IF YOU DON'T HAVE A BANKING SYSTEM, YOU DON'T HAVE AN ECONOMY - DEMOCRATIC U.S. REPRESENTATIVE PAUL KANJORSKI OF PENNSYLVANIA: TOTAL HOGWASH
CSPAN: February 10, 2009
See my earlier posts. We don't need banks or bankers, never have.
See also the very valuable work of Patrick Carmack and Bill Still.
I have never run into a better capitalist's outline of the history, the problem, or the mundane solution — the solution falling within the system of the inherently unrighteous mammon. They do a much better job (on a very limited budget) than the Austrian School of economics at offering a mundane solution.
- Carmack and Still are absolutely right that the U.S. does not need to back its currency with gold or anything else. A fiat currency is just as real as gold if faithfulness is just as high for honoring the fiat currency as it is in honoring the gold. It isn't the gold itself where any value lies. It is rather in the people.
- They end the Federal Reserve.
- They end fractional-reserve banking.
- They eliminate the National Debt.
- They end all interest payments to the banks from the Income Taxes paid by workers.
- They end the business cycle.
- They end deflation and inflation.
- They actually end evil usury.
These two are highly underrated and deliberately ignored in the mainstream, because the bankers own the media. Spread the word. They've been trying for over a decade. They need more exposure. Bloggers can help.
I take things further down the Christian path via the Christian Commons Project than do Carmack and Still, but I will not say that given the limited scope of their efforts that they are wrong in their direction starting from where they begin that is with the largely duped, naive, gullible, and ignorant mass of Americans and humanity. In addition, they are working within, they have mostly confined themselves to, the current system, the capitalist system. I am not and do not. Within that system, theirs is as good as it gets (which isn't good enough but just a start).
I say all of this though concerning them; because the type of thinking they have done, the effort in logic they have endeavored to employ, the historical analysis they've used, the truth seeking they've undertaken are all conducive to continuing on through the strait gate and then along the narrow way of Jesus to perfection. For additional clarity, I add also that there are those who mistakenly would stop at Carmack and Still's proposed solution and not continue on to and through the strait gate. I don't say that either Carmack or Still are in that camp by the way, as I have never seen the Christian Commons put to either of them or their responses after having time properly to consider.
If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? (Luke 16:11 KJVR)
Carmack and Still want justice. Let us go on from their plan to the real justice rather than just linger at the higher levels of Hell or lower levels of Heaven — nevertheless, qualified credit given where due.
When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. (Mark 2:17 KJVR)
NUGGETS FROM DEMOCRACY NOW
Dismissing Torture Case, Obama Continues Bush Assertion of "State Secrets"
The Obama administration has decided to continue a Bush administration policy of invoking "state secrets" to dismiss a lawsuit accusing a Boeing subsidiary of helping the CIA secretly transport prisoners to torture chambers overseas. On Monday, a San Francisco appeals court heard arguments on the American Civil Liberties Union's attempt to reinstate the case against Jeppesen International Trip Planning on behalf of five former prisoners. The lawsuit accused Jeppesen of arranging at least seventy flights since 2001 as part of the CIA's extraordinary rendition program. The Bush administration successfully won the case's dismissal on the grounds it would risk exposing "state secrets." On Monday, Obama administration lawyers told judges the government's stance is unchanged. ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, "The Justice Department stood up in court today and said that it would continue the Bush policy of invoking state secrets to hide the reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations committed by the American government. This is not change. This is definitely more of the same."
(Source: Democracy Now)
Now you see it. Anthony Romero is exactly right. The Real Liberal Christian Church isn't for punishment, but Obama is. He'll punish plenty of people. Just watch and see. What he won't do is upset the apple cart of the plutocrats who order the renditions via the CIA that they own and operate as part of their secret-society framework, which Obama has now joined in nearly full if not in full.
It's no state secret that U.S. corporations worked with and for the CIA in rendering (transporting) kidnap victims to dungeons to be torture to soften them up or just to throw terror into everyone who learned of the CIA tactics.
You know, we're (the Empire) insane (sociopaths); so don't mess with us (the U.S.). They wanted that leaked. It's been part of the brinksmanship strategy. It's psyops (psychological operations). It's propaganda. How do I know this?
