Verified Warnings From Former U.S. Presidents About the “Invisible Government” Running the U.S. With “No Allegiance To the People”

Ross Pittman 

consciouslifenews.com

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”- George Santayana

Past presidents of the United States and other high profile political leaders have repeatedly issued warnings over the last 214 years that the U.S. government is under the control of an “invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.”

According to a half-dozen of our former presidents, one vice-president,  and a myriad of other high profile political leaders, an invisible government that is “incredibly evil in intent” has been in control of the U.S. government “ever since the days of Andrew Jackson” (since at least 1836).  They “virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties… It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”

As a result, “we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion and no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.”

The sources for the above quotes (and more) are listed below. All of the quotes listed in this article have been verified as authentic and have associated links to the source materials.  Also included below are statements made by David Rockefeller, Sr, former director of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and Federal Reserve Chairman’s Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke that appear to confirm some of the warnings.

Warnings About the Invisible Government Running the U.S.

The warnings listed below, which appear in chronological order, began with our first president – George Washington.  The last president to speak out was JFK, who was assassinated.    Read what they and other political leaders have said about the invisible government.

George Washington wrote that the Illuminati want to separate the People from their Government
  
“It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am. The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation). That Individuals of them may… actually had a seperation [sic] of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.” – George Washington,  1st President of the United States (1789–1797), from a letter that Washington wrote on October 24, 1798, which can be found in the Library of Congress.  For an analysis of Washington’s warning, see the article “Library of Congress: George Washington Warns of Illuminati”

“I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.” —Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States (1801–1809) and principal author of the United States Declaration of Independence (1776), in a letter written to John Taylor on May 28, 1816

“A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many and various powerful interests, combined in one mass, and held together by the cohesive power of the vast surplus in banks.” – John C. Calhoun, Vice President (1825-1832) and U.S. Senator, from a speech given on May 27, 1836

Note that it appears that Washington’s and Jefferson’s concerns regarding bankers and separation of the people from the government was realized by 1836.  This fact was confirmed in a letter written by FDR in 1933 (see below) in which he wrote that “a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”  Jackson was the seventh president of the United States (1829-1937).  Calhoun served as Jackson’s vice-president from 1829-1932.

“Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.  To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”— Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography, 1913 (Appendix B)

“A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men… [W]e have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States, The New Freedom, 1913

“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something.  They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States, The New Freedom, 1913

“The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation… The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, … and control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”  - New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, New York Times, March 26, 1922

“Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government board, has cheated the Government of the United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt…Mr. Chairman, when the Federal Reserve act was passed, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here… and that this country was to supply financial power to an international superstate — a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure.” – Congressman Louis T. McFadden, from a speech delivered to the House of Representatives on June 10, 1932

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.” — Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States (1933–1945), in a letter to Colonel Edward M House dated November 21, 1933, as quoted in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945.

“Today the path to total dictatorship in the U.S. can be laid by strictly legal means… We have a well-organized political-action group in this country, determined to destroy our Constitution and establish a one-party state… It operates secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government… This ruthless power-seeking elite is a disease of our century… This group…is answerable neither to the President, the Congress, nor the courts. It is practically irremovable.” – Senator William Jenner, 1954 speech

“The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.”  —J. Edgar Hoover, The Elks Magazine, 1956

“The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings… Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe… no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent… For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.” — John F Kennedy, 35th President of the United States, from a speech delivered to the American Newspaper Publishers Association on April 27, 1961 and known as the “Secret Society” speech (click here for full transcript and audio).

“The Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world.  Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.” Congressman Larry P. McDonald, November 1975, from the introduction to a book titled The Rockefeller File.

