Zahir
Ebrahim
November
23, 2008
©
Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Permission granted to use
freely as per copyright notice.
“The
United States debt, foreign and domestic, was the price of liberty.”
--- Alexander Hamilton,
explaining the real underlying principles of “liberty” for the 1776 Revolution,
quoted on the front page of US Treasury website
explaining the real underlying principles of “liberty” for the 1776 Revolution,
quoted on the front page of US Treasury website
Introduction
Economics
and Money aren't supposed to be as abstruse as it is made out to be,
and nor does it take a Ph.D. from M.I.T. to realize that one is being
taken for a sodomized ride on the Capricorn of economics gibberish.
It is the responsibility of every denizen of the world to understand
how humanity is being herded into global debt-enslavement and a
centrally managed world-government, baby-step at a time, by
manufacturing deliberate crisis and then proposing the next baby-step
as its solution or fait accompli. Each baby-step erodes away some
aspect of national sovereignty. 911 helped setup the global police
state as a proposed solution to 'terrorism' – a manufactured
product – to create the sine qua non mechanisms for
world-government. “World government could only be kept in
being by force”, as Bertrand Russell had put it.
The
latest financial crisis is designed to systematically create a
central world-banking system, as a proposed solution to 'bad loans' –
again a manufactured product – to be managed by a global
banking cartel under legal sanction. “Give me control of
a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws”,
as the Rothschild banking scions boldly narrate in almost every
generation. Today, the cumulative world debt is in uncountable
trillions, and there is no nation on earth which is not beholden to
some banking cartel, be it the WB-IMF tag team of economic
mercenaries preying upon the resource-rich nations of Global South
(see John Perkins), or the private central banks lending parasites
doing the same to their richer brethren in the Global North (see
Money as Debt).
On
top of them both, sit the same handful of private banking families in
their interlocking relationships, protected by their own hand-crafted
instruments of commerce, trade-treaties, and their hand-picked
political governance which creates for them the legal sanctions
necessary for the entire global racket based on unpayable debt to
flourish. Once a nation, like a person, can't pay its debts, demand
for the proverbial “pound of flesh” is as
convincing as making an offer one can't refuse.
In
contrast to the Neanderthal gangster Al Capone, or Michael Corelone
in the blockbuster movie 'The Godfather', who weren't smart enough to
change the laws of the land in favor of their criminal enterprises
and therefore, the state's policing apparatus could be relied upon to
eventually take parasites like them down, these banksters connivingly
write the very laws of the land in their favor. They own, or control
through proxy, the media, the legislatures, the executives, the
think-tanks, the foundations, all levers of power, good and bad
loans, and discourse itself, in pretty much all major societies –
from G7 to G20 (excepting to some extent BRIC, Venezuela, and Iran) –
cleverly hiding their own role behind the scenes in constructing
their global fiefdom.
That
aspiration was unabashedly and boldly re-stated by bankster James
Warburg in 1950 to the US Senate – the son of bankster Paul
Warburg who not only founded the Council on Foreign Relations in
1921, but was the key architect of the Federal Reserve System under
the clandestine auspices of Senator Nelson Aldrich at Jekyll Island
in 1910 – “We shall have World Government, whether
or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will
be achieved by conquest or consent.”
And
that precise “consent” is being manufactured, as we
speak, baby-step at a time! This ain't no 'tin-hatted' conspiracy of
the UFO's taking over as the 'body-snatchers', or Orson Wells' famous
dramatization on radio of H. G. Wells' novel “The War of the
Worlds”. That Halloween eve special in 1938 – as an
experiment in mass psychology to observe the response to fear –
panicked New York city!
A
bona fide long-running elitist conspiracy for world government that
is rapidly reaching fruition today within the windows of opportunity
created by manufactured crises – “We are on the
verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major
crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order”,
noted David Rockefeller – is writ large in the ex post facto
con-fessions and deeds of its vainglorious key architects themselves.
Indeed, witness this eloquent boast from the bankster, in his own
2002 'Memoirs': “Some even believe we are part of a
secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States,
characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of
conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated
global political and economic structure – one world, if you
will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
(pg. 405)
A
penetrating understanding of manufactured crises as Machiavellian
harbingers of calculated change, may be gleaned in Isaac Asimov's
science fiction classic known as the 'Foundation Trilogy'. It is not
accidental that foundations, both in real life, and in art,
are instrumental harbingers of imperial change. This truism is
attested to by the evidence gathered by Norman Dodd for the
Congressional Reece committee in 1953-54, as described below.
Wikipedia notes of the art version, that, “According to
Asimov, the premise [of Foundation] was based on ideas set forth in
Edward Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire,”!
The
only protection against these parasites – whom America's
courageous President, Andrew Jackson, referred to as “a
den of vipers” – is for ordinary peoples first
learning what has been kept hidden from them, before it is too late.
For indeed, tortuous control systems are being put in place globally
at an accelerated pace, and overturning them after fait accompli
would require nothing less than a new 'Moses' powerfully proclaiming
to the new 'Pharaohs': “let my people go!”
Last time I checked, god of chosen peoples had unmercifully relegated
both the old and new prophets to the enactment of miracles only on
the silverscreen for the entertainment of the masses, as its ordained
New World Order is brought into beguiling existence under the radar
screen of most plebes. What now sayist the plebe?
For those who
know nothing of these matters, Project Humanbeingsfirst has compiled
an 'essentials' self-study bibliography
of videos, books, documents, news reports, and its own forensics
reports, for both, beginners frantically searching for an
understanding of what's happening to them as they lose their shirts
and their skirts to Wall Street, as well as for advanced
non-researcher white-collar professionals whose job it is to
understand money, but who actually remain no less ignorant than the
plebes. All only suffer its want, or enjoy its superfluity, but no
one has the time or the inclination to ponder its creation, or which
hands control it. Most believe, as did this scribe once, that the
government creates and controls money. Please see the self-study
bibliographic guide: Monetary
Reform Bibliography – A self-study guide for uncovering the
agendas behind the economics gibberish.
[a1]
The
Ignorance of the Learned
It
has been rather disturbing for this scribe to continually rediscover
that even well educated persons from among the ruling elite
themselves, CEOs of corporations with fancy MBA degrees, venture
capitalists with CA degrees, economists with Ph.D., and financial
geniuses on Wall Street with degrees in mathematics and physics from
Caltech and M.I.T. – never mind engineers and scientists
perpetually kept too busy to bring their rational forensic acumen to
bear upon such mundane existential matters as money, economy,
geopolitics and empire – do not fully understand the mechanics
of money, nor its direct manufactured relationship with economic
booms-and-collapses, war on terror, and the broader calculated agenda
for world government. All feel daunted by the economics gibberish
which surrounds any discussion of it.
It
is also painfully obvious that even the so called “expert”
economists, and Nobel Laureates, do not fully grasp all the issues
regarding money. Because they still can't manage the economy despite
their Nobel Prizes, and keep getting run over by the exact same
inability to link together artificial booms and speculations fueled
by cheap credit that is created out of thin air as national debt,
predictable busts, tightening of credit, loss of confidence, and
ultimate windfall for the handful of wealthy in whose hands all the
wreckage of prosperity gets transferred pennies to the dollar,
consolidating enormous wealth in fewer and fewer hands at the end of
it all. And they still can't call it correctly, as evidenced from the
statements of the famous 92 year old economist Anna Schwartz –
coauthor of Milton Friedman's classic text on monetary history of the
United States – and all the rest of the economists quoted by
Lendman. [a2] More examples can be found in “Monetary
Reform: Who will bell the cat?”.
