplus eaters." Numerous non-profits and NGOs are greasing the skids with their insistent lobbying against even responsible economic development.
Now in the U.S. we will likely see riots, panic, martial law, plagues, epidemics, and prison camps, much of which has already begun with police crackdowns, anti-terrorist exercises, declining public health, erosion of civil liberties, and the world's largest prison population.
It is likely that the "American Century" is over and that the "New American Century" will really be the "No American Century." Outside of select pockets of prosperity around financial centers, resorts, and military installations, the U.S. is being destroyed. As an example, the residents of once-prosperous towns in Michigan have turned to the illegal manufacture of meth-amphetamine now that the jobs are gone.
We have been used and abused, though often suckered into it by our own stupidity and greed. We have allowed ourselves to serve the will of an alien force-the world's financial elite. Our payback now appears to be a looming national catastrophe.
Economic Restructuring
Economically, what is left of America must be rebuilt from the ground up. The flaw is not in the productivity of nature, the availability of resources, our ingenuity, nor our ability to work. The flaw has been in the capitalist financial system.
We must now rebuild three things: American family farming, since a nation that cannot feed itself cannot long exist; then infrastructure and manufacturing, which will require energy conservation and redevelopment of our energy resources; then income security tied to productivity but not always to employment-a basic guaranteed income for all. The best available treatment of the history and benefits of a guaranteed income may be found in Steven Shafarman's new book, Peaceful, Positive Revolution, Tendril Press, 2008.
The concept of a guaranteed income as a benefit of a modern industrial economy has been around for a long time. But it is often confused with job-creation. As indicated earlier, during the 1930s, British economist John Maynard Keynes came up with the idea of using government deficits to try to out-run unemployment through government- controlled pump priming. But in the long run his methods were doomed to fail as debt-based economic growth eventually reached its limits due to inflation. This is where we are today, with President George W. Bush now the largest deficit spender in history.
The most successful attempt to define a rationale for an honest and democratic monetary system, one based on human labor and not financial chicanery, was the Social Credit movement founded by British engineer C.H. Douglas (1879-1952). He first set forth his ideas in his book Economic Democracy in 1918 and continued to teach his system for the next thirty years, attracting a considerable following in Great Britain , Canada , New Zealand , and Australia .
Douglas explained the dynamic whereby the incredible productivity of modern technology can readily be harnessed to provide the material sustenance for all members of society, but fails to do so because there is a chronic shortage of purchasing power from the cumulative societal income realized through wages, salaries, and dividends. The main reasons income cannot keep pace with prices is that the latter include retained earnings for savings and reinvestment, along with depreciation of capital-i.e., the tools and facilities of production.
But the "gap" between prices and earnings (what Keynes was to call "aggregate demand") was viewed by Douglas as a benefit of a modern industrial economy rather than the curse which in the Depression was causing farmers to dump their milk in the fields because consumers lacked the money to purchase it.
Douglas saw this gap as the natural appreciation of the potential producing economy to which everyone in society was entitled as monetized shares. He said this appreciation should manifest in regular payments of a National Dividend by government from a calculated credit account not dependent on taxation or government borrowing. The National Dividend could be paid by a combination of regular stipends to citizens and/or through a system of price subsidies. And it would be non-inflationary.
Douglas went further by explaining that in real life the price-income gap was in fact filled-nature abhors a vacuum-but by bank lending at usury. This was why the banks got richer, while everyone else struggled just to survive. Banks also use their credit creating ability to acquire securities, such as Treasury bonds, with the government paying interest that is compounded because the debt is constantly being re-financed. Interest on the U.S. national debt is expected to exceed $500 billion in fiscal year 2009. To pay it, many social programs will be cut.
The technical explanation is provided by Canadian Social Credit expert Wallace Klinck, "Expanding interest charges being paid on exponentially compounding debt accumulates due to an industrial cost accountancy error related to allocating capital charges in retail prices which do not distribute equal incomes within the same production cycle. The growing disparity between prices and incomes is progressively worsened by the replacement of human labor by capital (technology)."
Under the current system, the banks steal the fruits of economic wealth which properly belong to the public as a whole, both workers and non-workers, and while the financiers were well aware of Douglas 's system, they hated it. Word went out in the 1920s that his name was never to be mentioned in the British press. John Maynard Keyes was said to have developed his own deficit-spending theories as a means to counter Douglas 's influence. And when Douglas visited the U.S. in the late 1930s, he was told to his face that he would never be allowed to introduce his ideas in this country.
Next Steps
To accomplish a program of real reform will require a strong president but possibly a political revolution to get one. Congressman Ron Paul has made history as the first major presidential candidate to call for the abolishment of the Federal Reserve. He is right. The first thing a president worthy of the name should do is eliminate the Federal Reserve as a bank-of-issue, get rid of our debt-based monetary system, and depose the bankers and Wall Street financiers from the seats of power. Ron Paul is also right that the U.S. should withdraw its military from overseas and stop trying to control the world.