“There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” – Daniel K. Inouye, US Senator from Hawaii, testimony at the Iran Contra Hearings, 1986   

The Federal Reserve  (CONTINUE READING AT CONSCIOUSLIFENEWS.COM)

“A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves…” – John C. Calhoun

“… owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.” – Theodore Roosevelt

“… one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank.“  – Louis T. McFadden

Debt Slavery – Why It Destroyed Rome, Why It Will Destroy Us Unless It’s Stopped

by MICHAEL HUDSON

counterpunch.org 

 

Book V of Aristotle’s Politics describes the eternal transition of oligarchies making themselves into hereditary aristocracies – which end up being overthrown by tyrants or develop internal rivalries as some families decide to “take the multitude into their camp” and usher in democracy, within which an oligarchy emerges once again, followed by aristocracy, democracy, and so on throughout history.

Debt has been the main dynamic driving these shifts – always with new twists and turns. It polarizes wealth to create a creditor class, whose oligarchic rule is ended as new leaders (“tyrants” to Aristotle) win popular support by cancelling the debts and redistributing property or taking its usufruct for the state.

Since the Renaissance, however, bankers have shifted their political support to democracies. This did not reflect egalitarian or liberal political convictions as such, but rather a desire for better security for their loans. As James Steuart explained in 1767, royal borrowings remained private affairs rather than truly public debts. For a sovereign’s debts to become binding upon the entire nation, elected representatives had to enact the taxes to pay their interest charges.

By giving taxpayers this voice in government, the Dutch and British democracies provided creditors with much safer claims for payment than did kings and princes whose debts died with them. But the recent debt protests from Iceland to Greece and Spain suggest that creditors are shifting their support away from democracies. They are demanding fiscal austerity and even privatization sell-offs.

This is turning international finance into a new mode of warfare. Its objective is the same as military conquest in times past: to appropriate land and mineral resources, also communal infrastructure and extract tribute. In response, democracies are demanding referendums over whether to pay creditors by selling off the public domain and raising taxes to impose unemployment, falling wages and economic depression. The alternative is to write down debts or even annul them, and to re-assert regulatory control over the financial sector.

Near Eastern rulers proclaimed clean slates for debtors to preserve economic balance

Charging interest on advances of goods or money was not originally intended to polarize economies. First administered early in the third millennium BC as a contractual arrangement by Sumer’s temples and palaces with merchants and entrepreneurs who typically worked in the royal bureaucracy, interest at 20 per cent (doubling the principal in five years) was supposed to approximate a fair share of the returns from long-distance trade or leasing land and other public assets such as workshops, boats and ale houses.

As the practice was privatized by royal collectors of user fees and rents, “divine kingship” protected agrarian debtors. Hammurabi’s laws (c. 1750 BC) cancelled their debts in times of flood or drought. All the rulers of his Babylonian dynasty began their first full year on the throne by cancelling agrarian debts so as to clear out payment arrears by proclaiming a clean slate. Bondservants, land or crop rights and other pledges were returned to the debtors to “restore order” in an idealized “original” condition of balance. This practice survived in the Jubilee Year of Mosaic Law in Leviticus 25.

The logic was clear enough. Ancient societies needed to field armies to defend their land, and this required liberating indebted citizens from bondage. Hammurabi’s laws protected charioteers and other fighters from being reduced to debt bondage, and blocked creditors from taking the crops of tenants on royal and other public lands and on communal land that owed manpower and military service to the palace.

In Egypt, the pharaoh Bakenranef (c. 720-715 BC, “Bocchoris” in Greek) proclaimed a debt amnesty and abolished debt-servitude when faced with a military threat from Ethiopia. According to Diodorus of Sicily (I, 79, writing in 40-30 BC), he ruled that if a debtor contested the claim, the debt was nullified if the creditor could not back up his claim by producing a written contract. (It seems that creditors always have been prone to exaggerate the balances due.) The pharaoh reasoned that “the bodies of citizens should belong to the state, to the end that it might avail itself of the services which its citizens owed it, in times of both war and peace. For he felt that it would be absurd for a soldier … to be haled to prison by his creditor for an unpaid loan, and that the greed of private citizens should in this way endanger the safety of all.”