And as is the case for the common man who least understands any of
this, it could be for these learned economists as well, that it's
simply because of the overloaded semantics and secrecy which
surrounds this most essential and profound human invention since
fire.
None
among them apparently knows the money mechanics and how it
astronomically enriches the private bankers for doing absolutely no
production work in society other than ledger-entry, and none has any
appreciation for the overarching “forces that drive them”.
For surely, as Bernard Lewis had observed in another terrorism
context, a study of motivations can lead to a better understanding of
why the financial terror crises fueled by newer deadly toys and
things – what Warren Buffet called the “Financial
Weapons of Mass Destruction” and predictable “time
bombs” [a3] – keep getting repeated under the
very noses of those chartered to explicitly prevent them, leaving the
much lauded economists from prestigious institutions none the wiser.
But it is perhaps also more credible to argue, that they – the
profoundly learned economists – deliberately promulgate
economics gibberish in the service of their 'ubermensch' masters. The
empire needs its own knowledge-scions, just as it needs its own
media, its own presses, its own propaganda and spin machinery, and
its own military-industrial-academe complex. Who sits atop all of
this? Who funds all this? Who benefits from all of this? Does the
United States – its economy and its peoples in worst shape
today in this first decade of the information age than they ever were
since the Great Depression years of the industrial age?
So,
clearly it wasn't just for the “full spectrum dominance”
of the nation-state of the United States, for which the sole
superpower was being coerced into exercising its Project for the New
American Century under the disguise of 'war on terror'. It was not
just for the hegemony of the sole superpower that Zbigniew Brzezinski
– an Executive Director of the globalist Trilateral Commission
which David Rockefeller founded – had penned 'The Grand
Chessboard' and made it available so publicly, like its PNAC twin.
While
clearly America bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, and may yet nuclear bomb
Iran and Pakistan, not to mention enter into a chicken-style nuclear
confrontation with Russia, but what fuels this asininity? Who
benefits?
The
American peoples as well as their nation-state are certainly the very
visible losers in the final analysis – even at the cost of
decimated 'lower-civilizations' and their unfortunate children of
lesser gods, many more will follow in those footsteps, and only they
will see the end of war being waged upon humanity – going
bankrupt and trillions of dollars in debt as they are. See the latest
national debt figures in “The
entrenched notion of Public Debt in America – will take a
gestalt shift to overcome!”
(see Public Debt)
Who
holds this national debt at its very top, and for which, every
American tax-payer perpetually pays interest on? Aaron Russo in his
documentary “America:
from Freedom to Fascism”,
makes the astonishing revelation of how private central banking under
the Federal Reserve System, and the federal income tax, are joined
together at the hip as a congenital birth defect. There is some
discussion of the possible illegitimacy of the federal income tax and
the IRS in the film, but that's a red herring which distracts from
the fact that it could be just as legal as the Federal Reserve
System, and still remain a premeditated congenital birth defect
devilishly crafted to ensnare the unwary public into paying
gratuitous interest on the issuance of their own national currency!
[a4]
Something
far more insidious has been under construction using just one primal
axiom of political science: “what is inconceivable in
normal times is possible in revolutionary times”, the
devilish words of David Ben Gurion who presided over the leadership
of the newly acquired land for the Jews at the expense of its
indigenous Palestinian inhabitants exactly 60 years ago. The same
maxim is being deployed for world conquest at the expense of the rest
of its indigenous inhabitants.
At
the top of that pyramid, sit the moneychangers of modernity. For
money is an even bigger existential necessity today in the
producer-consumer global paradigm of high finance than it ever was in
the past, even though the imperial coin is as old as mankind!
And
yet just the fact that one has to come by the accurate understanding
of “Money” only as a forensic detective assembling a
jigsaw puzzle, and primarily from empirical analysis of widely
disparate data and events, is very revealing of the secretive role of
its affluent creators.
The
power of money creation in private hands lies at the root of all
evil. A forensic recognition of this blatant fact and the concomitant
direct full spectrum public assault upon it, will lead to the
termination of all the wet dreams for world government by hectoring
hegemons of all stripes. It will also lead to the immediate
termination of all the manufactured mechanisms employed for achieving
it, namely, the fiction of 'war on terror' and the manufactured
economic collapse. Furthermore, a lineup before a court appointed
legal firing squad with confiscation of all wealth should create a
reasonably effective deterrence example for the future.
So
let's no longer be counted among the ignorant, the co-opted, and
those who, quite bewilderingly, “scurry around like drugged
cockroaches in a bottle” [a5] waxing platitudes against an
indomitable foe out for their enslavement.
To
emphasize the relevance of learning from history to avert a tortuous
future, take for example, the remarkable 1982 video interview of Mr.
Norman Dodd by G. Edward Griffin, cited in the Project
Humanbeingsfirst's Monetary
Reform Bibliography.
It can be watched here.
As
a member of the “Morgan Bank” during the Great
Depression, and later a chief investigator in 1953-54 for U.S.
Congressman B. Carroll Reece's Special Committee on Tax Exempt
Foundations (the Reece Committee), Norman Dodd makes some
extraordinary revelations on video. He appears to be an unusually
credible person, unlike many other plebeian detractors of aggregated
wealth – scion of wealth and pamper, educated at Andover and
Yale, insider to banking and Wall Street investment – not a
'tin-hatted' conspiracy theorists alluded to in the main discourse
(“The
Enduring Capitalist Conspiracy For World Government”).
After
the crash of 1929, Norman Dodd says he had “rendered”
a report on the stock market crash to his bank's superiors, and
according to the paraphrase of the Morgan bank officials that was
rehearsed back to him: “Norm what you're saying is we
should return to sound banking ... We will never see sound banking in
the United States again.”
Mr.
Dodd further reveals that the officials rehearsed “chapter
and verse” to explain that point and stated:
“Since
the end of world war one we have been responsible for what they call
the institutionalizing of conflicting interests, and they are so
prevalent inside this country that they can never be resolved.”
With
that as the backdrop, this is what Norman Dodd relates of a
conversation he had with the President of the tax-exempt Ford
Foundation in 1954, as part of his Congressionally mandated
investigation of tax-exempt foundations:
“Mr.
Dodd, we've asked you to come up here today because we thought that
possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is
interested in the activities of the foundations such as ourselves.”
Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr.
Gaither then went on and said: “Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a
hand in the making of policies here have had experience operating
under directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our
grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can
be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
ED
GRIFFIN: Why do the foundations generously support Communist causes
in the United States?
NORMAN
DODD: Well, because to them, Communism represents a means of
developing what we call a monopoly, that is, an organization of, say,
a large-scale industry into an administerable unit.
ED
GRIFFIN: Do they think that they will be the ones to benefit?
NORMAN
DODD: They will be the beneficiaries of it, yes.
Another
ominous thread in the interview is when Dodd reveals of what his lead
investigator discovered in the minutes-books of Carnegie Endowment
for Peace. According to Norman Dodd, the following was recorded on
the old-fashioned dictaphone machine by Katherine Casey as she was
browsing the minutes-books in the CEP library:
'We
are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie
Foundation began operations. In that year, the trustees, meeting for
the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed
throughout the balance of the year in a very learned fashion. The
question is: “Is there any means known more effective
than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?”
And they conclude that no more effective means than war to that end
is known to humanity.
So
then, in 1909, they raised the second question and discussed it,
namely: “How do we involve the United States in a war?”
