2008-01-30 - 10:40 a.m.
This year's presidential politics have encouraged me to look a little more deeply into what makes the government tick and where the powers of influence lie (no pun intended). The information and disinformation is out there, and there is enough of it to get one's head spinning with contradictory thoughts, leaving one wondering what to believe and where to expend one's efforts.
First, it must be said that I have always been one to refuse taking the given at face value (as there is always a catch or an agenda attached) and I value myself, my opinion, and the minds of others enough to self-educate and gather more available information before forming the kind of opinion I consider to be of value to an intelligent conversation. Furthermore, following the same reasoning, I do not discount unpopular information and I do not leave fringe sources of information out of what I seek. More concretely put, I include theories and inferential information from others as worthy bouncing-off points.
Just as with anything, despite the chaos of information and bewilderment of a competent mind, there is usually a logic that can be followed. There are presumptions with the logic, but it is common-sensical enough to be followed.
For example, our popular sources of information (the information brokers) are RICH sources of information (not rich as in amount of info, but rather that they are wealthy corporations). The brokers of information have a lot of information and what they choose to divulge through their medium must be chosen carefully. The rich tend to want to stay rich or get richer. Hence, the information they choose to divulge is intended to fulfill that end...they say things that will make them richer. That is a fairly logical extrapolation, right?
Stemming from this logic, it follows that what makes the information broker rich does not necessarily have to have my best interest at heart. After all, the information I'm being presented with is not all of the information that the disseminator had...just what they chose to tell me for their own benefit. I understand that that hints at a longer term goal for the process of becoming richer, rather than an immediate return upon the value of the filtered content of the information disseminated. Anyway, I usually trust myself to make the decisions that are best for me. No one else will live my life for me and I am the one best fit to judge for myself. However, when I have to make a decision for me, I usually try to seek to get all the correct and pertinent information necessary before making the decision. If I do not do that, there is a chance that my decision will be faulty and I may be harmed. Thus, when the information broker presents me with the information they do, they are imposing their OPINION on me, not granting me all the possible information necessary for me to make an informed decision for myself.
The good news is that just as the information broker got all that information and chose from among that the stuff they wanted me to get, the rest is usually also out there and available, especially in our age of technology and near-instantaneous communication. Someone wishing to know what there is to be known can get what they are looking for. They just have to look beyond the usual suspects as resources.
Where am I going with all of this? Well, there is something to be said for the tension and chaos gripping our world. Not all of it is bad but not all of it is good either. Now I'm going to stick to what is rational. Some people at this point like to get all mystical and religious but I will stick to the real world that we can deal with. There are things that cause a big stir in our lives outside of our control. There are market forces and natural forces and social forces and political forces and lots of other forces that mess with the system we live in and we are affected. We, as down-to-earth people, do not understand them all and certainly do not feel that we have that big of an influence on any of it, such that our "waves" can be felt in the overall maelstrom. We live our lives, do the best we can, and hope for the best. If you think about it, even at our most disheveled hours, we must submit to being in the system, so long as we live.
It is this self-fulfilling standard that keeps us placated. It is this acceptance of our place that keeps us from expending the energies necessary to discover new information that may shed the light onto the reasons why we are in the situation we are in. In other words, we are so busy being busy that we do not ask who is keeping us busy and for what purpose.
Obviously I am hinting that someone (or many someones in collaboration) is/are benefiting from us being busy and want to keep it that way. What I am getting at is that we are living in a conspired system. What is the endgame? Power. Total control of power. The endgame has not been achieved. No one group or one person has achieved total power. But that does not mean their aim is not set.
Okay, so with that last paragraph I automatically got stuck into your pit of doom of kooky conspiracy-theorists. I am no longer credible, right? No more reading on? Fine. I understand. But remember where I began...there is a ton of information out there to sort through before making a judgment. Just because you are fed someone else's opinion does not have to mean you must believe it to be all that there is, including my information here. If you are interested enough to read on, please do.