The fact that the main Near Eastern creditors were the palace, temples and their collectors made it politically easy to cancel the debts. It always is easy to annul debts owed to oneself. Even Roman emperors burned the tax records to prevent a crisis. But it was much harder to cancel debts owed to private creditors as the practice of charging interest spread westward to Mediterranean chiefdoms after about 750 BC. Instead of enabling families to bridge gaps between income and outgo, debt became the major lever of land expropriation, polarizing communities between creditor oligarchies and indebted clients. In Judah, the prophet Isaiah (5:8-9) decried foreclosing creditors who “add house to house and join field to field till no space is left and you live alone in the land.”

Creditor power and stable growth rarely have gone together. Most personal debts in this classical period were the product of small amounts of money lent to individuals living on the edge of subsistence and who could not make ends meet. Forfeiture of land and assets – and personal liberty – forced debtors into bondage that became
irreversible. By the 7^th century BC, “tyrants” (popular leaders) emerged to overthrow the aristocracies in Corinth and other wealthy Greek cities, gaining support by cancelling the debts. In a less tyrannical manner, Solon founded the Athenian democracy in 594 BC by banning debt bondage.

But oligarchies re-emerged and called in Rome when Sparta’s kings Agis, Cleomenes and their successor Nabis sought to cancel debts late in the third century BC. They were killed and their supporters driven out. It has been a political constant of history since antiquity that creditor interests opposed both popular democracy and royal power able to limit the financial conquest of society – a conquest aimed at attaching interest-bearing debt claims for payment on as much of the economic surplus as possible.

When the Gracchi brothers and their followers tried to reform the credit laws in 133 BC, the dominant Senatorial class acted with violence, killing them and inaugurating a century of Social War, resolved by the ascension of Augustus as emperor in 29 BC.

Rome’s creditor oligarchy wins the Social War, enslaves the population and brings on a Dark Age
(CONTINUE READING AT COUNTERPUNCH.ORG)

An Economy of Illusions

Tim Kelly
Infowars.com
October 12, 2012

For the past four years, talking heads, pundits, and other regime apologists have been looking for “green shoots” and other signs of an economic recovery to vindicate the U.S. government’s fiscal and monetary shenanigans.
 
So when the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released its report on October 5 showing the creation of 114,000 new jobs in September and a reduction in the unemployment rate from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent, it was hailed by many as a major victory for the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve. Indeed, it was cited as proof that all the deficit spending and “quantitative easing” (money printing) had finally paid off.

Well, maybe not.

It turns out the methodology the BLS used to produce their rosy jobs report is rather dubious. As Mark Twain said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

According to the BLS, “In September, 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force.” These people “wanted and were available for work,” but “they were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.”

So the BLS’s official unemployment rate simply ignores 2.5 million unemployed Americans. I suppose that is more humane than conscripting them into work brigades or “disappearing” them into FEMA camps, but it’s still dishonest.

Stock prices predictably soared in reaction to the phony good news, providing further evidence that Wall Street has become totally decoupled from the real economy.

For a more accurate rendering of economic conditions in the country, one should look at the statistics showing a dramatic increase in involuntary part-time workers (600,000) and a concentration in low-paid service jobs. Manufacturing also continued its demise, shedding some 16,000 jobs in September.

The United States is rapidly becoming a nation of the underemployed, barely scraping by and desperate for part-time work in order to make their ends meet. This is the face of the “new economy.”

And to make matters worse for the beleaguered American worker, inflation appears to be rearing its ugly head once again. The consumer price index (CPI) increased 0.6 percent in August, thus raising the specter of stagflation (simultaneous high unemployment and price inflation).

The Obama White House is certainly not the first administration to fudge numbers in order to paint a false picture of prosperity. Republican and Democratic administrations have been underreporting the unemployment and inflation rates for decades.

According to John Williams of Shadowstats, the current real unemployment rate is around 22 percent, while real annual inflation is above 10 percent. Those numbers are indicative of an inflationary depression; so it’s understandable that incumbent politicians would favor the BLS’s rosy report over grim reality.

Tens of millions of Americans recently tuned in to watch Barack Obama and Mitt Romney face off in a debate over the state of the US economy.