Well,
I doubt at that time if there was any subject more removed from the
thinking of most of the people of this country than its involvement
in a war. There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt
very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were. Then,
finally, they answered that question as follows: “We must
control the State Department.” That very naturally
raises the question of how do we do that? And they answer it by
saying: “We must take over and control the diplomatic
machinery of this country.” And, finally, they resolve
to aim at that as an objective.
Then
time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War
I. At that time they record on their minutes a shocking report in
which they dispatched to President Wilson a telegram, cautioning him
to see that the war does not end too quickly.
Finally,
of course, the war is over. At that time their interest shifts over
to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States
to what it was prior to 1914 when World War I broke out. At that
point they came to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, “we
must control education in the United States.” They
realize that that's a pretty big task. It is too big for them alone,
so they approach the Rockefeller Foundation with the suggestion that
that portion of education which could be considered domestic be
handled by the Rockefeller Foundation and that portion which is
international should be handled by the Endowment. They then decide
that the key to success of these two operations lay in the alteration
of the teaching of American history.' [See
Norman Dodd Hidden Agenda]
Mr.
Norman Dodd had also revealed another interesting little known fact
in a prior year, in his testimony on “Regionalism” in
1978 before a committee created by the Illinois legislature. He
disclosed the fact that a brand new constitution for the American
continent had already been constructed as a super-state – what
today in its baby-step incarnation is called the North American Union
– and it has been patiently waiting in the wings, like the
Patriot Act, to be sprung at the opportune time just like the
oppressive police-state legislation was sprung upon the American
public within a few weeks of 911. Witness this exchange: [a6]
Mr.
Dodd: [...] Now, the second experience that I would like to share
with you... oh, and incidentally, it is the Ford Foundation's grants
which are responsible for the formulation of this idea of regional
government, and also the idea that given regional government, we
must, in turn, develop and accept and agree to a totally new
Constitution which has already been drawn up, as was mentioned
just a few minutes ago. [previous testimony] [...]
Rep.
Lucco : Fine. You've answered my question. Now, another thing. You
took us back to 1908, and I came on the scene in 1912, about the time
of the Balkan Wars, which you alluded to, and World War I. Now,
today, and you said that we actually created -- or "they",
whoever "they" are - actually created the situation of a
war. Now that we have the...
Mr.
Dodd : Wait, now. You deserve to know who the "they" are.
Rep.
Lucco : I was going to ask you that.
Mr.
Dodd : The "they" in this instance are the Trustees. . .
were the Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
They were men who were prominent lawyers in New York; men like
Nicholas Murray Butler, the head of Columbia University; also, and
subsequently, Allen and Foster Dulles, as attorneys -- that caliber
of gentlemen.
[CDR
Note: "Global Tyranny ...Step by Step", by William Jasper,
quotes Allen W. Dulles from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 - New
York: The Foreign Policy Association, Sept-Oct, 1946- page 46...
"There is no indication that American public opinion, for
example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit
American membership in it. In other words, time - a long time - will
be needed before world government is politically feasible... This
time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion
is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country..."]
Rep.
Lucco : Then I'm trying to collate what you are talking about -- 1912
-- with 1978, the meeting at Camp David, the problems in the Middle
East, the Sino-, or Chinese-Russian situation--are they now getting
us ready for a third world war?
Mr.
Dodd: My answer to that, sir, is that they have set forces in
motion, and these forces cannot help but culminate in World War III.
I happen to personally believe that it is possible to prevent it from
working out that way, but I'm alone in my beliefs.
Rep.
Hudson: Apparently you're not alone, Mr. Dodd. [...]
Rep
Hudson : Mr. Dodd, I have one question. You mentioned a proposed
new Constitution, or federal charter, for this country, sort of
waiting in the wings, you might say.
Mr.
Dodd : Yes.
Rep
Hudson: Is that the one... I have heard tell of a Tugwell type. Is
that the one you refer to?
Mr.
Dodd : That's it, sir.
Rep.
Hudson : Thank you. All right, well, thank you very much, Mr. Dodd.
We are grateful for your being here.
Now,
if Rep. Lucco of the Illinois legislature in 1978 can endeavor to
“collate what you are talking about -- 1912 -- with 1978”,
surely a sensibly learned person today might try to collate the same
to 2008? How might one forensically bring to bear all such historical
knowledge, including revelations by Norman Dodd, on the present
financial crisis and the role of the Federal Reserve System? How does
that relate to the blatantly undisguised drive for world government
today? How does that relate to 911? But no! Not the Federal Reserve
System Chairman, nor any of the Nobel Prize winning economists waxing
more economics gibberish, will go there! [a7]
And
forget about the mainstream presses, erudite pundits, and even lauded
dissent-space politicians like Ron Paul, [a8] and intellectuals like
Noam Chomsky [a9] [a10] and Howard Zinn [a11] – forever only
rehearsing the crimes of the “rogue state” and 911 its
“blowback” – doing so either. Their laudable
emphasis on the facts that are visible like the American F16s and
Apache Helicopters bombing civilians, or the crash of the stock
market as a result of casino capitalism, and lamentable silence on
the ones which are not readily visible like that which remains
shrouded in conspiratorial secrecy for an overarching agenda and must
be forensically uncovered from rational thinking and analysis, or
official narratives that are required to be kept intact, only ends up
circuitously leading their own fawning flock, amidst great applause,
to the pastures dutifully bounded by the same fences as the
mainstream scholars! [a12] [a13] Their intellectualism, apparently,
only extends to the government mandated axioms of “Bin Laden”
and “Al-Qaeeda”, which are most obligingly, implicitly
retained by them in their very learned dissenting discourses that
valiantly document and courageously standup to the crimes of their
own nation. [a14] [a15] And these intellectual are this scribe's own
respected teachers! [a16]
Perhaps
all these gadfly historians and men and women of letters who mainly
delight in rehashing histories which are already faits accomplis, and
in waxing moralizing sermons on being the privileged minority to whom
“Western democracy provides the leisure, the facilities, and
the training to seek the truth lying hidden behind the veil of
distortion and misrepresentation, ... through which the events of
current history are presented to us”, [a17] be graciously
reminded of George Bernard Shaw's famous maxim “We are made
wise not by the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility
for our future”.
One
wishing to learn more may review the pertinently culled reading list
in the Monetary Reform Bibliography, and minimally peruse: “Monetary
Reform: Who will bell the cat?”,
and the Press Release “This
may be a psy-op!”.
As
Noam Chomsky once wrote, and quite correctly too, that “it
takes a sentence to repeat lies and deceit, while it takes
considerably more space to unravel them.” [a18]
Elsewhere, he also wisely noted “It's always a good idea
to start by asking about the facts. It's whenever you hear anything
said very confidently, the first thing that should come to mind is,
wait a minute, is that true?” [a19] Fortunately, many
dedicated and quite ordinary peoples have learnt from Noam Chomsky's
teachings, and have already done just that. They have diligently
asked about the facts for all the official myths which are
axiomatically rehearsed “very confidently”
from the highest to the lowest pulpits across the land, and some of
their truly intellectual works are cited in the Monetary Reform
Bibliography.
The
reader is also invited to ask the same question, “is that
true”, of the 'who-dunit' axiom of the first 911 which
“very confidently” narrated of an invasion from
abroad; of the axiom of 'macro economics inevitability of this
financial meltdown' that Warren Buffet termed “an economic
Pearl Harbor”; and finally, of the axiom of 'the only
solution for avoiding both types of 911s in the future, is world
government controlled by the private central banks at the top of the
pyramid'. The same pyramid-top which keeps the watchful-eye upon the
world from the back of the world's reserve currency, the one dollar
bill! It is an important question to ask, who effectively controls
this reserve currency? For their identity is the identity of the
watchful eye, the real emperors of the world! Upon their feet, lie
the seeds of all the crimes against humanity in modern times. And
upon whose beck and call, lies the “imperial mobilization”
of the sole superpower state to preside over its own calculated
demise, to create 'one world'!
