Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I believe a temporary return to isolationism is what we need. We need to re-learn how to produce our own goods and food in order to have a stable economy. Service oriented economies can never be stable.
How would you break the mold and turn this country back toward constitutional government and preservation of individual right vs. promotion of corporate greed?
As you may have noticed, I am an independent thinker.
My instinct is that Ron Paul would put the Constitution first as he has promised, and things would get really strange in D.C. if people got pissed enough to put him into office.
I disagree with his abortion stance, but I believe he would ultimately do the right thing there.
What would it hurt to have an honest man in the White House for a change?
But then there's the very high likelihood of assassination, so I guess I would have to have an equal trust in the character of his VP candidate.
I have read the interviews, the witness accounts, looked at the videos, and made my own decisions a long time ago. You know, the same way I evaluated the religious tenets of Christianity. That is probably why I am not aware of current events in the "truther movement". I dont' need a movement to help with my decision making.
I am currently finishing a petition to the Supreme Court of the United States concerning an illegal seizure of my property by the Lafayette, Colorado police and rulings by Municipal Judge Roger Buchholz in that city which were in violation of the rules of civil procedure and the law of the case.
Then I get to pursue my state appeal of 20th Judicial District Judge Roxanne Bailin who used an offer in compromise to find against me in a civil suit in violation of rule 408 of civil procedure and found that a contract existed when none was presented and the person who claimed to have the contract admitted on the stand that he couldn't remember the provisions of the alleged contract or whether it happened in January or May, as his pleadings contradicted each other.
This is the result of a July 2007 incident and I have been rather preoccupied with my own fight for civil rights and justice. Win or lose, the public record of this fight will be published on my own web site so people can decide for themselves if the judiciary and the government continue to represent We the People.
Sorry, from the context, I somehow got the impression that you were female.
Of course there are some "first dates" that are very special, but when you're looking for a serious relationship those bedpost notchers get really old.
I did not know of him by name. I am watching a video on DavidRayGriffin.org. I agree 100% so far.
I made the statement I made about BinLaden's son based on the testimony of Siebel Edmonds:
By Brad Friedman on 7/31/2009 1:07pm Ryland: A Sibel Edmonds 'Bombshell' - Bin Laden Worked for U.S. Until 9/11 Edmonds expert fills in details from recent BRAD BLOG interview with noted, gagged FBI translator/whistleblower...
During my recent interview with FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds on the Mike Malloy Show, a caller had asked her opinion on whether she believed 9/11 to have been "an inside job."
Edmonds replied by first specifying "As I have done for the past 7 or 8 years, I have basically stuck with what I know, first-hand, directly, my own knowledge, based on my own experience, based on what I obtained, which is not a lot, but it is extremely important."
After explaining the difference between what she does and doesn't know first hand, she went on to explain: "I have information about things that our government has lied to us about. I know. For example, to say that since the fall of the Soviet Union we ceased all of our intimate relationship with Bin Laden and the Taliban - those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11." ...
Her complete response, pulled from the lengthy interview (full, commercial-free audio here) has been transcribed by Luke Ryland, perhaps the world's foremost expert in all things Sibel Edmonds related.
Today in a highly-recommended diary at dKos, Ryland filled in a good chunk of details from Edmonds' references, reporting that her comments are, in fact, a "bombshell"... Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds dropped a bombshell on the Mike Malloy radio show, guest-hosted by Brad Friedman (audio, partial transcript).
In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained 'intimate relations' with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11."
These 'intimate relations' included using Bin Laden for 'operations' in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These 'operations' involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner "as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict," that is, fighting 'enemies' via proxies.
As Sibel has previously described, and as she reiterates in this latest interview, this process involved using Turkey (with assistance from 'actors from Pakistan, and Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia') as a proxy, which in turn used Bin Laden and the Taliban and others as a proxy terrorist army.
After filling in many of the details, with scores of informational links to support the allegations, Ryland summarizes thusly:
The bombshell here is obviously that certain people in the US were using Bin Laden up to September 11, 2001.