While the candidates exchanged accusations and talking points, neither mentioned the Federal Reserve, QE3, Uncle Sam’s $220 trillion in unfunded liabilities, the crisis in the eurozone, nor the impending collapse of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

All of those are critical economic issues, and how they are resolved will have an enormous impact on the lives of every American. But they received nary a mention during the hour-and-a-half debate about the economy.

The ugly truth is the system is busted, and voting for Romney or Obama isn’t going to make any difference at all. Neither man has the courage, understanding, or wisdom to implement the radical changes that are necessary to right the ship of state.

And then there are the recent exploits of the Federal Reserve.

The Fed has held interest rates at zero for four years and just recently announced that they will hold them there for at least another two.

This means that real inflation will continue being higher than interest rates. Such an easy-money policy is very hard on savers, who are now getting a negative return on their capital. With the Fed effectively telling people not to save and instead to consume as much as possible before their money suffers further devaluation, the nation is devouring its seed corn and thus ensuring an economic famine in the near future.

How can the middle class survive under such a monetary regime?

It cannot.

If the Fed continues with its money printing, the vast majority of Americans will be impoverished and made wards of the state. Indeed, with more than 45 million Americans already receiving food stamps, the country is well down this road to serfdom.

The core economic problem is that the country has been borrowing and spending well beyond its means for decades. Now that the bill has come due, the Fed’s response is to create more money out of thin air. (READ MORE)

Swiss Study Shows 147 Technocratic “Super Entities” Rule the World

Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
October 10, 2012

The Swiss Federal Institute (SFI) in Zurich released a study entitled “The Network of Global Corporate Control” that proves a small consortiums of corporations – mainly banks – run the world. A mere 147 corporations which form a “super entity” have control 40% of the world’s wealth; which is the real economy. These mega-corporations are at the center of the global economy. The banks found to be most influential include:

• Barclays
• Goldman Sachs
• JPMorgan Chase & Co
• Vanguard Group
• UBS
• Deutsche Bank
• Bank of New York Melon Corp
• Morgan Stanley
• Bank of America Corp
• Société Générale

However as the connections to the controlling groups are networked throughout the world, they become the catalyst for global financial collapse.



James Glattfelder, complex systems theorist at the SFI explains: “In effect, less than one per cent of the companies were able to control 40 per cent of the entire network.”

Using mathematic models normally applied to natural systems, the researchers analyzed the world’s economy. Their data was taken from Orbis 2007, a database which lists 37 million corporations and investors. The evidence showed that the world’s largest corporations are interconnected to all other companies and their professional decisions affect all markets across the globe.

George Sudihara, complex systems expert for SFI claims that this phenomenon is a common structure that could be found in nature. Comparing the manufactured reality of the financial markets to the ecosystems of the planet, Sudihara says that although the 147 corporations that rule the world through influence and interconnectedness are no more harmful than the natural cycles of our weather or animal kingdoms.

Yet because of the facts presented in the study, the financial crash of 2008 can be traced back to these tightly-knit networks. Future disasters can also be projected based on this analysis because of the “connectedness” of these influential entities which are only 147 corporations.

It is suggested the global capitalism could be a useful tool to make the markets more stable by simply acquiescing to control by the technocrats. The world’s transitional corporations (TNCs) guide the flow of all economies through influence and manipulation which created a structure of economic power. Most corporations are guided by the shareholders who use the companies to wield incredible power over the shift of economic consciousness. And the behavior of the system reflects the direction taken by those who fund the super entities.

Assumed by many that there was a complex architecture to the global economic power that caused financial systems to ebb and flow or crash and burn is not a scientific fact as evidenced in this study.

As the banking cartels force countries in the EuroZone into sovereign debt, there is a weakening of the many multi-national corporations around the world. Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase have financially gained while stocks are being unloaded in other markets.

This sovereign land-grab by the central banking cartels across Europe is mirrored in a recent Goldman Sachs report: “The more the Spanish administration indulges domestic political interests … the more explicit conditionality is likely to be demanded.” In other words the technocrats working for the Zionists are acquiring each country in the EuroZone.