Again, my logic follows...What does one do when they are richer beyond rich and becoming poor is impossible? When money no longer matters and the game of gaining more money becomes a non-effort and no longer makes sense? The lay-person among us would say that one relaxes for the rest of their lives and enjoys living until death. Those who would find even that state of being boring and a waste of time will say that the next logical pursuit will be power.
What is power? The ability to make change. The ability to influence the maelstrom. The ability to rise above its influence. The ability to control those contained within the maelstrom. The ability to extend power even more. The ability to make this acquisition of power all-encompassing and permanent.
I personally believe, from all that I have read, researched and gathered, that these groups (and they are indeed groups, not individuals) do exist and they are in the pursuit of such a power as described above. It is not necessarily the owners or directors of the huge corporations one might suspect, although some of those are part of the larger picture. Money and credit, however, are still the key to running things in this world, and the true source of both leads us to our conspirators. As Sutton's Law would imply, in order to figure out where to look for such level of power go where the money is. Banks.
Basically, owners and creators of old banks and new ones that attained their level of influence realized something, soon after the world's mechanization and integration. The realization was that at their level of influence, competition between them was bad and it would hinder their progress. Together, they were much much more powerful than any government. In fact, seeing that their source of power was the control of governments and people, the bankers made pacts. They would collaborate to systematically take over the governments of the world, to make their own version of a "One World Government", with them at the head of it.
The first collaborative pact was made in the United States. The second pact was made on a global level. The former is described below because it is well documented. The latter is my own speculation for lack of solid direct evidence, but the foundation of the speculative evidence is solid in the economic events we see around us and the actions we see taken by the banks and the governments. ALL of this that I am saying here is available as public information. All you have to do is choose to look and put the pieces together yourselves. Even the organizations I investigated to get this information, made up of the rich and powerful, do not really hide their intentions for a One World Government. Their mission statements, their speeches, their members and their actions account for all that has helped form my speculation about the second pact.
The original bankers were not necessarily of any one religion, creed or nationality. They were, however, the richest of the rich banks of the world. They were the old banks of Europe, namely British, Dutch, Italian (within the USA) and French, as well as the rich banks of the United States: JP Morgan Bank, Chemical Bank and Trust Corporation, National Bank of Commerce, Chase National Bank of Manhattan, National City Bank of NY, First National Bank of NY, and the Investment company of Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb. Many of the aforementioned were separate corporations, but their majority stockholders were the same individuals. As I mentioned before, the collaboration began among the US Banks first. Later, the realization came that collaboration and influence needed to be much larger than just at the national level.
During the industrialization of the United States, the US government realized that it had to create its own method to control its economy and currency. If their standard currency of trade was an old-world bill, the world market, controlled by old European Banks, would dominate the US. So the original Bank of the United States (mostly Alexander Hamilton's work) issued bonds to raise the money they needed to conduct national affairs, gradually raising the value of the American dollar to compete globally. The standards for inflation, exchange rate, interest, and creation of currency was in the hands of the Treasury. This was much like the control China has over its economy today, and which the free market banks complain so much about since the Chinese control their own fate via this system.
Most U.S. domestic market banks were not happy about this power that the government had, but they did manage to work under such regulation. Some, namely those from a few paragraphs ago, made a very large amount of money. Despite the profits, the most powerful bankers still did not desire to be hindered by the government regulations, and they had the money to put where their mouths were. In order to create a free market control system, the US government (or better yet, the people of the US) had to voluntarily relinquish the power they had over the economy of their own country to the heads of banks and their economists. Having declared independence from the British/European control system a century before and surmounted the travails of creating the national system, this would not be an easy thing to do.
