Friday, September 28, 2012

Demand Freedom, not Free Stuff

"I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. That is the chief meaning of freedom. Until we can re-establish a condition under which the earnings of the people can be kept by the people, we are bound to suffer a very distinct curtailment of our liberty."

President Calvin Coolidge in his 1925 inaugural address

In these days of political discourse, I am amazed at the number of people who are still worshipping at the feet of some political party or the other, mostly the other. While a significant number of people have "awakened," (become aware that the whole political system is a scam and that most politicians are bought and paid for by corporate interests, mostly banks and the financial sector, and couldn't care less about you) there are still those zombies walking around out there spouting fear based propaganda (i.e., talking points) and insisting that everything will get better if only their guy is granted control of the magical scepter of power.

Those who pimp one party or the other (mostly the other) simply will not admit to themselves that the whole system is broken and corrupt (especially their own party), that voting solves nothing, and that they're going to have to personally do something more than take a trip to the polling place every four year years in order to change things for the better. They may have to come to the conclusion that they're going to have to grow up sooner rather than later because there may soon be no one else there to take care of them.

I contend that the answer to many, if not all, of our societal problems is freedom. It's important to understand the concept I'm trying to get across here, as freedom means different things to different people. I define freedom as a state of human condition where one is in charge of his own destiny and is therefore independent of coercive influences. In order to be truly free certain criteria must be met. As I go over those criteria you may find that, by my definition, the vast majority of Americans are not free. Indeed, we may all be encumbered in some way, shape or form, but if the encumbrance was sought voluntarily it's different than having it forced upon one's self. The difference is in degrees and history has shown us that the freer a people are, the more productive, prosperous and by some measures the more happy they are.

There are many people who are fearful of freedom. They fear either not having anyone there to take care of them when they are in need, or the retribution that may be sought by angry mobs who are not being taken care of, among other things. This is the politics of fear, and it is very divisive. It pits one group of people against another and takes the focus away from the real culprits and issues that should concern us all.

People who promote these politics will talk about things like free food for the poor, free healthcare, free telephones, free rides, free this and free that. They will make the claim that people have a right to these "basic necessities," that providing such necessities is the duty of an advanced free society. These lofty goals may be good, but is government force really the way to go about achieving them? Is stealing from one class of people to give to another class moral? I think not. Extortion, even under the guise of taxation and justified by a moral cause and good intentions, is an immoral way to provide for those less fortunate. To "give" free things to one class is to enslave another. When one advocates freedom, one advocates the abolition of all types of slavery.

I keep hearing about percentages. There's the 99% and the 47% which means they're pitted against the 1% and the 53%. Is this how we really want to limit our society, by having a certain percentage pitted against another certain percentage? Do we want to fall into that mind trap? Do we want to be so immersed in group think that we forget we are all individuals with individual needs, wants and desires? Do we really want to exude hatred toward another group who have worked hard and made the most of their opportunities rather than joining together and concentrating on the group that has systematically and incrementally removed opportunity for all over the decades? Have we become a society of slaves blaming other slaves and ignoring the masters?

Here's a little history. The modern day income tax was first employed in this nation in 1913, the same year the Federal Reserve System was created. Coincidence? I think not. Back then, it was supposed to tax only the top 1% of income earners. 1%, sound familiar? Back then, the top 1% was anyone earning more than $14,000 per year. You wanna talk about inflation? Nobody cared much because, I mean, what the heck, it only affected the top 1% and who gives a crap about any of them, right?

So, incrementally, little by little as time passed, the burden of income taxes was spread to the lower income earners because everyone needs to pay their "fair share" until today when most every worker, most every laborer, has taxes taken directly from their paycheck and then they have to take the time out of their own busy lives or pay someone else to do government paperwork so they can get their own money back. What kind of craziness is this? Now, 100 years later, income taxes affect just about everyone. And, here's the kicker, the only people who really benefit from the income tax are the central bankers as just enough income taxes are collected to pay off the interest on the national debt. How about that? So this 53% against 47% BS is just a smokescreen to keep people from seeing the real issue, the issue of who's really getting the money.

I have a solution for all this rhetoric splitting us into percentages, this crap that makes people want to check out what's in others' pockets. How about "we" have 100% of the population not paying income taxes? How about "we" admit to ourselves that income taxes are extortion and "we" have all been taken advantage of by a group of central banking thugs? How about "we" stop being a certain percentage debt slaves laboring for the federal government a certain percentage of the year (there's a reason they call it "tax freedom day")? How about "we" stop worrying about what will happen to us if "we" refuse to pay our income taxes? Maybe then 100% of us would have nothing to gripe about and we'd all stop worrying about who pays what to whom.