Armed
with all this analysis from many disparate sources and a rational
long-view perspective which connects all the dots – perhaps a
weekend's worth of self-study – one can finally judge for
oneself what is deliberate disinformation, and what are the
indisputable facts of the matter.
Thus,
at least, one is now trivially able to judge for oneself, the worth
of half-truths based disinformation masterpieces which deceive by
omission rather than outright lies, like:
But
even more importantly, now one has sufficient knowledge, as well as
perspective from many sources, to ask the overarching meta question:
Why
should there be any need for super-abundance of non-information, and
at best, disinformation – the profound ignorance of the learned
– on such a transparent matter as the Federal Reserve System,
and on such a mundane issue like money which everyone in society
needs existentially, like air and water, in the first place?
If
one ponders upon that question first, either agrees or disagrees with
the proposition that this subject is shrouded in secrecy and
obfuscation which is what creates mythologies, half-truths, and even
outright lies – not to mention the trillion
dollar Bailout of Wall Street
[a20] that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson now also recommends for
other nations through a coordinated central banks' attack upon all
the world's peoples to ensnare them all in further debt – then
the rest follows on why detective forensic skills are either needed,
or not, to tell the difference between propagandists shilling for
their paymasters, 'tin-hatted' conspiracy theorists indulging their
imaginations, 'technique of infamy' and manufactured red herrings,
and the unarguable real facts of the matter.
Answering
this question first, can further enable one to look at
solutions-spaces more critically without being fooled. But only after
the problem-space, and its awesome power to corrupt and to confuse,
has been first well understood. In this regard, humanity owes a great
debt of gratitude to Ezra Pound, America's most ignored poet and
thinker, for explaining the specialized version of the dialectics of
deception – the 'technique of infamy'.
Thus
We Fail as a “focus group”!
To
begin exploring the solutions-space, the following websites might be
useful. Project Humanbeingsfirst does not endorse, or censure, anyone
of them, and remains largely agnostic when they make sense –
for the real challenge lies elsewhere. A preliminary analysis of two
main proposals, the Gold-Standard
(Mises Institute) favored by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, which does not
make any sense, and the Greenbacks,
(thought to be) favored by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, which does
make sense, can be found in the Monetary Reform Bibliography.
Richard
Cook
also pontificates yet another solution-space in his just released
2008 book “We Hold These Truths – The Hope of Monetary
Reform”. His concept, in its preliminary form, inspired by the
work of the late C.H. Douglas of a century ago called Social Credit,
was published in 2007 here
and here.
[a21] The late Dr. Edward Hamlyn at the British Association for
Monetary Reform, also left the world his gift of the 2007 edition of
“The New Money Text Book” which can be read here.
[a22] The American Monetary Institute has their own Monetary Reform
Act drafted here.
[a23] The 3-1/2 hour video, The
Money Masters,
in its concluding last 45 minutes, also explores a rational
solution-space and makes specific recommendations for national
monetary reform.
[a24] The video also points to an alternative local solutions-space
for individual communities, that of local 'community-currency', as a
sustainable money system to fulfill local trading needs debt-free.
Some Europeans, apparently, tend to agree with this
community-currency prescription. There already are, or will soon be,
65
regional currencies
in operation alongside the EU. One of these currencies, made defunct,
was based on the ideas of Silvio
Gesell
in the now almost century old classic, “The Natural Economic
Order”: [a25]
'Austria's
Tyrolean community of Wörgl launched a scheme based on his
theories, in 1932, reputed to have slashed unemployment at the height
of the Depression. It was watched by Keynes and Irving Fisher, who
saw a fast-depreciating currency as a possible answer to the 1930s
“liquidity trap”.
The
Wörgl experiment was declared illegal by Austria's central bank
when a further 200 other communities launched copycat currencies,
threatening the authority of the state. Though article 35 of the
Bundesbank's founding law forbids the circulation of
“quasi-currencies”, the experiments are being treated as
a harmless eccentricity.'
As
one can easily glean from this quick survey, there is a surfeit of
monetary reform proposals. If only there was some way to bring them
all together on one common platform!
Project
Humanbeingsfirst encourages the readers to first endeavor to fully
comprehend the problem-domain, and what entrenched systems of power
inhibit all debt-free solutions from emerging, before jumping into
the solutions-domain and spending time on the treadmill of inefficacy
– like the antiwar movement. The failure to recognize that
power only respects power, otherwise it is merely a “focus
group”, [a26] has been the latter's undoing. This
certainly does not preclude understanding the technical domain
itself, including the local community needs to transact business at
the individual and local business level; understanding the national
needs to monetize the GDP and transact business at the national
institution level, including collect taxes and pay for services; and
understanding the global needs, not only for international trade, but
also as a stable repository for valuation of public and private
assets, both global and local, and as the calibration of a fair
standard for measuring wealth in vastly disparate levels of
industrial development and/or natural wealth, in rich and poor
nations.
Some will surely
argue that the latter needs a 'global currency'. If they were to do
so, they would fall right into the trap of the banksters. The
afore-cited monetary reform bibliography contains a culled selection
of recent pertinent
news reports
which plainly betray the globalist motivation of the International
bankster cartel who wish to use the present manufactured financial
crisis to lead the world's gullible public to precisely that
conclusion-space. To be managed centrally, by a world cartel of
International private central banks, which would be the first and
last nail in the national-sovereignty of all nations. “Give
me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its
laws”, was not stated in
mere vanity by the Rothschild scions.
Based on the
knowledge and forensic touchstones now gained, anyone capable of even
a modicum of reflection should trivially be able to dismantle red
herring reform proposals made by erudite scholars of empire to
cleverly maneuver the world towards the masters' choice. Take for
instance, this 1978 masterpiece by James
Tobin,
“A Proposal for Monetary Reform”, which many reform
advocates now eagerly promulgate as the “Tobin tax”.
[a27] It retained the international banksters' profiteering axiom of
'money as debt' quite intact, and like his learned colleagues at the
Federal Reserve System routinely do, proposed some other erudite
gibberish for how to green the yellowing leaves. Tobin began with the
following synopsis of the problem domain in his presidential address
at the 1978 conference of the Eastern Economic Association,
Washington DC:
Over
the last twenty years economists' prescriptions for reform of the
international monetary system have taken various shapes. Their common
premise was dissatisfaction with the Bretton Woods regime as it
evolved in the 1950s. Robert Triffin awakened the world to the
contradictions and instabilities of a system of pegged parities that
relied on the debts in reserve currencies, mostly dollars, to meet
growing needs for official reserves. Triffin and his followers saw
the remedy as the internationalization of reserves and reserve
assets; their ultimate solution was a world central bank. Others
diagnosed the problem less in terms of liquidity than in the
inadequacies of balance of payments adjustment mechanisms in the
modern world. The inadequacies were especially evident under the
fixed-parity gold-exchange standard when, as in the 1960s, the
reserve currency center was structurally in chronic deficit. These
analysts sought better and more symmetrical "rules of the game"
for adjustments by surplus and deficit countries, usually including
more flexibility in the setting of exchange parities, crawling pegs,
and the like. Many economists, of whom Milton Friedman was an
eloquent and persuasive spokesman, had all along advocated floating
exchange rates, determined in private markets without official
interventions.