It is important to understand why: the US outsourced terror operations to al Qaeda and the Taliban for many years, promoting the Islamization of Central Asia in an attempt to personally profit off military sales as well as oil and gas concessions.
The silence by the US government on these matters is deafening. So, too, is the blowback.
"Alone for the first time in his life, Omar took a car to the Pakistan border. A few months later, his father destroyed the World Trade Center, killing thousands. "I never thought the attack would be civilian buildings," Omar says. "I thought it would be a ship, like the USS Cole. My father's dream was to bring the Americans to Afghanistan. He would do the same thing he did to the Russians. I was surprised the Americans took the bait. "
I wonder how much the CIA paid him to do that interview...
If you're in CA your vote might not count. Not if Poll workers get to take the machines home on "sleepovers" before the election. Any 12th grade geek can reprogram them.
"I write the polls that make the whole world sing..."
C'mon now, just sing along with the propaganda machine, don't pay attention to all of those "conspiracy theorists" with PHDs and all of those bloggers writing about the evil Fed and erosion of civil rights.
I can not believe in a benevolent Fed - one of the best examples is that knowing that a sudden contraction in money supply was coming to create the "crisis" of 2008 several U.S. federal reserve Banks went short COMEX silver and caused the collapse fromj $20 to $10. I have seen the government papers on this but can't take time to look them up now.
The post below includes some kooky ideas that I don't buy into, but I think his facts are pretty much on the money.
Now do you understand why I don't believe the banks of the Federal reserve are acting in the best interest of this country?
As for government derelection of duty, it is the responsibility of Congress to coin money under the Constitution. If they are going to farm out this responsibility don't you think they have an obligation to at least oversee the process? The Federal reserve has NEVER been fully audited.
If it's not something I am familiar with I look for secondary sources. I don't consider any journalists as deliverers of unquestionable fact. They can be wrong, they can be fed false information.
I will even look into the stories of some of the weirdo reporters and see if there is some basis in fact that has been distorted.
You seem to be under the impression that my "kooky source" is some sort of a spiritual guide or personality. It is simply Spirit, the One Source of all.
If you respect a person (and it is my belief that we should respect every person and at worst ignore them if we can't deal with them) you can listen and consider without feeling compelled to change your own beliefs. If the ideas are credible, you may adapt.
Christians were told to witness through love, not proselytizing. I have trouble with the love part sometimes, I have often been told that I do not "suffer fools gladly".
Friedman rejected the use of fiscal policy as a tool of demand management; and he held that the government's role in the guidance of the economy should be restricted severely. Friedman wrote extensively on the Great Depression, which he termed the Great Contraction, arguing that it had been caused by an ordinary financial shock whose duration and seriousness were greatly increased by the subsequent contraction of the money supply caused by the misguided policies of the directors of the Federal Reserve.
The Fed was largely responsible for converting what might have been a garden-variety recession, although perhaps a fairly severe one, into a major catastrophe. Instead of using its powers to offset the depression, it presided over a decline in the quantity of money by one-third from 1929 to 1933 ... Far from the depression being a failure of the free-enterprise system, it was a tragic failure of government. —Milton Friedman, Two Lucky People, 233
Friedman also argued for the cessation of government intervention in currency markets, thereby spawning an enormous literature on the subject, as well as promoting the practice of freely floating exchange rates. His close friend George Stigler explained, "As is customary in science, he did not win a full victory, in part because research was directed along different lines by the theory of rational expectations, a newer approach developed by Robert Lucas, also at the University of Chicago."[25]
I can appreciate that, but it was the first one that I found and it said what I wanted to say. If I had found anything questionable I would have searched further. I really don't trust ANY source.
I have been kicked off of WikiAnswers, OathKeepers, Daily Kos, and probably a few more if I stop to think about it. I get kicked off for being "too religious" and for "not religious enough". I get kicked off for makeing the factual statement that the Federal Reserve banks are not government entities, and then I get kicked off of another site because I'm "socialist" or "statist" because I believe in a social safety net.