There's another lesson we can learn from history. That lesson is the freer a society, the more it prospers, the more authoritarian a society, the more it deteriorates into chaos. This can be looked at another way. The more society thinks in terms of individual rights, the more it prospers, the more it thinks in terms of group rights, the more morally bankrupt it becomes. Perhaps this is because when men are free society has a tendency to look at things from a more loving point of view, but when men are enslaved by the chains of government dictates, especially a highly centralized, authoritarian government, society has a tendency to look at things from a more fearful point of view.

All major religions have their version of the golden rule, treat others as you would treat yourself. So, if you want to be free, you have to allow others to be free. If you want to make decisions for your own life, you have to allow others to make decisions, however bad or wrong you may think they are, for their own lives. If you want to keep all the money you earn and decide where to spend it, you have to let others keep all the money they earn and let them decide where to spend it.

Free stuff is not free. It comes at the price of dependency. It comes at the cost of moral degradation as society as a whole comes to believe that theft and extortion are moral ways to go about taking care of business. Whether you are a welfare mom or a weapons dealer on corporate welfare, you are dependent on an immoral system that takes money in an involuntary manner. A free society might sound scary, but when you look at them historically you might come to the realization that the fear factor comes not from an historical basis, but is based upon propaganda from those who stand to benefit from creating a more collectivist way of life.

We would all be better off if we could whittle down the federal government. We would all do much better if the federal government was scaled back to a Constitutionally limited size. To do this some people need to realize that freedom does not mean free stuff. If we are to have freedom we need to stop asking the government for favors and start taking care of ourselves and our neighbors. We need to tell government to stop using the money given to them to socially engineer society. We need to decentralize government and bring politics closer to home and community where politicians can be more easily held accountable. We need to demand freedom, not free stuff. We need to deny consent.

My archives can be found at my website Please visit there to read more and support me by making a donation.

For a time my books will be available exclusively at from Kindle Direct Publishing. As a special offer, for those of you who may have missed it the first time, on Oct. 3rd, Oct. 4th and Oct. 10th, 2012, the full versions of all my ebooks will be available for free to download. Please help support me by downloading my ebooks for free on those days. The more downloads I get, the better. Tell your friends. If you don't have a Kindle, offers a PC version for free. Please download and enjoy.

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Edge of Sanity

The Ouijiers

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Conspiracy Theories and the Spiritual Realm

I am once again about to step into the realm of speculation and the most extreme conspiracy theories, as I am wont to do. Today I wish to delve into one of my favorite conspiracy theories, the one that states that those in charge of running the world, the ones I like to call the establishment elite, have to tell us what they're going to do to us before they can do it to us. This is an interesting theory that makes the claim that in the spiritual realm if one tells someone else what they're going to do before they do it and that person doesn't object, it makes it okay to do whatever they want without having to be accountable for it in some kind of cosmic law.

This actually sounds quite free market, libertarian in certain aspects. It's kind of a sort of extra dimensional version of the man who wants to be eaten getting together with the man who wants to eat him, a situation that arose in Germany not so long ago. Both men obviously needed psychological help, but if they were just exercising their free will who are we to interfere? Oh man, I don't believe I went there, but then I am exploring the world of the extreme right now. The point is that on a spiritual level these people seem to believe that they have the right to do cruel, unjust, despicable things to whole populations if they simply tell us their plans and no one (or not enough people) objects. This is at least my understanding.

The problem for the elite is that they plan on doing some truly awful things. Going down the proverbial rabbit hole, we find they want to kill most of us and enslave the rest of us. They plan to accomplish this through several means, including genetically engineering food, using heavy metals and adjuvants as preservatives in vaccines, spraying from military airplanes, using public schools to dumb down the children, controlling the economy by controlling currency production, setting up an American police state which will be the center of an authoritarian, collectivist, corporate owned world empire complete with concentration camps, work camps and re-education camps, etc. In other words they plan on using conquest, war, famine and death to usher in their new world order. So, how can they tell us all this is the plan they have for us and not have anyone object?

The answer to this is that they do so through the entertainment industries such as the movies. The entertainment you pay $10 to watch on a Friday or Saturday night is not really entertainment at all, it's the elite telling you their plans for you. They talk of Satanism, matrixes, amazing futuristic technology, dysfunctional utopian societies and even alien invasions and audiences across the land applaud enthusiastically as they watch such things. The elite take this as approval for their plan. Ah, but more than this, some of the pop stars that we watch on youtube, including many of the rock stars that I grew up with, are also part of this plot. Whether they know this or not is questionable, but their music drops hints of what's to come or what the conspiracy is all about. It's pervasive throughout the industry and sprinkled in with meaningless entertainment.