Well, when they want something kept a secret, then it is. Look at how Barack Obama went to the Bilderberg Group in broad daylight right in the heat of a political campaign, yet the press corps was completely missing. Did the news corporations not know of the meeting? Of course they knew of the meeting. The higher ups were informed, since the top media moguls are privy. Then the orders flowed down hill so that no one working under them would be paid or keep his or her job if the Bilderberg Group meeting wasn't covered exactly as the top members of that ordered. Now think about the meetings that don't even happen under any publicly known name or at any commercial venue. The ultra-rich want the Bilderberg Group meetings to be known, just so much, for effect. It's enough to have the desired psychological impact.
These people run the global bank. (It's ultimately one bank.) They launder the criminal money in the world. Their whole system is based upon deception and intrigue. It's why the plutocracy is called a kleptocracy, as in a government by thieves. It's cloak and dagger. There's no doubt about it.
There is no difference between what the bankers do and what those termed "organized crime" (Mafia) do with the exception that the so-called organized criminals don't pretend to be righteous. They do have their strange code of honor, but they don't lie about the fact that they are acting antichrist. Strangely, many defend Christ. It's confusion; but also strangely to many, theirs is the lesser sin relative to the kleptocrat bankers who (the bankers) are evil sinners but continue on in sheep's clothing to further their plan for the dominion of Satan over all the souls of the Earth.
Make no mistake that the whole worldly system, including the churches that support it, bow to Satan. On the fleshly level, we are all stuck with them for a little while.
Our job though is to bring forth God's dominion and regardless of any prior confusion on that score. We are definitely not to sit waiting for God and Jesus to bring it. We are to be doing the active work in the vineyard that is designed to conflate the New Heaven and New Earth (Christian Commons). This concept is where people get the idea that the Bible teaches that God helps those who help themselves. The Bible definitely doesn't state is verbatim. Also, the saying definitely does not mean that God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not actively engaged. They dwell within. Their spirit lives in us and acts through us. Anyone who claims otherwise is not Christian and denies the very words of Jesus that state what I'm saying here in no uncertain terms.
Now, of course, the CIA and system contains sociopaths even by design. They are each other's tools for Satanism. The question is, how does one react. One reacts as Jesus reacted. One turns the other cheek and takes up his or her cross and if it comes to it, all the way to Calvary where they murdered Jesus on the cross.
Jeppesen Dataplan is a subsidiary of Boeing, the huge airplane manufacturer. Jeppesen has been accused in court of working for the CIA flying innocent people to be tortured. The Bush administration got the courts to look the other way. The Obama Justice Department is taking the exact same evil position as the Bush administration. Change? Well, there has been some change but obviously not enough. Obama will fail. He already has, repeatedly. Together as Christians, we must call upon him to turn. (See: "Obama Administration Backs Bush Policy in Terror Case (Update1)," by Justin Blum and Joel Rosenblatt. Bloomberg. February 10, 2009.)
THE NEW DEAL REDUCED UNEMPLOYMENT PERHAPS 15%+
Well, first of all, there is a grave understatement in those arguments about what the New Deal actually did. And that understatement is typically because the unemployment figures that many people are accustomed to using for the 1930s don't count people who actually worked for the New Deal. This is Michael Steele's distinction between jobs and work. But people who were building the Lincoln Tunnel or the Triborough Bridge or the aircraft carrier Yorktown are counted as work relief and not as employed, and there were many millions of those. And when you put them into the figures, you find that the New Deal actually reduced unemployment from 25 percent in 1933 to about-to less than ten percent in 1936. It went up again in '37 and then came back down again to about ten percent before the war. So, a major, major improvement in unemployment did occur under the New Deal.
(Source: Democracy Now)
Oh, that's so big! That really shoots down the naysayers against the government versus the so-called private sector. Franklin Roosevelt had plenty of faults, but he was, as U.S. Presidents go, probably the best over all considering the times with which he was dealing.
Military Keynesianism, of course, finished the job begun by the New Deal. It was still government that stimulated. The military was government much more so back then. There were, of course, private industries making the military hardware and ammunition, etc.,; but it was still heavily governmental pay that made it all happen.
I don't write any of this in support of militarism. We don't need militarism for employment. I don't write it in support of coercive socialism. We don't need that either. I do though write it in direct refutation of the laissez-faire liars who try, under the direction of the plutocrats, to dupe the masses into falsely imagining that only the private sector can do anything so-called real, such as create real jobs. It's utter nonsense and simply a ploy by the superrich to confuse the masses so the rich may get on top and stay there regardless of what is ultimately best for the whole people.
The superrich own both the laissez-faire movement and the coercive-socialist movement. They own and control the money in both systems. The only way to get out from under is to bring forth the moneyless society that is the Christian Commons.