People generally don't want to question their own preconceptions, they don't want to try to see the other guy's point of view. If you challenge their ideas with common sense, logic, or actual history very few will step up and have a civil discussion and try to support their beliefs rationally.
Until the people of this country ditch the "my party,church,faction, whatever is completely right and yours is all wrong" attitude we won't be able to come together as WE THE PEOPLE and restore legal government.
It's not really a leap of faith, it's more of a you had to be there thing LOL!
Sometime when you feel like you have your back to the wall or are just plain confused about what is going on in your life give prayer or meditation a try.
Don't forget though, communication is a two way street, especially with Spirit. Too many well churched Christians think that prayer is just giving God your grocery list. The important things happen when you listen and find new insight and new inspiration.
I knew about the Friedman conclusion about the FED causing the great depression, did not read the entire book but I read excerpts. I was actually sourcing that, and I liked the quotes from the PBS interview. The Bernake quote was icing on the cake.
I have no "regular sources of information". When I want to know about something I research it, check several sources, and make up my own mind.
Are you so enmeshed in your own belief system that you can not understand the concept of making independent evaluation based on a variety of sources?
I have gained some modest insight into interpreting stock charts, but I attribute that to a great deal of study and the training of the intuitive mind.
I have never had a metaphysical revelation that I could make money on, they always come out of the blue and they are usually for the benefit of someone else.
Even Bernake admits the Federal Reserve caused the Great Depression, who is this guy trying to kid?
"We have been one of the institutions to repeatedly say that we believe the renminbi was substantially undervalued and that something had to be done to fix this problem,' IMF managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said in a news conference opening the agency's annual meeting. 'Many do consider their currency as a weapon, and this is not for the good of the world economy.'... World Bank President Robert Zoellick noted that a wave of trade protectionism sparked the Great Depression in the 1930s and cautioned that policymakers needed to calm the current dispute before it gets out of hand."
MONEYNETDAILY Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression Fed chief says, 'We did it. … very sorry, won't do it again' Posted: March 19, 2008 9:02 pm Eastern
Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that's the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
The worldwide economic downturn called the Great Depression, which persisted from 1929 until about 1939, was the longest and worst depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. While originating in the U.S., it ended up causing drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in virtually every country on earth. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the Great Depression ranks second only to the Civil War as the gravest crisis in American history."
What exactly caused this economic tsunami that devastated the U.S. and much of the world?
In "A Monetary History of the United States," Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman along with coauthor Anna J. Schwartz lay the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve.
WND Exclusive MONEYNETDAILY Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression Fed chief says, 'We did it. … very sorry, won't do it again' Posted: March 19, 2008 9:02 pm Eastern
Despite the varied theories espoused by many establishment economists, it was none other than the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression and the horrific suffering, deprivation and dislocation America and the world experienced in its wake. At least, that's the clearly stated view of current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
The worldwide economic downturn called the Great Depression, which persisted from 1929 until about 1939, was the longest and worst depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. While originating in the U.S., it ended up causing drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in virtually every country on earth. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the Great Depression ranks second only to the Civil War as the gravest crisis in American history."
What exactly caused this economic tsunami that devastated the U.S. and much of the world?
In "A Monetary History of the United States," Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman along with coauthor Anna J. Schwartz lay the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve.
Here's how Friedman summed up his views on the Fed and the Depression in an Oct. 1, 2000, interview with PBS:
PBS: You've written that what really caused the Depression was mistakes by the government. Looking back now, what in your view was the actual cause?
Friedman: Well, we have to distinguish between the recession of 1929, the early stages, and the conversion of that recession into a major catastrophe.
The recession was an ordinary business cycle. We had repeated recessions over hundreds of years, but what converted [this one] into a major depression was bad monetary policy.
The Federal Reserve System had been established to prevent what actually happened. It was set up to avoid a situation in which you would have to close down banks, in which you would have a banking crisis. And yet, under the Federal Reserve System, you had the worst banking crisis in the history of the United States. There's no other example I can think of, of a government measure which produced so clearly the opposite of the results that were intended.