Now, I'm not saying that I believe or disbelieve this particular conspiracy theory, but I will say this. I do not approve of their plans. In fact, I vehemently disapprove of their plans. And you don't need the movies to tell you such conspiracies exist, you just need to listen to what some of these elitists are saying or look at what they've written. The fact of the matter is that such plans are evil, no matter how good their intentions may be, or even if they may feel they are trying to save the world. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Those that perpetrate such madness know what they're doing is wrong, and that's why they try to hide it. They might pretend that they're following some supreme spiritual law to cleanse their souls of responsibility, but deep down they know their malice and cruelty knows no bounds. The ends do not justify the means, and much of the time the ends wished for aren't ever realized because the means used were so cruel and unjust.

To clarify, I consider evil as the attempt to subvert free will and limit choice by force, threats, deception or coercion. Free will is a gift of nature given to all human beings and to try to control it in others for personal gain is tantamount to enslavement. There are, of course, differences in degrees, but fraud is fraud, no matter how you try to hide it. Deception is deception. Showing something in a movie, or through a rock star, or in a book, or through any kind of popular entertainment is not equivalent to telling the masses of your plans and does not exonerate you of accountability in this realm or the next. If someone believes something is pure entertainment, they certainly are not consenting to some sick fantasy of some Lucifer worshipping elitist. If this conspiracy theory isn't true, then I think whoever originally propagated it did so to obfuscate and confuse, if it is true than those who are a part of it have some definite psychological problems.

While it might be interesting and even amusing to consider conspiracy theories such as the one described, what is often lost in the debate is the potential for evil and damage to be done. Whether or not certain conspiracy theories are true, the allegations brought about should not be dismissed off hand. The former president Bush once stated that we should never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories, but to me that smacks of bunk. That sounds like something the guilty would endorse in order to hide the truth rather than discover it.

Nothing should be discounted simply because it seems unlikely or sounds crazy. In history and in nature, it is likely that crazier things have already happened. Indeed, investigation should be welcomed with open arms into such matters, especially if they come from independent sources with more to lose than to gain. It seems to me that it is those who off handedly debunk or simply take the word of those in "authority" who have closed their minds and should be mistrusted. Those who have taken the time to dig and uncover hidden links and facts should be given due consideration. When eyes are opened, they may be surprised at what they see.

My archives can be found at my website Please visit there to read more and support me by making a donation.

For a time my books will be available exclusively at from Kindle Direct Publishing. As a special offer, for those of you who may have missed it the first time, on Oct. 3rd, Oct. 4th and Oct. 10th, 2012, the full versions of all my ebooks will be available for free to download. Please help support me by downloading my ebooks for free on those days. The more downloads I get, the better. Tell your friends. If you don't have a Kindle, offers a PC version for free. Please download and enjoy.

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Edge of Sanity

The Ouijiers

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Does the GOP Care About the General Election?

Recently I engaged in posting lists of questions on my facebook page in an effort to get people to think about the paradigms they base their political opinions upon. I'm trying to get them to realize that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. I'm trying to get them to realize that when they vote for Democrats or Republicans they are voting for their own enslavement. It is not an easy task as most people prefer to live in a state of denial where they believe government loves them, knows what's best for them and strives to protect and provide for them. They will not admit that the whole system has become corrupt and cares only about preserving itself. That would mean having to discard lifelong beliefs and many are simply too psychologically weak to do such a thing. They simply don't want to face the possibility that their whole world has been based on lies and that their lives are not theirs.

This year, with the advent Ron Paul's quite successful run for the presidency, many a Republican has come to the conclusion that the political process is either broken or was never truly set up to represent the will of the common folk or to make life better for the grassroots. I say that Ron Paul's run was successful not because he became the Republican nominee for president, which he didn't, but because he managed to awaken so many Republicans who might have otherwise still been blindly and blissfully following the party line like sheep being led to the slaughter. It's too bad some similar phenomenon didn't happen on the Democrat side of the equation as far too many of them seem satisfied sucking on the teat of big government and begging to be taken care of. They just don't seem able to come to the realization of what for many is the very first step toward awakening, the realization that both parties are the same.