Thus
notice that in the above description of the problem domain, not a
single mention, by anyone, of money coined by private central banks
as a national debt from which they directly profit, like many a blood
sucking leach. The conversation begins, very conveniently, posing
an entirely different problem, as the key problem for monetary
reform! Is this scribe the only one who sees such ab initio
obfuscation by the super learned, which, by its very design, cleverly
circumscribes the entire discourse space, and hence masks the real
problem and its effective solution?
Tobin
continues:
By
the early l970s the third view was the dominant one in the economics
profession, though not among central bankers and private financiers.
And all of a sudden, thanks to Nixon and Connally, we got our wish.
... Clearly, flexible rates have not been the panacea which their
more extravagant advocates had hoped; international monetary problems
have not disappeared from headlines or from the agenda of anxieties
of central banks and governments.
So
the “exchange rate regime” wasn't the right
problem to have solved for in the first place, as Tobin sheepishly
observes from empirical results, for the problems persisted in the
headlines then, and obviously still do today. The solution identified
was in-efficacious for the disease, because it obviously did not
address the root cause of the real disease. And this is essentially
what Tobin is confessing to, that it was the wrong medicine for a
poorly diagnosed disease:
I
believe that the basic problem today is not the exchange rate regime,
whether fixed or floating. Debate on the regime evades and obscures
the essential problem.
Okay,
so let's see what is the new “essential problem” which
Tobin identifies:
That
is the excessive international-or better, inter-currency-mobility of
private financial capital.
So
the fundamental problem for monetary reform is now identified as
“currency mobility”:
Under
either exchange rate regime the currency exchanges transmit
disturbances originating in international financial markets. ...
Specifically the mobility of financial capital limits viable
differences among national interest rates and thus severely restricts
the ability of central banks and governments to pursue monetary and
fiscal policies appropriate to their internal economies.
Notice
the error of obfuscation, of central banks are lumped with the
government, and treated as benevolent entities operating in the best
interest of the peoples just as governments are supposed to. With
that as the unquestioned axiom, Tobin makes the accurate observation:
Likewise
speculation on exchange rates, whether its consequences are vast
shifts of official assets and debts or large movements of exchange
rates themselves, have serious and frequently painful real internal
economic consequences. Domestic policies are relatively powerless to
escape them or offset them.
And
then comes up with the wonderful solution space for this newly
identified problem:
There
are two ways to go. One is toward a common currency, common monetary
and fiscal policy, and economic integration. The other is toward
greater financial segmentation between nations or currency areas,
permitting their central banks and governments greater autonomy in
policies tailored to their specific economic institutions and
objectives. The first direction, however appealing, is clearly not
a viable option in the foreseeable future, i.e., the twentieth
century. I therefore regretfully recommend the second, and my
proposal is to throw some sand in the wheels of our excessively
efficient international money markets.
And
to his great regret, that he can't immediately have world government
of the central banksters as his first preferred solution, Tobin
throws “some sand in the wheels of our excessively efficient
international money markets”! He formulates both the
problem, and its solution thusly:
At
present the world enjoys many benefits of the increased worldwide
economic integration of the last thirty years. But the integration is
partial and unbalanced; in particular private financial markets have
become internationalized much more rapidly and completely than other
economic and political institutions. That is why we are in trouble.
So I turn to the second, and second best, way out, forcing some
segmentation of inter-currency financial markets.
Great
– and that “forcing some segmentation of
inter-currency financial markets” is his famed 'Tobin Tax',
which many would-be monetary reformers now carry upon their own proud
backs as the greatest invention since sliced bread! It is not
un-interesting to observe that Tobin's language of “economic
integration, "one world" ideal, [of] a common currency,
national financial and capital markets, and a single national
monetary policy”, almost mirrors that of David Rockefeller.
And surely, his 'Tobin Tax' may well be a solution to some problem,
but certainly not the most significant one which plagues all mankind
– the spectre of debt-slavery!
This
is, qualitatively, exactly equivalent to the mainstream focussing on
the stated legitimacy of the 'war on terror' – for the suicide
bombers are indeed a grotesque and observable reality – and
axiomatically assuming that those going after them are the good guys
doing so in self-defense! The famous dissent-stream only disagreeing
to the extent that yes, these 'terrorists' are real, but it's
“blowback”, and that we should not be using this for
“imperial mobilization”! But neither entertaining the
thought that perhaps the threat of suicide bombings is being
deliberately manufactured, and in order to make the threats appear
credible and non-immanent, the bombings planned into existence! [a28]
After
all, who did not see the planes crash into the tall buildings on
television? Thus, keeping the first axiom of 911 – 'Bin Laden's
invasion from abroad' – naturally intact, or unexamined, or
deflected as “endless controversy, [which] just gets in the
way of dealing with the immediate situation”, all kinds of
artificial discourse space, and its concomitant inefficacious
solutions, are opened up for energetic debate in society. Being part
of the same world-game, economists too conjure up their pet solutions
keeping the sacred-cow axioms unquestioned, and then use the
resulting failures and/or expected reactions as rationale for pushing
their preferred overarching agenda. Tobin openly regretted in 1978
that the time wasn't ripe for pushing his “one world”
agenda all the way home just yet:
Perhaps
it is true that establishing a common currency and a central
macro-economic policy will automatically generate the institutions,
markets, and mobilities which make the system viable and its regional
economic consequences everywhere tolerable. The risk is one that few
are prepared to take. Moreover, EEC experience to date suggests that
it is very hard to contrive a scenario of gradual evolution towards
such a radically different regime, even though it could well be the
global optimum.
Time
has indeed been made ripe today, another thirty years further into
the machinations for world government from when James Tobin wrote
that! And that same overarching agenda – which Norman Dodd
revealed, which Tobin confirmed, and which even Allen W. Dulles, the
founding father of the CIA and its longest running Director, lamented
in 1946 would require “time - a long time - will be
needed before world government is politically feasible” –
is now being pushed with the most forceful vigor by all the banksters
and their minions [a29].
How
much more confirmation does one need before the pig-headed men and
women of substance – the much lauded persons of the arts,
sciences, and the letters – will recognize what's staring one
blatantly in the face? It is a calculated conspiracy which sees no
price as too burdensome, no war as too onerous, and no extermination
as too unsightly, for creating world government!
It
is also very convenient for the learned to mix up the 'highest order
bit' with 'lower order bits' of a complex matter – irrespective
of deliberately or inadvertently – for the plebes can hardly
tell the difference. And that's just wonderful for creating clever
red herrings when the latter are emphasized, and the former is
ignored! Surely whatever one comes up with is always a solution to
something, and that's just as undeniable as any pathetic tautology.
But is it a solution to the 'most significant bit'? Has the problem
itself been accurately diagnosed, and the systemic multi-lateral
illness accurately mapped out to its very DNA? Not when the
sacred-cow axioms remain untouchable! And this is indeed how one wins
a Nobel Prize and lucrative appointments. [a30] In some cases, even
stays alive.
To
explain the commonsense concept of 'bit' drawn from electrical
engineering, it's like having a “one” in the 7th decimal
place, and also in the 2nd decimal place, to create the total amount
One million and Ten dollars, $1,000,010, and while auditing the
books, focussing on the digit position which identifies the Ten
dollars and not the one which identifies the Million! The
significance of this is not lost to the banksters!
With
that detailed analysis as the backdrop to warn the unwary mind of the
unlimited methods at the disposal of a highly intellectual ruling
elite which predominantly runs its affairs using political science
101, not good intentions 101, it is also important to emphasize that
one monetary system does not necessarily fit all challenges, nor meet
the needs of all nations.