And what happened is that [the Federal Reserve] followed policies which led to a decline in the quantity of money by a third. For every $100 in paper money, in deposits, in cash, in currency, in existence in 1929, by the time you got to 1933 there was only about $65, $66 left. And that extraordinary collapse in the banking system, with about a third of the banks failing from beginning to end, with millions of people having their savings essentially washed out, that decline was utterly unnecessary.
At all times, the Federal Reserve had the power and the knowledge to have stopped that. And there were people at the time who were all the time urging them to do that. So it was, in my opinion, clearly a mistake of policy that led to the Great Depression.
Although economists have pontificated over the decades about this or that cause of the Great Depression, even the current Fed chairman Ben S. Bernanke, agrees with Friedman's assessment that the Fed caused the Great Depression.
At a Nov. 8, 2002, conference to honor Friedman's 90th birthday, Bernanke, then a Federal Reserve governor, gave a speech at Friedman's old home base, the University of Chicago. Here's a bit of what Bernanke, the man who now runs the Fed – and thus, one of the most powerful people in the world – had to say that day:
I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. …
Today I'd like to honor Milton Friedman by talking about one of his greatest contributions to economics, made in close collaboration with his distinguished coauthor, Anna J. Schwartz. This achievement is nothing less than to provide what has become the leading and most persuasive explanation of the worst economic disaster in American history, the onset of the Great Depression – or, as Friedman and Schwartz dubbed it, the Great Contraction of 1929-33.
… As everyone here knows, in their "Monetary History" Friedman and Schwartz made the case that the economic collapse of 1929-33 was the product of the nation's monetary mechanism gone wrong. Contradicting the received wisdom at the time that they wrote, which held that money was a passive player in the events of the 1930s, Friedman and Schwartz argued that "the contraction is in fact a tragic testimonial to the importance of monetary forces."
After citing how Friedman and Schwartz documented the Fed's continual contraction of the money supply during the Depression and its aftermath – and the subsequent abandonment of the gold standard by many nations in order to stop the devastating monetary contraction – Bernanke adds:
… Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, Friedman and Schwartz noted, bank panics were typically handled by banks themselves – for example, through urban consortiums of private banks called clearinghouses. If a run on one or more banks in a city began, the clearinghouse might declare a suspension of payments, meaning that, temporarily, deposits would not be convertible into cash. Larger, stronger banks would then take the lead, first, in determining that the banks under attack were in fact fundamentally solvent, and second, in lending cash to those banks that needed to meet withdrawals. Though not an entirely satisfactory solution – the suspension of payments for several weeks was a significant hardship for the public – the system of suspension of payments usually prevented local banking panics from spreading or persisting. Large, solvent banks had an incentive to participate in curing panics because they knew that an unchecked panic might ultimately threaten their own deposits.
It was in large part to improve the management of banking panics that the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. However, as Friedman and Schwartz discuss in some detail, in the early 1930s the Federal Reserve did not serve that function. The problem within the Fed was largely doctrinal: Fed officials appeared to subscribe to Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's infamous 'liquidationist' thesis, that weeding out "weak" banks was a harsh but necessary prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. Moreover, most of the failing banks were small banks (as opposed to what we would now call money-center banks) and not members of the Federal Reserve System. Thus the Fed saw no particular need to try to stem the panics. At the same time, the large banks – which would have intervened before the founding of the Fed – felt that protecting their smaller brethren was no longer their responsibility. Indeed, since the large banks felt confident that the Fed would protect them if necessary, the weeding out of small competitors was a positive good, from their point of view.
In short, according to Friedman and Schwartz, because of institutional changes and misguided doctrines, the banking panics of the Great Contraction were much more severe and widespread than would have normally occurred during a downturn. …
Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.
Best wishes for your next ninety years.
Today, the entire Western financial world holds its breath every time the Fed chairman speaks, so influential are the central bank's decisions on markets, interest rates and the economy in general. Yet the Fed, supposedly created to smooth out business cycles and prevent disruptive economic downswings like the Great Depression, has actually done the opposite.
No, I said education is unrelated to the process of logic, correcting your misquote of what I said.
Your question about the web browser was vague. I had no idea where you were going with it.