Mitt Romney is an obvious puppet, a man who should have never sought the GOP nomination. He is such a Democrat as to have designed the cornerstone of the Democrat Party's greatest so called achievement, the overblown healthcare bill that no so called congressional representative ever had a chance to fully read and comprehend before they voted for it. They are both bought and paid for by the same financial special interests. They are so alike they might have been raised in the same collectivist family. Their ideals are so similar that it has become comical to watch the Democrat zealots derisively pointing out Mitten's faults while ignoring the same faults in their man Barry. With the disgraceful exclusion of Ron Paul supporters and the false pageantry of Mitten's coronation, the Republican Party made it clear they couldn't care less if they win or lose the election, they just want to be certain one elitist, collectivist puppet or another gets selected. As such, they don't care how many Republican faithful they've lost. The Republican Party might very well have destroyed the last vestiges of its credibility with the selection of such an obvious anti-conservative.

Our government has become a criminal enterprise. The Constitution has been violated a thousand ways till Sunday. Politicians don't give a crap about it because the people don't give a crap about it. As long as the government gives the common folk a bit of money, or the illusion of security, or the illusion that they'll be taken care of, or something to make them feel good about themselves, or some other crumbs that fall from the table where the ruling class gorges itself, they'll let the government get away with doing the things it was never authorized to do. Whether the people are unwilling or unable to enforce the Constitution and limit government as it should be doesn't really matter in the long run. All that truly matters is that the criminals are getting away with their crimes and the more people that recognize this problem, the better.

It was for this reason I started asking questions of people. Since the Democrats didn't have a Ron Paul they could listen to, they need something else to jump start their synapses (as do Republicans that actually think Mitt Romney is conservative). They didn't even get the benefit of having someone run against the incumbent this year and so they didn't even get to see one of their own compare their glorious leader to the neocons they have come to despise, even though he is more neoconish in some aspects than the most hated Bush ever was.

If you are going to participate in the masquerade that is voting, then I suggest you cast your vote for anyone other than the two establishment cronies that they have picked for you. If you're worried about a vote for this person being a vote for Mittens, or a vote for that person being a vote for Barry, relax. It's all pre-ordained by the powers that be anyway. After all, if you don't understand by now that the true power isn't in the hands of politicians, if you don't understand that the powers that be wouldn't leave such an important decision in the hands of the unwashed masses, then you're awestruck by the illusion and not peeking behind the curtain to see what's really going on. Below are some questions to ponder that will hopefully help to shake the awestruck from their collective trances.

Are you stuck in a political rut? Do you believe that societal problems can only be solved by use of government force? Are you of the opinion that there are only two sides to political problems? Do you believe that we are all too stupid to figure out how to solve problems on our own and that politicians are smart enough to do so? Do you think we have to vote for one of two nimrods for supreme leader?

Are you better than me? Are you better because you're a Democrat and I'm not? Does that make you more concerned about social issues than I am? Are you better because you're a Republican and I'm not? Does that make you more concerned and knowledgeable about economic issues than I am?

Do you think that because some libertarian believes something that I must also believe the same thing? Even if he's a famous libertarian? If that libertarian were to say something really stupid would that mean all libertarians were really stupid? Are there issues much more important than the stupid thing the libertarian said? Would people latch hold of what that libertarian said, rub it in the face of all libertarians and then claim rhetorical victory and moral superiority? What if I was an anarchist, would that make me a bad person? Are you being active, or simply reactive? Are you truly putting thought into your political views and actions, or are you merely doing what someone else is telling you to do and feeling what someone else tells you to feel?

Have you given away your power? Do you know what's best for you, or does someone else? Does the school know what's best for your child, or do you? Does your insurance know which doctor is best for you? Does the government know which insurance is best for you? How much responsibility for your life have you given over to others? How much of that trust has been abused? How much choice do you truly have? How much of your choice and responsibility are you willing to relinquish?

Do you believe in democracy? Do you think there is wisdom in crowds? Do you believe the majority always knows what's best? Do you think it's ok for 50% + 1 to tell the rest of us what to do? How to think? How to feel? Do you think it's ok for 50% +1 to force everyone else to behave in a certain way? To buy certain products? To pay for certain services? To force people to use certain services they may not want to use?

Do you believe it's ok if the representatives of the majority force people to behave in certain manners? To pay for and use certain goods and services? Do you believe it is ok to murder one person if everyone else wants that person dead? Would it be ok for 99% to kill 1%? If so, what percentage would that stop at? 98% to 2%? 95% to 5%? 90% to 10%? 80% to 20%? 60% to 40%? 50% + 1 to everyone else? If not, is it because you believe that individual rights should be honored no matter what the majority thinks? Do you believe that people put in power really know what's best for everyone simply because more people voted for them?