Some
nations are more agrarian, struggling with even the basics of daily
existential necessities, and some are already in the post
industrialization travails borne of superfluity and rape of poorer
nations. Cultural sensitivities and social mores also make one size
fit all an anathema to those peoples who don't always measure all
that they value in dollars and cents!
But
one basic principle of money does fit them all, and no nation's
public is ever against it:
Power
to coin a nation's money, and to manage its money supply, thus
availability of credit to borrowers, must not be put in the
for-profit interest-bearing indenting hands of private individuals
and their banking institutions regardless of how kindly and
benevolent their claimed motives, how great their claimed expertise,
or how compelling the expediency.
And
yet, despite such a common principle uniting all the detractors of
aggregated wealth and proponents of monetary reform, both their
detailed analysis of the problems, as well as their proposed
system-solutions, often suffers from their jumbled philosophies which
almost act like 'religion'. That's partially because it is indeed
'religion' and passion for justice which drives the detractors, not
business motives for personal gain, as it does their antagonists who
little care for the purity, or lack thereof, of their fleecing
system, and only remain focused on how to keep their befuddled flock
in perpetual debt. The bankers therefore, apart from their enormous
power and wealth, hold a practical and expedient advantage over the
'malcontents' who are seeped in idealism, and often with empty
pockets.
Furthermore, all
such proponents of a new monetary system even do not pursue a proper
system design discipline. They invariably link their design to an
imagined economic system of their preference, and none is able to
perceive that one is a mechanism, the other is policy. Many economic
policies, even full blown economic systems as diverse as socialism,
to real free-market capitalism with winner take all, and every social
balance in between, should be efficiently constructible on a properly
architected monetary system mechanism which operates in the public
interest. To understand the real challenges, please see “Monetary
Reform: Who will bell the cat?”
and this
response
to the petition in “Open
Letter to G-20”.
Therefore,
it is unsurprising that some propose platitudes as solutions,
forgetting that the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule are at least
3000 years old but have made little impact on the real world of
avarice and plunder. These include proposals for radical
transformations as if revolutions are just around the corner. Some
propose solutions which merely favor the private central-bankers
themselves, knowingly or unwittingly is immaterial. Many of these are
almost always cosmetic bandaids. These also include partial solutions
that leave the core problems intact. “Religion” is most
apparent in these arguments. An example of this is the gold standard,
or the gold-equivalence standard pushed upon the world by the
dominant victor of World War II at Bretton Woods. The “religion”
in this case is protecting the asset holders against inflation at all
cost.
A memorable
oration in history on this “religious” discourse already
exists. It was made by William
Jennings Bryan
over a century ago. [a31] The principles still remain the same, even
as they were the same under which the English forced the gold
standard upon the colonies to bring the prosperous colonies back from
coining their own money called 'colonial scrip', into the fold of
debt enslavement to the British empire which monopolized the gold.
[a32] This speech is worthy of review by any student, and proponent,
of a gold backed standard. Project Humanbeingsfirst has taken its
first analytic look at the idea of a limited 'precious commodity'
backing a national currency, in “Monetary
Reform: First Look at the Gold Standard”.
In
the ability to tell the nuanced differences therein, among outright
BS, partial asininity born of misconceptions, idealism, and
usefulness at different application hierarchies, lies the key that
can practicably and immediately unlock the world from the debt
shackles of the perpetual monetary conspiracy for world government.
Coming together on one single point of focus, debt-free coining of
money by a government, and single-mindedly driving that focus to the
point of its political acceptance – as fait accompli –
and leaving the design of the actual monetary system under that
guiding principle to a transparent body chartered by the government,
or Congress, as a public process, is the only sensible approach.
Indeed, the only practical reform approach that will ever work.
But
as those given to even a modicum of realism well understand,
rectification of injustices is only possible either with the mighty
hand of the victor's justice, or under the astute gamesmanship of
balance of power. In this case, political power to affect legal
solutions at all levels. Never on its own, regardless of the
soundness of the platitudes or the solutions.
To
build such a balance of power today that might be effective, does not
seem to be in the capability arsenal of those proposing monetary
reform solutions. A largely powerless peoples who cannot even fund
one single economics think-tank of national consequence, and one
single financial political action group of influence, never mind
mustering the kind of lobbying-power before which powerful Congress
persons and local law-makers, mayors, state governors, attorney
generals, and newspaper editorialists might bow their head.
Realistically, I
see no impact by monetary reformers at the national or international
level. For it is but a truism that those who control purse
strings, control nations' destinies – the real golden rule on
earth, as old as mankind! To confiscate their purse-strings –
as easy as a stroke of pen – is a revolutionary act for which
there is no “Jesus” today to cleanse the Congress of the
moneychangers. The Wall Street bailout with the new crown of thorns,
and which the US
Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson
[a33] is now brazenly attempting to extend to crucify all of mankind
upon the new cross of a global monetary system, is proof-sufficient.
Finally,
not wishing to end on the afore-stated pessimistic note as in the
original version of this report, Project Humanbeingsfirst's position
is the one principally reflected in the political-science notion of
countering power with power and not platitudes, and principles of
hegemony with principles for liberty, not ego nor preference for a
particular “religion”. The first loss of sovereignty of a
nation, is the loss of controlling its money. The founding fathers of
the United States of America understood that principle just as well
as the founders of empire from time immemorial – as evidenced
in this excerpt from an oped which appeared in the Times of London:
[a34]
“If this
mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America,
shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will
furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be
without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its
commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history
of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to
North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy
every monarchy on the globe.”
It
entirely sums up Project Humanbeingsfirst's antithetical axiom
adopted as its rallying cry for abolishing the Federal Reserve System
– the power of private central banking – forcefully
reclaiming, for all nations and all peoples, what President Lincoln
had noted: [a35]
“The
Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and
credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the
buying power of the consumers.”
“The
privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme
prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest
creative opportunity.”
“By the
adoption of these principles ... the taxpayers will be saved immense
sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the
servant of humanity.” (See Public Debt)
Footnotes
This
essay has extensive embedded reference links in the online version of
which the more pertinent ones that beg citation or elaboration are
noted below.
[a1]
Introduction is part of the Monetary Reform Bibliography by Zahir
Ebrahim,
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-bibliography.html
[a2]
Stephen Lendman, The Financial Meltdown: This Time Is Different,
October 22, 2008
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10647
[a3]
Warren Buffett, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2002 Annual Report, pages
13-15: http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/2002ar/2002ar.pdf
“Derivatives
are financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that,
while now latent, are potentially lethal”, and, “We view
them as time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the
economic system”
[a4]
Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-who-will-bell-thecat.html
[a5]
Raphael Eitan, quoted in: Former Israeli army chief drowns, BBC News,
Nov. 23, 2004,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4034765.stm
“When
we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it
will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.”
[a6]
Norman Dodd, Testimony on Regionalism, September 26, 1978. Transcript
of Public Hearing – Joint Committee on Regional Government –
September 26, 1978, Edwardsville, Illinois, Norman Dodd – pgs
51-61 http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/regionalism/dodd.htm
[a7]
Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-who-will-bell-thecat.html
[a8]
Zahir Ebrahim, Open Letter to Hon. Ron Paul Supporters October 29,
2008
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/open-letter-to-ronpaul-supporters.html
[a9]
Zahir Ebrahim, Letter to Noam Chomsky on Steven Jones seminal paper
on the destruction of WTC towers, April 21, 2008
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/04/letter-noamchomsky-jones-paper.html
[a10]
Noam Chomsky, putting out his pathetic “911” Seven
Stories Press booklet to tote his broken horn of “blowback”
and state sponsored terrorism immediately after 9/11, retaining all
the core-axioms seeded by the Pentagon and the White House, not to
mention making a ton of money on it at the expense of devastated
civilizations, has left this scribe intellectually standing quite
alone to fend for himself, without any priests!