The European Central Bankers agreed to give any nation in the Euro-Zone a bailout if they agreed to hand over the country to them under the guise of “new rules and conditions when applying for assistance.” (READ MORE)

Audit the Fed Threatens the Secrecy of the Federal Reserve Bank

Susanne Posel
Infowars.com
August 7, 2012

Congressman Ron Paul, author of the legislation called Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2012 (HR459) that will subject Ben Bernanke and the privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank to a monetary audit policy  has seen much support from his peers on Capitol Hill. The House of Representatives passed 327 – 98 on a vote last week which exceeded the necessary 2/3rd majority.

Bernanke, trying to deter the US Congress from digging into the private matters of the Fed, told House lawmakers that this legislation would allow a “nightmare scenario” of political meddling in monetary policy making. How pretentious of this head of the global Elite banking cartel to say that American representatives would be fumbling idiots meandering about in the matters of private shareholders being forced to disclose their agendas regarding our money system.

Paul, who is pushing for “transparency” in America’s relationship with the Fed, said that Americans are “sick and tired of what happened in the bailout and where the wealthy got bailed out and the poor lost their jobs and they lost their homes.”

Back in March, Bernanke lectured at the George Washington University in a propaganda stunt  to reaffirm to the younger generations that the Federal Reserve is necessary and integral to the US monetary future. Bernanke claimed that “a central bank is not an ordinary commercial bank, but a government agency.”

By fabricating the factual need of the Fed as a cornerstone of our currency system, Bernanke tried to coerce the public on the benefits of the Fed. Dennis Kucinich said that “it’s time that we stood up to the Federal Reserve that right now acts like some kind of high, exalted priesthood, unaccountable to democracy.”

Paul wants to show the American public that their hard-earned money is going into off-shore accounts to support the global central banking cartels and fund their agendas. The focus is on the 2007 – 2009 “recession” that has laid the groundwork for hyper-inflation in the near future. (CONTINUE READING)

10 Things That Every American Should Know About The Federal Reserve

Michael Snyder| 
businessinsider.com
February 09, 2012
 

A Private Property sign at the Dallas Federal Reserve

What would happen if the Federal Reserve was shut down permanently? That is a question that CNBC asked recently, but unfortunately most Americans don't really think about the Fed much.

Most Americans are content with believing that the Federal Reserve is just another stuffy government agency that sets our interest rates and that is watching out for the best interests of the American people. But that is not the case at all.

The truth is that the Federal Reserve is a private banking cartel that has been designed to systematically destroy the value of our currency, drain the wealth of the American public and enslave the federal government to perpetually expanding debt.

Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-02-09/wall_street/31040431_1_interest-rates-big-banks-member-banks#ixzz1ywWXaAw4

New World Order Blueprint Leaked

By: Rudy_Avizius

marketoracle.co.uk 

Jun 21, 2012 - 03:58 PM
 

On June 12, a leaked copy of the investment chapter for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was made public. This copy was analyzed by Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch and has been verified as authentic.  This agreement has been negotiated IN SECRET for 2-1/2 years and no information has ever been released until this leak. So why have the details of this negotiation been so secret? This agreement has been framed as a “free trade” agreement and yet out of 26 chapters only two have anything to do with trade. The other 24 chapters grant new corporate privileges and rights, while limiting governments and protective regulations.

If implemented, this agreement will hard code corporate dominance over sovereign governments into international law that will supercede any federal, state, or local laws of any member country. This document alone should set alarm bells ringing, but if one steps back and looks at the larger picture, the future ramifications look even more ominous. After completing this reading, see what your conclusions are.

This video is a must see for anyone who wishes to more fully understand the implications of this secretly negotiated agreement. This article will also show how if this agreement is considered in the context of other recently passed legislation and developments, and the “dots are connected”, the results would be total corporate global governance with an accompanying police state. In this new system the role of elected  governments would be to serve as subservient agents for the transnational corporations, while the armies, police, and courts would serve the interests of these transnational corporations. The  status of the member states would be locked-in,  similar to countries once they are inside the Eurozone.