Do you still believe in democracy? Do you believe the federal government of the USA is a democracy? Do you believe it is based on democracy? Do you believe the founding fathers meant for it to be based on democracy? If you still believe in democracy, is it only good if it benefits you, when your principles, ideals and agenda are supported by the majority, or would you happily support the majority even if you disagreed with them? Even if it was detrimental to you? Even if it interfered with your natural rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Would you disobey bad laws because they are bad even if the majority agrees with the laws, or would you merely say nothing and go along to get along? How extreme would those laws have to become before you said or did something about it? Should we always go along with the will of the majority, or is honoring the natural rights of individuals a more important principle and actually better for the greater good?

Perhaps the time has come to evaluate other options and to stop doing what hasn't worked so far. Perhaps it is time to realize that voting does not work, that change for the better has not happened through using the ballot box. Perhaps we need to ignore the ruling class and start living life as the free people we are. Perhaps it is time to support those who decide for themselves to do so. Perhaps it is time to stop aggressing against our neighbors and start honoring their choices. Perhaps it is time to deny consent.

My archives can be found at my website Please visit there to read more and support me by making a donation.

For a time my books will be available exclusively at from Kindle Direct Publishing. These are fine works of fiction that I'm sure you'll enjoy. Please help support me and my efforts by purchasing one of the following titles.

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Edge of Sanity

The Ouijiers

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Politicians, Language and Control Mechanisms

"If you got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Barrack Obama

I realize that the above quote is taken out of context and that some people will argue that its simple reading isn't what Barrack meant. I know they'll say that he was stating that government has built the infrastructure upon which business is built. That might be technically true, but there's a couple of problems with that. First off, I think Barrack means just what he said in that simple sentence. I think he believes that because he has never done anything worthwhile on his own, he's always had someone holding his hand in one way or another as he's made his way through life. People seem to forget, both his father and his stepfather were men of power and privilege. He was brought up as a child of power and privilege. I think Mitt probably feels much the same way Barrack feels, though he likely would claim just the opposite. A politician is a politician, and politicians lie and break promises.

Another point is that just because the infrastructure was built by the government doesn't mean it wouldn't have been built if the government didn't do it. The fact is, we don't know what kind of a job a true free market would have done in building infrastructure. People seem to forget that at one time roads were private, yet many were still free to travel upon. The fact is that humans, when looking to benefit themselves, will look around their environment and use the tools they see at their disposal to build a better life for themselves if possible. Ancient humans would pick up rocks and sticks to use for their benefit and modern humans learn to type on keyboards and surf the Internet. Just because they use the infrastructure to build a business upon doesn't mean somebody else made it happen. You did the work, you should keep the profits.

Politicians love to twist words. They love to convolute concepts. That's because they love control. Think about it for a second. What do they call themselves? Among other things, they like to be known as lawmakers. Ooo, they make the laws, not you or I. They like to make it sound like they're special, like they're better than everyone else. They're not. In many ways they often demonstrate that they are the lowest of the low, and it seems to me more so the higher they get up the political ladder. What is a law, anyway? Mostly, it's a form of control. Mostly, it's words on a piece of paper that expresses how someone else feels you should behave. Mostly, it's something that dictates how you must interact with someone else or face the threat of government sanction, which can include fines, prison and even death. And most laws make crimes out of voluntary behaviors that victimize no individual.

The concepts they have twisted the most, and the ones that give them the most power, are the concepts of theft and fraud. They've done this by changing the words around and making these concepts seem moral and just to everyday people. For instance, they call theft "taxes" and say they must have them in order to provide you with certain services.

"Wait a minute," I've heard some people argue, "Taxes aren't theft. They're a necessary evil. Society couldn't operate if there weren't taxes. What about the roads? What about the schools? What about police and firemen? What about the courts? Who would provide us with running water? Who would take care of the poor and downtrodden? How would the country defend itself?" Etc., etc. etc.

These are all fine questions with really unlimited answers. The truth is, I don't know how all that would shape up without taxes, but I somehow feel that things would work out. Anyhow, that's missing the basic premise of why taxes are theft. To me, theft is when someone either takes my property without my knowledge or permission, or steals my property using some kind of force, coercion or threat to my life or well being. My property includes the money I've earned. Theft occurs when my money is taken involuntarily from me. Taxes are not voluntary. I only pay my taxes because I am afraid of going to jail if I don't. That sounds pretty involuntary to me, and very coercive. The immorality of taxes is clear.