I am discussing LOGIC - as a system of inquiry that may or may not be hypothetical, and may or may not use assumptions that deal with a metaphysical realm. It is a science of its own, not a scientific tool.
Since I have experienced the metaphysical realm I can apply logical methods to understand those experiences.
Logic tells me they are truly metaphysical, outside of the known physical world. The logical proofs can not be extended outside of my own Spiritual understanding because the assumptions used are experienced by a single soul. I can, however share my experiences with other who have had similar experiences and we can come up with theories in common and shared beliefs.
You are presuming that you know more about these experiences than I do. I did not "figure out that a cat scratch can lead to a severe infection". I am highly alergic to cats and that did not occur to me at all. I listened to her complain about the scratch all day, on the way home I flashed on the word gangrene and began to describe its effects, probably information taken from reading about the civil war. It was an intuitive process, not an intellectual one, but I succeeded in scaring her enough to get her to the hospital as soon as she got home where earlier in the day she insisted that she didn't need to see a doctor.
Generalizations may have a practical value. But when generalizations are used to categorize an individual they become prejudice.
Those studies were constructed to analyze independents as a group, not their individual beliefs and personal histories. So no matter how many facts and conclusions you have and no matter how accurate they are they can not be applied to me as an individual.
In your post you admitted that you think I lean to the left but my beliefs about the Fed indicate a different category.
My beliefs about the Fed are based on historical, factual research. Your studies are based on a research design which may or may not be constructed to come to certain conclusions. Valid or not the conclusions can not be imposed on any one individual, only the group as a whole.
That was 40 years ago. It was a hippie style coffee house in the basement of a church. The pastor would request that we attend services upstairs from time to time when the board stared rumbling about kicking us out.
It was the only true Christian fellowship I have ever experienced.
Those incidents were way before web browsers and way before I finished my college degree. I don't THINK there is a cosmic force that answers prayer, I KNOW it from personal experience.
I did not say that one could not use logic without
education or making assumptions
. I stated that one could not use logic without a base of knowledge or making assumptions, I said nothing about education. Have you ever taken a course in logic? One must begin with a theory or assumption otherwise it isn't logic.
I am truly independent, I do not appreciate your generalizations " they all associate & vote with 'some' party".
I was thrilled to find out there was a "Constitution Party", but when I read their platform it was offensive, and by my understanding totally unconstitutional because it was based on religious dogma, not principles of government.
I have no bias and I usually end up voting against a candidate rather than for one, in other words if one candidate is clearly more repugnant than another I will vote for the less repugnant one.
I would love to have candidates to vote for whose principal platform was restoring the "unalienable" rights of the people, and returning to a government that derived its powers from the consent of the governed. If I found such a candidate I would not only vote for them, I would campaign for them.
The Republicans alienate most independent thinkers because of their anti-abortion argument which is founded on religious dogma and has no objective basis that would justify passing a law. That may give an impression that "independents" affiliate with the Democrats, but I think it is just a lesser of two evils choice and they would bolt in a minute if they were ever given a real choice.
I believe there are a lot of voters like me out there, but the choices they are given are almost always partisan ones.
What I posted was a series of historic quotes and a comment on the history of the Federal Reserve.
As you have probably noticed from my other posts, labels don't stick too well to me.
I am politically independent, have educated myself on the Constitution and a lot of history in the last few years.
One of my metaphysical knowings was when I read on a stock board how hard it was for poster from Ohio to vote in 2004. I instantly realized that the whole country was being sold to the highest bidder and in the course of research found the explanation on BlackBoxVoting.org
I then began looking into the economic history of the country and made up my own mind. The Fed is the one siphoning the money out of the system and bankrupting the country.
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President.
"If Congress has the right [it doesn't] to issue paper money [currency], it was given to them to be used by...[the government] and not to be delegated to individuals or corporations." -- President Andrew Jackson, Vetoed Bank Bill of 1836
I'm sure you have read about how the Federal Reserve act was written by the bankers and then voted in during a quick pre-holiday session, but perhaps others on this board are not aware of this and the fact that ethical people have opposed the Federal Reserve since its inception.