The TPP is being negotiated by some of the same characters that brought us NAFTA, CAFTA and other so called free trade agreements. Some of the provisions in this document include the establishment of a parallel system of justice to be administered by 3 attorneys with no conflict of interest limitations. This 3 attorney tribunal could order sovereign governments to use taxpayer money to pay these transnational corporations for any environmental or regulatory costs that these corporations expended to meet local standards. Many existing laws would need to be rewritten and no new regulatory laws could be passed.

Governments that tried to pass regulations such as limits on the financial industry using risky bets such as derivatives would have the burden of proof to defend such regulations in a court system controlled by the corporations. The taxpayers would pay should a corporation prevail in one of these “private courts”. In fact over $350 million of taxpayer money has already been paid out to corporations under the NAFTA style deals, because of zoning laws, toxic bans, timber rules and other regulations. This TPP agreement is like NAFTA on steroids. This corporate tribunal bears a resemblance to the private US Supreme Court approved  binding arbitration that corporations use to severely limit an individual’s or a group’s right to sue for damages. With binding arbitration we essentially have a “private corporate court system” outside of any government judicial system where the corporations choose the arbitrators and pay for their services. This creates an apparent conflict of interest because  the arbitrators know that if they do not rule favorably to the corporations in the majority of cases, they will not be hired back.(CONTINUE READING)

The Great Debate: How Ron Paul’s Presidency Will Reshape America

Krummel Design.

Allan Stevo
LewRockwell.com
February 25, 2012

America is a place where neighbors rarely speak openly about politics, and when they do, it is usually only to repeat media sound bites. An Obama / Paul race will change that. Two differing ideologies will Clash. One for greater individual freedom. The other for more government. This competition of ideas will not occur with other Republican candidates, since they are ideologically aligned with President Obama when it comes to the power of the individual over the power of the state. Inevitably, debates will take place between the two candidates. Discussions in the new media will take place on the candidates. And most importantly, neighbors will discuss these two ideologies with each other. Because the differences between them are so significant these two candidates will compel us to move beyond the media sound bites and really examine our beliefs about the idea of America and the direction we should take as a nation. We can make that debate happen.

Many proponents of the statist ideology will work hard to see to it that the champions of freedom are denied a candidate in the general election who expresses those viewpoints. As usual, America’s political class will try to limit debate so that only statist viewpoints are widely expressed and only candidates with statist viewpoints are included on the ballot in November. This year is very different. It is possible and likely that Ron Paul will win the Republican nomination and that great contest of ideas will take place. Instead of Americans being forced to choose between two statists of different flavors (“the lesser of two evils”), they will be able to decide between an advocate of statism and an advocate of freedom.

President Obama is very charismatic and energizes large groups of people with his charm. Congressman Paul, too, energizes large groups of people, but with his relentless pursuit of the truth and his insistence on communicating that truth. These two men will face off and provide America with two different choices for what the future holds. America will have the opportunity to decisively choose which of those paths take. Never in my life have I been able to experience America the way America will look come autumn of 2012 as economic conditions worsen and Americans look to two very different philosophies to explain the cause and correction of the nation’s problems.

It’s the Intellectual Revolution that Matters Most

Canadian philosopher John Ralston Saul informs us that election day is but a punctuation mark on the debates of society, a punctuation mark on the active participation of the citizenry. Historian Murray Rothbard points out that the American Revolution took place at least a decade prior to 1776. The shooting war from 1776 onward was but a bloody rebellion that came about because the British government refused to recognize that the colonies had forged a new society. What happens in the hearts and minds is what matters. While winning the election will be the goal of these two political campaigns, what all of us Americans should want above all else is to see this “Great Debate” when Paul and Obama run against each other. I fully expect that Paul will win the nomination, will go on to win the presidency, will make important policy changes, and will lead necessary legislative changes while in office, but it will be that discussion that will change history. However much he changes the face of government, inspiring this Great Debate will be Paul’s most significant impact on America.

When I speak of this Great Debate, I refer not to any specific debate or series of debates between the candidates. I refer instead to the necessary discussion of ideas that takes place between the two campaigns in this election, and especially to the discussion of ideas that will take place in the new media, among neighbors, and in many other forums when these two very different candidates square off.