You say you pay your taxes voluntarily? That's fine with me. I will allow you to do that, just as I will allow you to give voluntarily to your church, and that's how I feel government should operate. The question is, will you allow me to not pay my taxes just like you would allow me not to give to your church? No? You think I ought to pay my "fair share"? What is my "fair share"? Maybe you think it's 10%. Maybe he thinks it's 25%. Maybe they think it's 50%. Maybe those getting the money think it's 75%. I think it's 0%. I think that maybe I should have to pay only for the products and services I use, and I think I should have choices that are provided from people other than the monopoly that calls itself government. There should be alternatives.

All I ask for is that I get to keep what is rightfully mine, what I've rightfully earned. All I ask is that I get to decide what to do with my earnings, not some politicians in some far off place who use them for their own agendas and self aggrandizement. All I ask is that I be left alone to make decisions for myself.

Politicians also use fraud to hang unto power. We all know they make promises they don't keep, but they also make promises they shouldn't be allowed to keep. They promise to steal from one group of people (the rich) to give to another group (the poor). In this way they want to be viewed as some kind of Robin Hood. What we seem to forget is that Robin Hood stole from the aristocracy (the government) and gave back to the people the money was originally stolen from in the first place (the tax payer). This little tidbit of information seems to be lost on many people. There is a vast difference between the rich who have earned their money honestly and the very wealthy who have used government force to obtain ill gotten gains through such means as government granted monopoly privilege and overbearing regulations and licensing schemes that create financial barriers to limit competition.

The best example of this that I can think of is, of course, the Federal Reserve. They have a monopoly on currency creation. This monopoly was granted by a few men who knew how to pull certain levers of power and circumvent the checks and balances that likely would have prevented its creation. Check into its creation for yourself. Read G. Edward Griffin's "The Creature From Jekyll Island." Ask yourself, why would such wealthy men go to such lengths to create the Federal Reserve System? What was in it for them? Do you truly think they did it for humanitarian purposes, as they would have you believe? What did Mayer Amschel Rothschild mean exactly when he said "Let me issue and control a nation´s money and I care not who writes the laws."?

Do these central bankers think they're above the law? Economic law? Natural law? The Constitution of our great republic? Do they believe they control everything, and everyone? Do they believe they own everything, and everyone? Do they still hold fast to the old belief system of the divine rights of kings? Are they jealous of the American dream of freedom and self determination? Are they really out to destroy such whimsical fantasies?

One thing is certain in my mind, these men wield tremendous power over our political system, far too much power. The politicians go out of their way to try to protect them. They make certain secrecy rules. They cover up or keep under wraps any nefarious dealings. They write laws to prevent close scrutiny of their activities. They prevent even their own organization from competing with them. They spew propaganda declaring that they are too big to fail when the too big should fail. They break and repeal old laws that might stand in the way of their complete economic domination over mankind. If the above questions are to ever have light shed upon them, we will need to sweep aside the politicians and the media lackeys who are protecting them.

There's one more fraud that seems to me has been perpetrated upon not only the American people, but people all over the world. That fraud is the notion that corporations, in particular extremely large multinational corporations, are straight forward businesses. I'm not talking about small time businesses that have incorporated, I'm talking about the supposedly too big to fail corporations that have formed cartels. It seems to me that these corporate interests have manipulated the public sector to do their bidding and are working to centralize their influence and rid the world of honest, hard working small business folk who might threaten to actually compete with them. These corporations have formed marriages with many governments, and there's something about the marriage of corporations and government that just doesn't sit right with me, more so if the corporation is a polygamist.

I know some small businesses have incorporated and some feel that they have to in order to compete and protect themselves. But there is a price to be paid. Remember, a corporation is a legal entity. Laws are written by government. When one becomes a legal entity, one becomes a government entity to a certain extent. When one has agreed to follow the government's set of rules in exchange for a measure of protection, one has given up a measure of one's sovereignty. One must follow government rules and regulations, even if they are contrary to what one might feel is best for the operation of the company. One is also subject to more expenses and higher taxes as a corporation, which is why government likes it. In a way, one purchases an insurance policy from government by incorporating. So, if one incorporates, in a roundabout sort of way, somebody else is helping to make business growth happen. A more accurate statement might be "if you have incorporated, someone else is making it easier for you to take risks." And now we have come full circle.

Politicians use language as a mechanism to gain control. I said earlier that politicians lie and break promises, but perhaps that's not quite accurate. It's more accurate to say politicians misrepresent their positions, or omit certain facts, or phrase their statements such that it sounds like they're stating something when they're actually stating something different. They don't break promises so much as they make ambiguous promises that can be fulfilled regardless of the harm their actions may cause. They certainly don't want to be perceived as liars and cheaters, even if that's exactly what they are. They want you to consent. They want you to do as they say even if you disagree with their policies. They want to easily control you, even when you feel wronged. They want you to remain the willing slave you are. They want to rule over sheeple, they do not want to serve a nation of free people.