See
Noam Chomsky, Closet Capitalist, by Peter Schweizer, Hoover
Institution, who quotes Chomsky:
http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2912626.html
“If
you look at the things I write—articles for Z Magazine, or
books for South End Press, or whatever—they are mostly based on
talks and meetings and that kind of thing. But I’m kind of a
parasite. I mean, I’m living off the activism of others. I’m
happy to do it.”
Peter
Schweizer further observes: “Chomsky’s marketing efforts
shortly after September 11 give new meaning to the term war
profiteer. In the days after the tragedy, he raised his speaking fee
from $9,000 to $12,000 because he was suddenly in greater demand. He
also cashed in by producing another instant book. Seven Stories
Press, a small publisher, pulled together interviews conducted via
e-mail that Chomsky gave in the three weeks following the attack on
the Twin Towers and rushed the book to press. His controversial views
were hot, particularly overseas. By early December 2001, the
publisher had sold the foreign rights in 19 different languages. The
book made the best-seller list in the United States, Canada, Germany,
India, Italy, Japan, and New Zealand. It is safe to assume that he
netted hundreds of thousands of dollars from this book alone.”
The
following video clip of Noam Chomsky's interview on CBC is also
disturbing to observe, in that while he very eruditely questions the
overt motivations of the 'rogue state' bombing Afghanistan as
outright criminal, he leaves unquestioned, the core-axiom upon which
the state sponsored terrorism itself was based – he does not
question the government's narrative of 911. Just like once before,
for the JFK's assassination, Chomsky did not question that official
narrative either. Noam Chomsky still maintained, in his email
communication as of 2008 with this scribe, that 'Bin Laden' had done
911, and he scoffs at those who might argue that the only person who
couldn't have done the controlled demolition of WTC-7 on which no
plane hit, is a yogi sitting on his rump in the Hindu-Kush, armed to
the teeth with AK-47s, cell phones, laptops, and prayers!
Nevertheless, apparently, it is acceptable to the 'rogue state' that
controlled critique be permitted on its “imperialism”
upon others in order to channel and manage a controlled dissent on
what is already obvious to all and sundry, and to vigorously prevent
dissent from being extended to what might really interfere with its
agendas and complex magic-shows such as genuinely conscionable
thinking peoples correctly adding two plus two equals four and
effectively mobilizing protest in millions based upon it. Protests of
a few hundred thousand is merely “focus group”. It
will remain so as long as there is an external enemy to continually
scare the peoples with. Protest of ten million in major cities
however, when the enemy is known to be within, an inside job, becomes
“democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”.
Chomsky had explained 'Manufacturing Consent'. This scribe has
explained 'Manufacturing Dissent' in “Weapons of Mass Deception
– The Master Social Science”
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/06/wmd-master-social-science.html
(Part 1 of 2 CBC Interview) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10rTPSSmOFw
(Part 2 of 2 CBC Interview) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bieFwutoqvA
(Part 1 of 2 CBC Interview) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10rTPSSmOFw
(Part 2 of 2 CBC Interview) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bieFwutoqvA
[a11]
Paul Joseph Watson, Howard Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If
9/11 Was An Inside Job, Tuesday, November 18, 2008,
http://www.prisonplanet.com/howard-zinn-i-dont-care-if-911-was-an-inside-job.html
Transcript
from video clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-WQ5z53lW8
In
response to a question by Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US
Senate from Colorado, Howard Zinn stated:
“Of
course as I told you, I never believe the government, or rarely
believe the government. Do I believe the government version of what
happened? Well, I am skeptical. Do I believe that the government was
in the conspiracy to do this? I don't know. I don't know enough about
the situation, and the truth is, I don't care that much. That's past.
... the whole argument that the people are engaged in, about, was the
government behind a conspiracy to blow up the two towers, to me
that's a diversion from what we really have to do, deal with the fact
that whatever, whoever
was behind 9/11, the government took advantage of that, to take us to
war, and to put us on a disastrous course, and it's that war, those
wars, that disastrous course we have to deal with. I don't want to go
back to the controversy that I think is endless controversy, and just
gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation.”
Howard
Zinn not dealing with the first-cause enabler of “imperial
mobilization” lends automatic endorsement to the government's
axiomatic propagandistic lie, that there is an external enemy. And it
is precisely that propaganda which keeps the fire of “doctrinal
motivation and intellectual commitment” lighted underneath all
the wars that Howard Zinn does want to deal with! So even for
pragmatically dealing with the “immediate situation”,
directly dealing with the first-pretext cause to yank away the very
fuel of “doctrinal motivation” might appear to the sound
of mind to be the most efficacious and sensible course of action.
Therefore, deliberately not dealing with it only lends zero efficacy
to all the subsequent dissent because the existence of the enemy
remains unchallenged. That's just peachy for the government, isn't
it? By its more logical name, such devious support of the ruling
elite's mission, might rightly be called 'Manufacturing Dissent'! So
much for the intellectuals of the West – where “truth”
is a commodity, like everything else.
[a12]
Zahir Ebrahim, Responsibility of Intellectuals – Redux,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/03/responsibility-of-intellectuals-redux.html
[a13]
Noam Chomsky, in an interview with Barry Pateman at M.I.T.,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO2e0DrnYg4 makes the following coldly
accurate observation on deliberate attitude control being
calculatingly practiced upon the public in free-societies by its
ruling-elite, but then, quite inexplicably, fails to apply that same
observation to his own blind acceptance of government propaganda of
'Bin laden' did 911, just like his friend Howard Zinn (op. cit.),
also forgetting his own decades' old moralizing proclamations on the
responsibility of intellectuals:
“Intellectuals
are in a position to expose the lies of governments, to analyze
actions according to their causes and motives and often hidden
intentions.” (Ibid.).
Transcript
from video clip, 7:15 to 8:50,
“The
people who understand this the best, are those who are carrying out
the control of domination. In the more free societies like the United
States and England, where popular struggles have won a lot of freedom
over the years, and the state has limited capacity to coerce, there
is a very striking, that it is precisely in those societies, that
elite groups, the business world, and state managers, and so on,
recognized early on, that they are going to have to develop massive
methods of control of attitude and opinion, because you can't control
people by force anymore. And therefore, you have to modify their
consciousness, so that they don't perceive that they are living
under conditions of alienation, oppression, subordination, and so on.
In fact, that's what, probably a couple of trillion dollars a year
are spent on this in the United States, very self-consciously, I mean
from the framing of television advertisements for two-year olds, to
what you are taught in graduate school economics programs. It's
designed to create a kind of a consciousness of subordination, and
it's also intended, specifically, and pretty consciously, to suppress
normal human emotions.”