Ron Paul and Barrack Obama are the Ideal Candidates

There are few people as qualified to represent the sides of the debate. Obama is the charismatic figurehead of the political establishment that calls for greater statism and corporatism. This establishment crosses party lines and includes the vast majority of federal politicians. He is the figurehead of what pollster Scott Rasmussen identifies as the American political class – a group of less than 10% of Americans who identify with the government on at least two of the following three questions:

1. Whose judgment do you trust more: that of the American people or American political leaders?
2. Has the federal government become its own special interest group?
3. Do government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers?

President Obama, a man whose time in office has aptly demonstrated his belief that the federal government can solve life’s problems by force of mandate, is qualified to represent the American political class in an election.

Ron Paul has spent approximately 40 years establishing himself as the most qualified person to represent freedom – he is well mannered, well read, knowledgeable of the workings of the halls of power, and an adherent to constitutional and pro-freedom values. He regularly finds himself in direct opposition to the ideas of the political class. He is unique among the Republican candidates in flatly speaking out against the statism and corporatism of the political establishment. It is imperative to that establishment that Paul not be allowed to win the presidency and nearly as important that his voice not even be heard. The political establishment does not want the American people to examine their beliefs, forced to think, forced to choose, forced to be exposed to a debate that is so powerful and expansive that neighbors and strangers will reach out to each other to discuss the issues of the day. The establishment is terrified by the potential of that debate. They realize that merely opening the channels of communication between friends and neighbors is enough to bring drastic and lasting change.

I know that debate will happen.

Both you and I know how important that debate is. After all, it’s the debates – the shifting intellectual environment – that made the American Revolution what it was. The act of taking up arms wasn’t the important part. Some piece of each one of us understands how important that debate is; that’s why we are active in the freedom movement. Let’s face it – both you and I have more relaxing and more comfortable things to do than win the day for Ron Paul. For example, instead of spending my time with the people I love the most, I am writing this to you. I am writing this book because I know that the small percentage of Americans who make up the political establishment can be overcome by the rest of the population. I write this because I know that you personally can so successfully appeal to the sense of reason of so many other Americans. Are we not better served by an Obama / Paul race in November than by another contest of Statist vs. Statist? Isn’t it good for the nation to debate the questions that will arise from these two very different candidates meeting? I’m suspect of anyone who doesn’t think that debate is a good idea.(CONTINUE READING)

Regulations Harm Small Business and Protects Corporations

James Hall
Infowars.com
February 22, 2012



The prospects for conducting commerce are never an easy task. The hurdles to start a business much less stay competitive demands the greatest skill and fortitude. Innovation and inspiration often is the best course for those bold enough to become an employer. The idea that a level playing field exists for all comers is preposterous. The entire macrocosm for business rests upon separating your enterprise from that of your rivalries. Such is a basic lesson for those brave or foolish enough to enter the arena.
Courtney Rubin cites the following in Inc. Magazine,

“Businesses with 20 employees or fewer pay 36 percent more than their larger counterparts (defined as those with 500 or more employees), says the report – called “The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms” — from the SBA’s Office of Advocacy. This is because a lot of costs are fixed — the same whether you have two employees or 2,000. Total annual cost of following the rules for a small business: $10,585 per employee, or about $2,830 more than big business. Businesses with 20 to 499 employees paid about $7,454 per employee, or about $300 less than the largest companies.
The report estimates that 89 percent of all firms in the U.S. employ fewer than 20 workers. By comparison, large firms account for only 0.3 percent of all U.S. firms.
Says the report: “If federal regulations place a differentially large cost on small business, this potentially causes inefficiencies in the structure of American enterprises, and the relocation of production facilities to less regulated countries, and adversely affects the international competitiveness of domestically produced American products and services.”

The screams for jobs, jobs and jobs would give the hint that federal, state and local business policy would favor the productive engine of employment. However, in the real world of political influence and favoritism only the well connected get the advantages. (CONTINUE READING)