Understand here that the Commons does not stop at the fleshly world but conflates Heaven and Earth. It is spiritual. The materialists resort to violence. The Commons does not. The Commons transcends the unrighteousness. Nonviolently, it translates the mammon into the Commons. That's the right way. Violence is wrong.
FASCIST, APARTHEID ISRAEL REPORTEDLY ALLOWING ONLY 2% OF NEEDED SUPPLIES INTO GAZA?
According to an article in Iran's Press TV, which is usually quite reliable, Ban Ki-moon says that Israel is only allowing enough supplies into Gaza for 30,000 people. There are 1.5 million people there, so that's only 2%. At that rate, they will have starvation.
They must be bringing in much more via the tunnels than estimated or there must be other sources or methods. Regardless, 2% is criminal on top of all the other crimes of the Apartheid Israel regime.
(Source: "UN says Israel blocks most Gaza aid." Press TV. February 11, 2009.)
Yisrael Beiteinu, for example, ran under the banner of "no citizenship without loyalty," and would like to strip any person who is critical of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians of their citizenship. People like me.
(Source: "Few Peacemakers in Israel's Knesset," by Neve Gordon. The Nation. February 10, 2009.)
Think about that in terms of the U.S. Think about the George W. Bush administration and the Republican Party stripping the citizenship of anyone who protested the Iraq invasion. Think about the Nazis stripping the Jews of German citizenship. What's the difference? There isn't any. Yisrael Beiteinu is fascist. Avigdor Lieberman is clearly a fascist, just as was the terrorist, Jabotinsky.
Think about the U.S. being an Anglo-Saxon state only for the Anglo-Saxons.
Yisrael Beytenu with Avigdor Lieberman will continue to perform, in the government and in the 17th Knesset. We will work with vigilance to actualize the Zionist vision of a Jewish State for the Jewish people.
Think about the KKK. What's the difference? There isn't any.
So, this Yisrael Beytenu with Avigdor Lieberman will be part of the main leadership coalition government in Israel. Why then would the United States taxpayers continue giving billions of dollars in military aid to a fascist state? Yisrael Beytenu is a police-state party and ethnically bigoted (See: http://www.yisraelbeytenu.com/). There is no doubt about it.
Avigdor Lieberman gives Jews a bad reputation around the world. He's a dangerous person. He's going to get many innocent Jews killed if he gets his way. He's going to cause many people to want to wipe out Israel. He is one of the reasons there is anti-Jewishness (wrongly called anti-Semitism).
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION MUST GO INTO 9/11 OR FAIL
U.S. Senator Patrick J. Leahy (Democrat of Vermont) has come up with a proposal for a truth and reconciliation commission concerning the criminality of the George W. Bush administration. Patrick Leahy said, "I don't want to punish anybody. I just want the truth to come out so this never happens again." Now that's the right attitude, and everyone should jump on board. Under Leahy's proposal, just as in South Africa, Bush administration officials would be given immunity from prosecution in exchange for their full and truthful testimonies of everything that happened. We've been calling for this from the start. (See: "," by Josh Meyer. Los Angeles Times. February 10, 2009.)
The main problems with the plan are several. First, it's limited. It should have no limitations whatsoever. It should go into every last thing that happened during the Bush-43 administration and before. It must go into 9/11 for sure, or it will fail. Second, it's hypocritical. Concerning torture and the lies told in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, Leahy wants to grant blanket immunity. Concerning the mortgage fraud, he said, "I want to see people prosecuted...Frankly, I want to see people go to jail." (See: "Fraud 'Directly Related' to Financial Crisis Probed: FBI Agents Could be Reassigned from National Security Due to Booming Caseload," by Jason Ryan. ABC News. February 11, 2009.)
This is not good. Why the double-standard? If we are going to forgive people, then forgive everyone who repents with the forgiveness Jesus grants to them. On the other level, concerning those who don't repent, forgive them with the different level of forgiveness Jesus grants to the unrepentant who come in two main categories themselves: Those who know better and those who are ignorant of what it is they should know. The latter receive fewer whiplashes from the tormentors who do not follow Jesus but rather Satan, the one who chooses to see Jesus as his enemy.
No, if the Bush administration gets immunity, so too do the mortgage bankers and all other repentant criminals and sinners. Patrick Leahy, don't make this error. Publicly retract your statements. Make them consistently Christian. If they have rebellious enough hearts and drum you out of the Senate, you'll be glorified in Heaven where the real glory resides.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)