It's time to stop listening to the propaganda and start judging by actions. It's time to get rid of the elephants and donkeys who haunt the halls of congress and replace them with free and independent human beings. It's time to dissent, or at least to support those who have the balls to dissent. It's time to say "no!" to the mandates and the dictates. It's time to stop shaking in your shoes and worrying about security. It's time to instead stand up tall and worry about freedom. It's time to restore the blessings of freedom so our children don't have to live their lives on their knees and dependent on others. It's time to enforce the Constitution. It's time to deny consent.

My archives can be found at my website Please visit there to read more and support me by making a donation.

For a time my books will be available exclusively at from Kindle Direct Publishing. These are fine works of fiction that I'm sure you'll enjoy. Please help support me and my efforts by purchasing one or more of the following titles.

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Edge of Sanity

The Ouijiers

Monday, September 3, 2012

Private FRNs or Public Currency?

"Eowyn: The women of this country learned long ago, those without swords can still die upon them. I fear neither death nor pain.
Aragorn: What do you fear, my lady?
Eowyn: A cage. To stay behind bars until use and old age accept them and all chance of valor has gone beyond recall or desire."
From the movie "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers"

What I'm about to propose is a state sponsored method of bailing the nation and perhaps the entire world out of a particularly nasty economic depression. This does not mean that I have suddenly changed sides and become a statist, though some of you may accuse me of being one after reading this, nor does it mean that I suddenly endorse state solutions to problems created by the state, it simply means that I can see a threat and sometimes the best way to counter a threat is to do something one might find distasteful. I used the above quote from the movie "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" because I felt it was quite appropriate for the situation we find ourselves in. The private owners of the Federal Reserve System long ago used the sword of government to create their monopoly on currency in this nation, and that sword will cut down the middle class if we don't learn to pick up that same sword or one very similar and use it to defend ourselves.

It becomes more and more obvious to me that the central bankers and the financial sector have usurped our government, and governments around the world, as time goes by. All one has to do is look at who's benefiting from the current economic conditions. All one has to do is look at who the politicians are maneuvering to protect. Just look at the Republican National Convention and how they've manipulated it to keep the voice of the Ron Paul supporters silent. Ron Paul was the only candidate that wants to end the Fed. I doubt very much that any of the other guys would seriously want to even audit that institution. This despite the fact that a law requiring a full audit of the Fed recently passed the House of Representatives by a huge margin.

Ron Paul was the only candidate that wants to get rid of the IRS. The other two major candidates simply argue about whether or not to raise taxes. According to many sources, every penny of income tax paid goes to pay off the interest on the debt owed to the private Federal Reserve. Not one penny goes to pay for whatever "service" you might want the government to provide. That's why the Constitution needed to be amended to allow for an income tax before the Federal Reserve Act was snuck through a legislature that had mostly gone home for Christmas in 1913. There wasn't even a plurality of senators or representatives present when the vote took place. The IRS is merely the enforcement arm to make sure the interest is paid by the working class of this country.

The Federal Reserve and the corporations that depend on its financial influence need to make certain that their people stay in charge of the executive branch. Why? Well, for one thing so they can use the bully pulpit of the president to spew their propaganda and muddy the waters of clearer thought. But, more importantly, I think they want to have the power of the United States military at their beck and call. They want to be able to use it to quell any dissention that might happen anywhere in the world if their cartels are threatened. The military is the arm of government that holds the sword that can be used to kill or to put a so called threat in a cage. The United States military isn't used for the defense of the people of the United States anymore, it's used to defend the interests of multinational corporations and central banking interests. If necessary the military could be used to force compliance with the wishes of those corporations and banking interests upon anyone who would wish to break the bonds of those corporations and try alternative methods of doing business which would compete with them.

The wars we see being fought in foreign lands are not defensive wars being fought to keep foreign invaders from coming over here, they are offensive wars being fought to keep a corporate elite empowered and their monetary schemes from collapsing. While they're punishing those who would oppose them, they're making money on the flip side selling weapons. It's a win and a windfall for them. It's death and destruction for any regime that might think the natural resources of their countries belong to the people of that country. It's an economic catastrophe and ruin for the common folk of this nation. That's why they must keep control of the executive branch.