For
a deconstruction of this Chomsky admission “you have to
modify their consciousness” of the diabolical modus
operandi of persuasion to create both conformity of views among the
sheep in the mainstream as well as inefficacy of dissent among the
conscionable rabble rousers in the dissent-stream, see Project
Humanbeingsfirst report “Weapons of Mass Deception – The
Master Social Science”
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/06/wmd-master-social-science.html
[a14]
Zahir Ebrahim, The attack of 'Al-Qaeeda' and Pakistani 'loose nukes',
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/04/alqaeeda-loose-nukes-pakistan.html
and 'Bin Laden': Key enabler of “imperial mobilization”
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/04/binladen-keyenabler-nuclearattack.html
[a15]
Zahir Ebrahim, Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social
Science,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/06/wmd-master-social-science.html
[a16]
This scribe in his youthful years benefited greatly from the
voluminous works, as well as from the courage, of both Noam Chomsky
and Howard Zinn. The former taught this scribe a couple of his famous
foreign policy classes at M.I.T., and the latter very kindly wrote a
recommendation letter for the book “Prisoners of the Cave”
to the publishers
http://prisonersofthecave.blogspot.com/2007/04/acknowledgment.html
This scribe's humble interlocution of Noam Chomsky on matters du jour
can be read at:
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/02/test-post1.html#Z-and-Noam-Chomsky
[a17]
Noam Chomsky, quoted, op. cit. Responsibility of Intellectuals –
Redux.
[a18]
Noam Chomsky, Chomsky talks back: Protestors story is ‘mere
deceit’, Letter to Editor Newton Tab, Tue Apr 24, 2007,
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/opinions/x2027601628
[a19]
Noam Chomsky, on The Clash of Civilization,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT64TNho59I
[a20]
Zahir Ebrahim, No Exits on this Super-Highway!
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/09/no-exits-on-this-super-highway.html
[a21]
Richard Cook, An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform for the United
States, April 26, 2007, and, Monetary Reform and How a National
Monetary System Should Work, May 11, 2007, both by globalresearch,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5615
[a22]
Edward Hamlyn, The New Money Text Book, 2007, British Association for
Monetary Reform,
http://www.monetaryreform.org/moneytextbook/The_New_Money_Text_Book.pdf
[a23]
Stephen Zarlenga, The Need for Monetary Reform, AMI,
http://www.monetary.org/need_for_monetary_reform.html
[a24]
Money Masters: The Monetary Reform Act,
http://www.themoneymasters.com/mra.htm
[a25]
Germans get by without the euro, UK Telegraph, 18 Jan 2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2802861/Germans-get-by-without-the-euro.html
[a26]
President George W. Bush, February 23, 2003,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030218-1.html
“First
of all, you know, size of protest, it's like deciding, well, I'm
going to decide policy based upon a focus group.”
[a27]
James Tobin, A Proposal for Monetary Reform, Eastern Economic
Journal, July/October 1978, pp. 153-159.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/glotax/currtax/original.htm
[a28]
Project Humanbeingsfirst, A letter to the American Peoples, May 11,
2008,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/05/letter-to-american-peoples.html
[a29]
News reports cited in
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-bibliography.html#Pertinent-News-Reports
[a30]
Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-who-will-bell-thecat.html
[a31]
William Jennings Bryan, Cross of Gold, July 9, 1896, Speech at the
Democratic National Convention in Chicago,
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5354/
[a32]
The Money Masters – How International Bankers Gained Control of
America, 215 minutes,
http://www.themoneymasters.com/the-money-masters/
[a33]
Project Humanbeingsfirst, Press Release October 09 2008, This may be
a psy-op!
http://pressreleases-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/pr-resp-wmr-fema-martiallaw-oct092008.html
[a34]
Times of London, oped text cited in: The Money Masters – How
International Bankers Gained Control of America, 215 minutes,
http://www.themoneymasters.com/the-money-masters/
[a35]
Abraham Lincoln, Ibid.
[John
Perkins] Zahir Ebrahim Introducing “A Game As Old As Empire”,
the sequel to “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”,
http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/03/introducing-game-as-old-as-empire.html
Additional
Footnotes
[Norman
Dodd Hidden Agenda] The Hidden Agenda for World Government,
Interview with G. Edward Griffin, 1982,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16_4Sgluk4Q
[Money
as Debt] http://www.moneyasdebt.net/
http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/MoneyasDebt/
http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/MoneyasDebt/index2.htm
http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/store/index.html
[Public
Debt] Zahir Ebrahim, The entrenched notion of Public Debt in
America – will take a gestalt shift to overcome! October
30, 2008, notes the United States Bureau of the Public Debt,
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/10/monetary-reform-seeding-prose.html
Begin
Quote
On
the US Treasury department website, there is a service called:
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/
Its
job, as stated,
“You
haven't heard of the Bureau of the Public Debt before? We're a small
agency within the Department of the Treasury. Our customers are your
neighbors, co-workers, and most likely you, too. You're our customer
if you've ever bought any type of Treasury security for yourself or,
as millions have done in the case of savings bonds, as a gift for
someone else.
Our
job is to borrow the money needed to operate the federal government
and to account for the resulting debt. In a nutshell, we borrow by
selling Treasury bills, notes, and bonds, as well as U.S. Savings
Bonds; we pay interest to investors; and, when the time comes to pay
back the loans, we redeem investors' securities. Every time we borrow
or pay back money, it affects the outstanding debt of the United
States.”
The
second paragraph is revealing as it is quintessentially axiomatic:
“Our
job is to borrow the money needed to operate the federal government
and to account for the resulting debt.”
End
Quote
Why
does that job even exist? There is a presupposition, an axiom based
on the a priori supposition of debt, and which remains unexamined ---
which is why that statement is axiomatic. The entrenched forces which
make that job axiomatic are neither understood nor its insidious
power appreciated by monetary reform advocates who seem to think that
these forces will magically just disappear to enable “reform”.
Which is why I have come to realize that monetary reform is in fact a
social engineering scam designed by the oligarchy to keep activists
occupied and chattering away in futility. The knowledge of the
subversion itself is harmless since nothing can be done with that
knowledge in any practical way. The risk analysis in game theory
scenario analysis would indicate that permitting this discourse to
exist in rebel hands is in fact useful to empire.
Begin
Quote
On
the same home page, is also this axiomatic quote from Alexander
Hamilton, the father of private central banking in the newly
independent former colonies, the Bank of North America, followed by
the First Bank of the United States when he was the Secretary of the
Treasury:
“The
United States debt, foreign and domestic, was the price of liberty.”
So
– the coupling between the federal government's Treasury
Department, and private central banking, is as old as America. It is
irrefutably captured in that quote of Hamilton. Despite the
occasional bouts of heroism by presidents like Andrew Jackson: “You
are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out, and by God, I will
rout you out.”, and after killing the Second Bank of the
United States, “I killed the bank”, for the brief
respite of 77 years until 1913, it has become such an axiom that
today, generations later, a federal government department is created
to monitor the size of that debt.
End
Quote
Print
URL:
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/11/monetary-conspiracy-world-government.html
Addendum First
Published November 23, 2008 | Links and bookmarks fixed
March 05, 2010 | Last
Updated links fixed and footnotes extended Thursday, March 12, 2015
12071
Links fixed August 25, 2016
The
author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary
geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied
EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley
(patents here),
and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden
2003 book was rejected by six publishers and can be read on the web
at http://PrisonersoftheCave.org.
He may be reached at http://Humanbeingsfirst.org.
Verbatim reproduction license at
http://www.humanbeingsfirst.org#Copyright.
Copyright
Notice:
All
material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with
full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety,
unmodified and unedited, for any purpose, granted, provided the URL
sentence and this copyright notice are also reproduced verbatim as
part of this license, and not doing so may be subject to copyright
license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html.
The rights of the author to express these views are based on
inalienable rights noted at http://www.hrweb.org/legal/undocs.html,
and to do so freely without suffering intimidation and duress. All
quotations and excerpts are based on non-profit "fair use"
in the greater public interest consistent with the understanding of
laws noted at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html.
Full copyright notice and Exclusions at
http://www.humanbeingsfirst.org.
The
Monetary Conspiracy for World Government 34/34