"The [Federal Reserve Act] as it stands seems to me to open the way to a vast inflation of the currency... I do not like to think that any law can be passed that will make it possible to submerge the gold standard in a flood of irredeemable paper currency." -- Henry Cabot Lodge Sr., 1913
"This [Federal Reserve Act] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson} signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill." -- Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. , 1913
"From now on, depressions will be scientifically created." -- Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. , 1913 "It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." -- Henry Ford
"The regional Federal Reserve banks are not government agencies. ...but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." -- Lewis vs. United States, 680 F. 2d 1239 9th Circuit 1982
"We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it." -- Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932 (Rep. Pa)
"The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International bankers." -- Congressman Louis T. McFadden (Rep. Pa)
"Some [Most] people think the Federal Reserve Banks are the United States government's institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign swindlers." -- Congressional Record 12595-12603 -- Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency (12 years) June 10, 1932
"A great industrial nation is controlled by it's system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the world-- no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." -- President Woodrow Wilson
"We are completely dependant on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system.... It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon." -- Robert H. Hamphill, Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank
"I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs....I think the major cause is that, deep down in our hearts, we have been accomplices in doing something terrible and unforgivable to our wonderful country. Deep down in our heart, we know that we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected." -- John Danforth (R-Mo)
"Capital must protect itself in every way...Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capitalism to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd." -- Taken from the Civil Servants' Year Book, "The Organizer" January 1934.
So if they "monetize the debt" will these people be in a position to influence legislators to say, give up a national park or two to pay down the balance?
The Federal reserve is unconstitiutional. I think we should start following Iceland's lead and renounce some of these debts that were acquired illegally.
Instead we are doing the opposite, voluntarily giving them money to make the crooks stronger and increasing the debt.
I don't go to church or pay a pastor. I have no allegiance to any religion. The fact that I call myself "Christian" is of no more importance than the fact that I'm also "Scots-Irish". It is part of my personal and cultural history.
As I clearly stated in the two examples I gave, the knowledge was outside of my education or medical experience. You can't use logic without a base of knowledge or making assumptions.
These were not premonitions, they were knowledge from outside of me that helped people to get well. I do not call this magic - I call it metaphysical knowledge. Knowledge that comes from outside of the physical world we inhabit.
It has happened often enough and the information is sufficiently specific that it would be illogical to call it a "fun premonition". I have tried to see if I could do this playing cards, I can't. The knowing comes unbidden and from outside.
As I said, it was a compelling message from a source outside myself that made me scare her into going into the hospital.
I did not have the medical knowledge at that time to know that a cat scratch could be so dangerous and I didn't even see the scratch to know how severe it was. I just started talking about gangrene when I gave her a ride to the bus stop after work.
There was another incident where someone I barely knew from a fellowship group was seen by others "acting like she was on drugs" in a public place. They mentioned it when we alll happened to drop in to see the new babies at the pastor's home. I found myself saying "It isn't drugs, she is having a nervous breakdown". At that time I didn't even know the clinical definition of a breakdown ((I realize this term is not used any more, this was almost 40 years ago). I was correct, and she was hospitalized close to my parents house in the suburbs.
I rode home with them a couple nights a week and went to visit her, riding back to the city in the morning. All I did was listen, and hold her. The doctor told me she had a history of psychiatric breaks and this was the quickest he had ever seen her come back from one.
All of this came through prayer. When I feel there is something I need to know or do, I pray. In time the answer almost always comes.
This is not reliance on "mystical power". It is listening to God and getting a sense of your real purpose in this life.
I almost died from anoxia one time. I was at peace, and I was praying. As I was being resucitated I got a message that I was coming back for a reason. That was over 10 years ago and I still don't know what that reason is, but I know I will in time.
These messages from the Diety are very real and very compelling, and usually relate to things that I can do to make someone's life better or help them (or myself) to grow in Spirit. They almost always "change the situation". When they don't it is because someone doesn't want the change to happen.
Prayer or meditation is one of the most empowering things you can do for yourself.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