This is where a certain US government member, Senator Nelson Aldrich, came in handy. He collaborated with the representatives of the "Big Banks" of the US to help them dissolve the "National Bank of the U.S." in the US Treasury, and create the system of the "Federal Reserve". The Aldrich-Vreeland act and the subsequently resulting Federal Reserve Act (resulted from the Owen-Glass Act which was a revision of the Aldrich-Vreeland Act), made the Big Banks the issuers of currency and the regulators of interest rates (passed in 1913 and amended regularly, still continuing today). The tricky part of this whole thing was that, despite the commission of 3 Governing Board Members appointed by the US Government (the president) to the Federal Reserve (giving the illusion of the government inclusion in the Federal Reserve System), the entity remained in the hands of its original founders, and was by no means controlled by the US government. If you read the words contained within the original 1913 Act, it says that the government approves the creation of the Corporation of the Federal Reserve Banks (the 8-12 banks yet to be commissioned at that time) to administer the issuing of credit to member banks, backed by U.S. Treasury Bonds. The Bank would be overseen by a Board of Governors, the majority to be determined by the member banks (i.e. stockholders) and the current Bank Board of Governors and 3 from the U.S. Government. They would create the rules by which the Bank would create the laws it would follow and the executors of those laws. So basically, the Federal Reserve Banking System was then, and is still, a private corporate entity, made up by the richest people who could fund the needs of the nation's smaller banks, and they are issuing our US Dollars and establishing the interest rates of exchange, and profiting from the interest accrued from the money it created, lent out and backed by its own system of credit.
The ability to issue credit and to administer the lesser Banks of the Federal Reserve (Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneapolis, Cleveland, Richmond, Atlanta, Dallas, St. Louis, Kansas City, and San Francisco) lies in the hands of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The creditors and therefore majority stockholders for this original bank of the Fed were three of the afore-mentioned rich banks of New York: The First National Bank (Morgan), The National City Bank (Rockefeller), and the National Bank of Commerce (Morgan).
THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS ARE NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY, such that the Executive, the Judicial or the Legislative branches of the government can control them. THEY ARE NOT A PUBLIC ENTITY such that market forces or shareholders can control them. The profits made by the Federal Reserve Banks go into the pockets of the families of the individuals that created the system of their establishment. They are the stuff that conspiracies are made of. And why not? The term conspiracy does not have to be taboo just because the information about their existence is not made public. Indeed, the very term "conspire" means to establish a pact in secret! This is exactly what they did. And they are reaping the profits. This information is freely available. However, it is not disseminated by your local media, which is owned by the bank conducting the conspiracy.
The Federal Reserve System is incredibly complicated if you read today's popular descriptions. It is also extremely simple to explain the big picture of how it works. The big banks lent the smaller banks and the US Government money. After all, the Federal Reserve Act let them print the currency and issue the credit. They lent out this money and collected the interest on it. They also set the interest rate, so they could actually determine how much they were paid back by those institutions doing the borrowing. If an institution could not pay back the interest or principal, they were acquired. Thus the Federal Reserve Bank System gobbled up smaller banks, convinced some state banks to join their system and lent and lent and lent to the US Government. The US Government is not a corporation to be acquired, but it does pay back the interest on its borrowed money, using our taxes, or its equivalent, our hard work and output. And BOY do we pay. To the tune of trillions of dollars, we are still paying the interest on the money we borrowed from the Federal Reserve, and the new money we CONTINUE to borrow from the Federal Reserve. And all that these banks have to do is create new numbers in computers to lend to us (credit) and put some green ink on some linen sheets we carry around in our wallets. They do not have anything to back up this made-up money. They did not mine any gold to back it up. They did not create or mine or steal silver or diamonds or anything to issue us this money. They made it out of nothing. They just typed the numbers on a keyboard and printed out a check and some currency bills.
The Federal Reserve System was the first collaboration I spoke about a while back. The Big Banks of the US wrested the control of the US economy out of government hands and made it a private function in 1913. They considered this system of laissez faire more logical than to have it in the hands of politicians with nationalistic agendas.
Between 1938 and 1943, the U.S. and the U.K. (FDR and Churchill) met and designed a method of control for the world economic exchange system in order to have it be less volatile, and thus decreasing tensions and increasing profitability for everyone. Near the very end of World War II, they invited the free nation-states of the world to get together under the auspices of the newly-created United Nations to create a fair and sound international monetary policy. What they all agreed on was called the Bretton-Woods Agreement. Each nation would work to keep its own exchange rate and currency in control, backed by a standard of the price of gold, which was a critical point for this to work. This kept pretty much all the nations honest in how much their central banks could inflate or deflate their currency, not allowing politics of any one nation to over- or under-inflate its lending rates to attract an inflow of undeserved money, as opposed to creating their national value through domestic productivity and export.