What Ron Paul's candidacy proves is that in the internet age, with financial crises jumping from the headlines every day, and authorities such as Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson manifestly having no intention of making real changes, the public is ready to listen to new ideas. But even progressive analysts are so locked into outmoded concepts that they fail to realize an entirely new type of monetary system is needed.
The basic concept that must be understood, as expressed repeatedly by this author in past articles, is that credit is a power of nature that is part of the human "commons." Credit allows society to materialize value by drawing from future potential productivity into present actualized reality. Credit therefore should be treated legally as a public utility, like water or electricity.
Credit is not a mathematical abstraction that should be manipulated into building pyramids of debt. Such practices are suicidal for an economy. Rather credit is organic, deriving ultimately from human labor (including mental labor, as in the application of technology), along with the sun, the soil, natural resources, and the rain. Thus we have gone full circle to the beginning of this article, where Russia and the U.S. were cited as the two nations that best understood where real wealth comes from.
The management of credit may be licensed to responsible private parties who are accountable to public authority, but it should never be given away or "privatized" to individuals or corporations who manipulate it mainly for their own profit, as banks do today. It is the privatization of credit through the banking systems of the world which has loaded humanity with debt, rendered short-term profits the highest priority of all business endeavor, and made modern industrialization as much a curse as a blessing.
Note that credit differs in this discussion from the legitimate investment of capital derived from profits or savings whereby an individual risks a portion of his wealth through a contract with a producing entity. Capital markets that facilitate this type of investment fall under the category of commerce, not usury.
A national monetary system should reflect the treatment of credit as a public utility and thereby make possible responsible economic activity and the fair distribution of wealth. Some of the measures which should be implemented are contained in the American Monetary Institute's draft American Monetary Act. (www.monetary.org/) The resulting currency could be issued, not in the form of debt instruments like Federal Reserve Notes, but silver-backed Treasury certificates as in President Kennedy's program of 1963.
Features of a new monetary system could be as follows:
A guaranteed income, followed by a National Dividend, should be paid directly to citizens from a Treasury credit account without recourse to either taxation or government borrowing. (C.H. Douglas's theory of the National Dividend as the monetization of the net appreciation of the productivity of a modern industrial economy is set forth in this author's Global Research article entitled, "An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform for the United States ," April 26, 2007.) The National Dividend, currently estimated at over $12,000 per capita annually, could be distributed in a variety of ways, in addition to a subsistence stipend. This could include price subsidies for consumer purchases, taking over existing Social Security payments, universal health insurance, or payments to women with young children. Another way to issue a National Dividend would be to monetize food production, whereby anyone who delivers food products to wholesalers receives a government payment as a producer's subsidy, thereby discounting food at the consumer point-of-sale. This would work in a similar fashion to farm parity pricing programs of bygone days. As explained by Wallace Klinck, "Social Credit policy is to compensate retail prices at the point-of-sale. It is not, however, to subsidize production which would be subject to consumer choice and fully supported by consumers having at all times financial income adequate to fully liquidate the costs of production. That is, production policy is to be determined essentially by consumers-this being the Social Credit concept of genuine economic democracy with maximum decentralization, or dispersion, of power over production policy. Price controls under the present financial cost-accountancy system, where continued economic activity is dependent upon an inflationary expansion of credit to meet rising costs arising consequent to flawed accountancy, is demonstrably impossible. Price regulation, however, would appear to be both necessary and realistic under a self- liquidating Social Credit system of finance. Although not generally recognized, prices are 'controlled,' (or manipulated) under the present system of finance in a most deleterious manner."
The government should also spend money directly into circulation, as it did with Greenbacks in the 19th century, both for operating expenses and for infrastructure projects at the federal, state, and local levels. A national infrastructure bank could be capitalized by state and local infrastructure bonds without any impact on the federal budget. Such spending would again be without recourse to borrowing or taxation. Infrastructure spending could be either through grants or low-interest loans. As with Congressman Dennis Kucinich's current proposed infrastructure bank legislation, the program could specify that a requisite proportion of funding be spent on American-made products such as steel. We should reform banking by eliminating the catastrophic privately- controlled fractional reserve system. Instead, the government should lend money at a low rate of interest to banks, then use the proceeds to help pay for legitimate government expenditures in the areas of regulation or services. Use of the proceeds, combined with the new Greenbacks and savings from no longer having to pay interest on an unnecessary national debt, would eliminate the need for the federal income tax, allowing the 16th Amendment to be repealed. In fact, under a monetary system such as the one described herein, probably three-fourths or more of the current societal tax burden could be eliminated.