So, what's the solution I mentioned earlier in this article? How can we get control of the office of the presidency back? How can we regain and reclaim the military that's supposed to defend and protect our nation, not the corporate interests? We saw what happened to Ron Paul's campaign at the Republican National Convention. We saw how they were kicked to the curb with no real recognition of their numbers and power. We know we won't be able to get enough people to vote for a principled third party candidate like Gary Johnson and even if we did we know that the fix is in. It's David versus Goliath all over again. How can we overcome such a giant?

It's really quite simple, and it's legal and peaceful and constitutional. We turn up the heat. We keep demanding an end to the Fed. We demand that those who want to govern obey the Constitution of this nation, and we remind them that the Constitution is the highest law of the land. We demand that they keep their oaths of office and expose them when they don't. We remind them that the Constitution delegates the power to mint and coin money to congress, and that they cannot pass that responsibility onto private interests who profit from such a government sanctioned monopoly. We then give them fair warning, either comply with the highest law in the land or face criminal sanctions.

You might think I'm dreaming, and maybe I am, but the law is on our side. Whether it can be enforced or not, that is where the question really lies. This is why I use the word "we" above. I really don't like to talk in the collective, but sometimes reality steps in and forces your hand. By "we" I mean people concerned with individual liberty and the natural rights of individuals being honored by people entrusted with government power. It's strange to think that those of us wanting to establish an individualist society and mindset should have to form a collective in order to do so, but there is strength in numbers. I know there's a lot more people out there who think like we do and have just kept their mouths shut even at this late date, but the time has come for all to speak out and be heard. We must let those who would rule us know that we are a power to be reckoned with and we are not going to give away our power that easily.

Do not let the conversation die. Let it be known far and wide that the Federal Reserve is a privately owned organization that our tax dollars pay for. Then let it be known that if the government printed treasury notes, it could get rid of the income tax and the IRS because it wouldn't have to pay interest on debt anymore. Furthermore, with the government in charge of the money creation, it could make money by collecting interest. It would loan out money only to businesses, like banks, who came to it for loans. Only those who wished to do business with the government would have to do business with it, the rest of us would be left alone. If enough people were to become aware of these facts, the political pressure we could put on our politicians would become so great that they wouldn't have a choice, they'd have to either succumb to the wishes of the people or become politically insignificant.

If we begin to once again enforce a legal definition of the dollar being a measure of silver, as it used to be, this solution becomes even better. The economy would quickly stabilize as everyone would know what the value of a dollar was and not be concerned that tomorrow it would loose value. The uncertainty in currency would be gone. The world would quickly once again accept the dollar as a reserve currency so long as they could trust that it would pay its value as a precious metal. Goods and services would soon be priced by market competition and the law of supply and demand and not by artificial mechanisms of the state and their corporate agents.

As a matter of course, the interest on our national debt would have to be forgiven. Whether or not we should even have to pay the principle would have to be determined. It can likely be shown that the whole scheme was a fraud and therefore we are not liable to pay it back, as was done in Iceland. Some bankers, and maybe even some politicians, might end up in jail. More importantly, those who have fleeced our nation of real wealth and commodities through fraud should have to return such wealth and commodities to the marketplace where they can be put to good use by the common folk. This is how it should be. The easiest way to accomplish this is with the power of government, the power of the many. Those in control of the private Federal Reserve have known for years that their scheme was fraudulent and criminal and would eventually collapse. A little honesty and prudence is all it would have taken to avoid the economic mess we find ourselves in, but their greed is insatiable. It's time to put humanity first.

I know that there are many who want to see a market solution to the currency problem, and I agree that there should be an end to the legal tender laws and the currency monopolies. I realize that a state run currency monopoly is also subject to corruption. However, it might be time to realize that those who don't use government can still suffer from government. As long as we have a federal government, we should strive to keep it on our side in whatever ways possible. When it comes to economics, if the government isn't protecting the interests of the common folk, then it's protecting the interests of someone else. It's protecting the interests of the ruling elites. It's protecting the interests of the corporate establishment and the financial sector. It's protecting the Fed. It doesn't matter who the president is or what party runs congress, it's time to end the Fed. Perhaps the best path to take to accomplish such a goal would be the path of least resistance.

My archives can be found at my website Please visit there to read more and support me by making a donation.

For a time my books will be available exclusively at from Kindle Direct Publishing. As a special offer, on Sept. 5th, and Sept. 6th, 2012, the full versions of all my ebooks will be available for free to download. Please help support me by downloading my ebooks for free on those days. The more downloads I get, the better. Tell your friends. If you don't have a Kindle, offers a PC version for free. Please download and enjoy.

The Colors of Elberia; book 1 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Legacy of the Tareks; book 2 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Power of the Tech; book 3 of The Black Blade Trilogy

The Edge of Sanity

The Ouijiers