Before that, there had been no generally-agreed-upon system of trades or monetary control. This made internal political decisions dominate one nation or currency over another. Thus one group of people's work and money was more popular for trade (this was a key factor in the tightening of the belts of the Germans, caused by the favortism of the British politicians, and the rise of Hitler prior to WWII). These unfair and biased methods of trade were making entire countries poor or rich, making tensions grow, causing naval blockades and guerrilla actions a common method of sabotage of competitive economies, and the constant fear and actuality of international wars. This was the way the world worked, at a time when globalization was in full swing but no agreements had been had to control it.
The BW agreement also created the IMF and one of the precursors to the member banks of the World Bank (the IBRD) to fund the rebuilding of the countries destroyed by the war. The Bank of England and our Federal Reserve System of Banks were major parties and contributors (aka lending partners) in the Bretton-Woods system agreed upon by all these countries. This was also a strategic role for the U.S. and the U.K. because it called for a leader nation to enforce the agreement (a very vulnerable and scary position for any one country to assume), where at the same time it gave them an extremely powerful advantage of controlling the system.
In June 1963 president John Fitzgerald Kennedy signed a presidential executive order (Number 11110) regaining the control of currency creation as a government function (taken away from the Federal Reserve), and backed it with the retention of Silver in government coffers. This policy was not a desertion from the Bretton Woods Agreement. It was simply a function of domestic policy. As commanded by JFK, printing money was, once again, done by the US Treasury, a division of the Executive branch. For five months, the bills carried around in people's pockets read on the top, "United States Note". The Federal Reserve Bank was now a lending competitor with the government of the United States! One of the world's most powerful currencies was to either benefit the U.S. government (a rather Keynsian idea), or the private banks of the Federal Reserve. In November 1963, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was assassinated. Executive Order 11110 was never repealed. To this day, the president of the United States can demand that the US Treasury start printing the money we use and to back it with silver, as written in EO11110. Upon the death of JFK and the take-over by Lyndon Baines Johnson as president, the printing of money by the US Treasury immediately stopped, and has not been done again by any president. Once again, the bills in our pockets have written on the top, "Federal Reserve Note".
So over the years, despite the Cold War, much of the global economic market was led by free market practices. This gave an opportunity for the United States to play its fair game of international chess, making the U.S. dollar the currency most traded for resources of energy (the backbone of the world's growth and sustainability). Essentially, the countries that had the energy reserves would not accept any other currency for their trade of [oil], other than the dollar. So what do the countries of the world do? Stock up on tons and tons of dollars (or U.S. backed treasury bonds redeemable for dollars. So all the world's banks and governments are stockpiling U.S. money. This makes the U.S. a very powerful nation in calling in debts and setting the small range changes in its exchange rates allowed under Bretton Woods. To compensate, the other countries try to negotiate and deal with the oil nations to trade in their own currencies. That was slowly working up until 1971, when the oil countries decided to raise their prices together, making the value of oil, and the dollar, very very high. So now the world was dependent on the oil, the huge stockpiles of dollars in their pockets, and the U.S. saw an advantage (especially in the face of the decreasing value of the dollar as it related to gold, and as the value of U.S. products decreased in the international markets, making the U.S. a sink for foreign products but not increasing exports)! President Nixon, through Executive Order, unilaterally made the U.S. dollar no longer linked to the Bretton Woods gold value. With so much dollar in everyone's coffers, the dollar could hold its own in world markets and it did.