In order to clear the way for these reforms, bankruptcy reorganization of the entire $50 trillion of existing debt in the U.S. should be undertaken, with debt being restructured and paid down over time or simply written off. Bank lending for speculation, such as for mergers and acquisitions, equity and hedge fund speculation, and purchase of securities on margin has been explosively enabled through bankers' ability to move massive amounts of funds electronically. These leveraging practices should be outlawed, as they are abuses of the public interest. (According to the London Times, one John Paulson made $3.7 billion in hedge fund trading last year. "Mr. Paulson's firm, Paulson & Co, made a fortune from shorting America 's sub-prime mortgage markets.") A national fuel conservation program with real teeth should also be instituted. And at least half of the U.S. military budget should be eliminated, with half of the remainder devoted to energy R&D and domestic public works. Employees of the military-industrial complex will find many new career opportunities as the domestic economy revives.
As these measures are taken, the United States will no longer be dancing to the financiers' tune. We would be helping prepare a future where man's inhumanity to man as expressed through war and financial exploitation is no longer glorified. Such a future would be a milestone in the eventual enlightenment of the human race. But these are measures that must be implemented now, before it is too late.
While we await these epochal changes, more modest steps may be in order. The author is often asked for personal financial advice. His advice is to invest in yourself and in other people. Plant a robust home garden. Learn new skills. Start community food co-ops that buy local products. Establish local currencies and barter networks. Join or form a union. Raise bees. Put kids through school. Get out of debt. Pray and meditate. Become politically active. Demand change.
Richard C. Cook is a former U.S. federal government analyst, whose career included service with the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House, NASA, and the U.S. Treasury Department. His articles on economics, politics, and space policy have appeared on numerous websites. His book on monetary reform is entitled We Hold These Truths: The Promise of Monetary Reform and will be published this autumn by Tendril Press. He is also the author of Challenger Revealed: An Insider's Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age, called by one reviewer, "the most important spaceflight book of the last twenty years." His website is at www.richardccook.com. Questions, comments, or contributions may be directed to economicsanity@gmail.com .
Comment: Unfortunately Dobb's screws up when he asks, "Let's be honest. Does Washington even know?" Of course Congress knows that Corporations are displacing Americans with H1-B's. They passed the legislation and they are working to make sure that more Americans are displaced by raising the caps on foreign visas. The question is what are we going to do about it. I recall that hemp rope has always made for a efficient and reliable hangman's noose. [BC]
On Monday, we reported that the Nielsen Company, the company that measures television ratings, has been replacing American workers with cheap foreign labor. Nielson, like many companies before it, is replacing good-paying middle class jobs and abusing the federal government's H1-B visa program process in the future. The biggest users of H1-B visas in fact are Indian outsourcing companies. Now some communities are telling Washington they've had enough of seeing jobs in their communities shipped overseas or labor shipped overseas to their communities.
Bill Tucker has our report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The city counsel in Florida is not suffering quietly the sting of Nielsen's actions. The company is taking the jobs away from American workers, giving the jobs to foreign workers on guest worker visas, and requiring the fired workers to train them. Most of those jobs ultimately will be transferred out of the country.
GREG RUBLEE, OLDSMAR CITY COUNCIL: What Nielsen has chosen to do in exploiting the H1-B visa program, by American standards, it's fundamentally wrong and it's fundamentally unpatriotic.
SUZANNE VALE, OLDSMAR CITY COUNCIL: I'm incensed our government would allow this to happen to the American people. This is all about driving down the wages in this country. To me, it's unAmerican.
TUCKER: Because of the uproar over the outsourcing, Nielsen said it would forego millions of dollars in tax incentives this year. It's been receiving those incentives for the past four years. Counsel members admit there's nothing more they can do aside from express their anger. They're calling on Congress and voters to wake up now.
ERIC SEIDEL, OLDSMAR CITY COUNCIL: It's a huge issue that's getting worse, especially hitting us at times when the economy is not very good. I think Washington, it's not to pass the buck. I wish we had the authority to do something. JANICE MILLER, OLDSMAR CITY COUNCIL: People need to call Senator McCain, and Senator Obama, finding out what their stance is on this issue. They're running for the president. They need to find out where they stand. This is important. Our jobs are going overseas.
TUCKER: Nielsen acknowledges the losses but responds by noting that roughly 1,300 jobs will remain in the city.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: However, critics are Nielsen and Oldsmar are a little leery of any promises or assurances from the company. They pointed o
In Zbigniew Brzezinski’s The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997), he outlines his case for how current American global supremacy should be used to further a long running elite plan for the unification of the world under the dictates of the United Nations. 
What do you do when you want to screw only the working people of your nation with the largest tax increase in history and hand those trillions of dollars to your wealthy campaign contributors, yet not have anybody realize you've done it? If you're Ronald Reagan, you call in Alan Greenspan.