Since the dollar was now a "renegade" currency and no longer linked to the (dying) Bretton Woods gold standard, the U.S. needed to insure its value by making sure no one could do without it. The United States, since this decision to break the gold linkage, has had to make sure everyone trades in dollars for their oil. This has been done politically, economically and militarily. Politically, with special deals for the largest suppliers of oil (Saudis and other Arab supplier nations), the U.S. has guaranteed the dollar's unique role as the currency for exchange. Economically, with domestic setting of Federal interest rates, the U.S. has insured the dependence of foreign banks (that still hold enormous dollar reserves) on dollars for trade. Militarily, with pressure or force on the nations that control the flow of oil to not rebel (i.e. Iraq) and to keep them dependent on U.S. military for protection. So what protects the dollar, then, is the fact that the U.S. is a synthetic sink for the world's products and the incredible debt it holds since so many other countries still hold their reserves of dollar bonds and banknotes. If the U.S. dollar crashes, no one else will buy the stuff produced out there, and all the bonds and bills they hold will become worthless. So it behooves the countries of the world to continue propping up the dollar so they themselves don't tank. And it behooves the U.S. government to continue its military pressure on oil producers, and to thwart the use of alternative energies by oil producing nations (i.e. Iran's nuclear power), and to continue its spiral of debt, incurred by the people of the U.S. (remember, the Federal Reserve Banks issue currency and collect on interest, not being dependent on the actual value of the global currency value and rate for their survival)...
So the second collaboration comes with increased globalization. Ever since JFK, the gigantic banks of the world have seen the benefits of collaboration, instead of competition (speaking strictly of the banks, not the global economy). This would be akin to a monopoly of central banks, which would be away from suspicion since they are perceived to be Government entities, rather than the free enterprises they are. The evidence of a pact made by the owners and founders of these banks is speculative on my part, because it has not been finalized and nothing as solid as the creation of a Federal Reserve Banking System has been established on a global scale. Not yet. At the moment, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are two exercises to that end. They lend globally and they collect the profits globally.
It is critical to note, at this point, that during the mid 1900's, the U.S. dollar and the British Sterling Pound were inextricably linked, both through the Bretton Woods Agreement collaboration, and through the control of the gold standard, which was set in the London exchange. Note that the British did not switch to the Euro currency when the European Union created it in the 1990's. It is also critical, and a very revealing factor, that at the inception of the U.S. Federal Reserve system in 1913, the largest private banks that gave the credit to each bank that formed the Federal Reserve had very powerful backers and investors that helped them get that big and powerful. These investors (that still exist today, reaping the rewards of the interest the U.S. taxpayers and consumers dole out) were of the original families and bankers of England, namely the Windsors, the Stuarts, the Loebs, the Kuhns, and the Rothschilds (financial advisors to the British Royals). Again, remember, that this is in addition to the original owners of the U.S. banks (the Morgans and the Rockefellers) who also had family origins and investment links to Europe and Britain. Reference: the Modern History Project.
So where does the One World Government come in? Well, just as the Federal Reserve System oversaw the debt of the US, and therein, it controlled the fate of the US people, the global world bank will have a global government. It is in the works. The first parts are being seen in the trading sectors. The European Union and the single currency, Euro. The African Union. The North American Free Trade agreements. Slowly we are working on making region-wide integrated world markets. At the moment these markets are competitive because the process of integration of a World Wide Government is still a fledgling. However, the process requires the subjugation of national sovereignties. People must freely give up their civil and national rights in trade for economic stability. The money controllers (the same people as the information disseminators) will force every nation upon their knees, break their backs economically and force them into submission. Their economies and their people will give in to the larger control. They will be forced to play the larger game.
The United States is not immune to this. We are already in incredible debt. We are already delivering our rights in exchange for "security". We are already losing our lands, properties and means of production to the global economic force. Simply because we will not put a hold on the borrowing from the big banks. Simply because we refuse to issue our own currency and to pay our debt to the Federal Reserve Banks.
The end game will be that the largest banking families and their collaborators who sit atop the chairmanships of the largest corporations and participate in the very exclusive "Think Tank" organizations directing our governments will develop the World Government Entity that makes the rules, controls the military and determines the direction of the lives of every man, woman and child on this planet. That is the power they seek. That is the power they pulled from right under our own noses. We practically gave it to them. We were too busy worrying about Brittany Spears and what designer shoes the candidates for President were wearing.
What I am asking any reader to do today, if you made it this far in reading any of this at all, is to go and investigate the ties between the politicians and the organizations that support this One World Government and Banking policy. A word of advice would be that the popular ones are usually part of these groups. The unpopular ones that work grassroots level are often the ones not involved in these groups.
�
�
