The American Ruling Class

[gene gene]

Search using Google (Ron Paul on 60 minutes) If enough of us sign the petition he may receive some much needed & deserved national air time.
Gene

[Aaron]

Get Ron Paul on 60 minutes

OFF WITH IT'S HEAD

Obviously this is just my opinion and I'm not trying to get anyone to believe
this if you don't already but IF you already support Ron Paul, then please
sign the petition below.

The number one problem that IF solved would lead to more prosperity for everyone and would instantly straighten out countless crooked dealings is to disband the illegal federal reserve and put the money making business for America back into the hands of congress, which they can print DEBT FREE as a matter of indisputable fact.

The ONLY presidential candidate that has the guts and has been consistent on this issue for many years is Dr. Ron Paul. No other candidate democrat, republican or independent comes close. There is no historical documentation that any other candidate can show that can refute this.

All other issues that the powers that be have us squabbling over are completely trivial compared to this and are only arguments that we didn't pick for ourselves but rather are handed to us to fight over and keep us distracted.

A great mass majority of the issues the entire Occupy movement are asking for would be solved by simply getting rid of the fed and printing our own money debt free. The same applies to many of the issues the Tea Party protesters are talking about. This is the one issue that if solved would satisfy many demands from both liberals and conservatives as well as everyone in between.

All other issues pale in comparison and are only shooting spit-wads at the beast when the real solution is to cut the head off. Please sign the below petition to get Ron Paul on 60 minutes.

Petition: CBS News 60 Minutes: Get Ron Paul on "60 Minutes" | Change.org

[dutchdivco]

Oh, yeah

Lets go ahead and give the Congress the check book, cause they've done such a GREAT job, so far! Look what a bang-up job they've done, of protecting the Social Security trust fund, for example!

Sorry, while I agree the Fed is bad, the original justification for the Fed, (at least the 'official' reasoning, as I understand it), was to keep it out of the hands of the politicians, and I gotta agree with that.

The executive would be no better, as any Pres. in office, would manipulate things to keep the economy 'good' during his term, with little concern as to the future. Much like CEO's, who do things to improve the stock price for the short term, in order to cash in on their stock options, with little regard for the long term consequences to the company.

I'm afraid this (getting rid of the FED)is yet another bug-a-boo topic; a distraction which, even if it could be 'made to happen' (which I doubt), wouldn't REALLY change anything.

Any/all of this, is trying to make changes in order to make/keep the existing system working, in some form. The REASON I come across as 'pessimistic' is because I have looked at everything, and concluded (for myself) that the problems are more basic than that; the WHOLE SYSTEM needs to be scrapped; there simply is no combination of changes that will make any substantive difference.Scrapping the Fed., returning to an O.J. Gov't., electing this leader or that, or even a 'revolution' to replace this form of government with a different one, is ALL re-arranging the deck chairs, on the Titanic.

It goes beyond the Political system, or the Financial system, its the whole way 'civilisation' has developed. I believe Humans were at their 'level of competence' (Peter principle) when we were 'Hunter/Gatherers'. Once we came up with the idea of staying in one place, and raising crops (and later livestock) a whole series of changes occurred, and we 'promoted' ourselves to our level of incompetence (Peter principle, again, as applied to species).

Specialisation instead of generalisation, Competition instead of co-operation, increasing population, Government, taxes, and fiat money, employment, property and property rights, dependence on long supply chains for necessities, the increase in the # of things we consider necessities, and more are ALL an inevitable result of that fundamental decision to stay in one place.

Genetic 'wiring' in our brains, which promoted survival (when we were hunter/gatherers), is counter-productive in modern society, and genetic modifications which wouldn't have promoted survival as H/G'ers, such as sociopathic/psychopathic behavior/wiring, IS increasing because it DOES promote survival in 'civilised' society.

As a simple illustration of this; a H/G goes into a swampy area, looking for food, falls in some quicksand, and barely manages to get out; he avoids that area in the future; i.e. he EXPECTS that if he goes there again, the same thing may happen. He goes into a different area, and finds good hunting. So, he returns to that area, expecting good hunting, again.Logical behavior, right?

Now, in modern 'civilised' society; a man buys a house, holds onto it for a year, fixing it up and renting it out so the rent will cover the mortgage payment. After a year or 2, he sells it and makes $30,000, as he 'flips' it. So, on a very basic level, he EXPECTS to be able to do it, again and again. This is why, periodically, 'we' humans have financial 'bubbles'; in which people continue acting (investing) a certain way, under the EXPECTATION that things will continue, going back to the Tulip Bubble, of the 1700's.

When you LOOK at the behavior, it seems illogical, (in modern 'civilised' society) and yet we keep doing it, over and over. This is because of vestiges of programming, left from a time when such wiring was beneficial.

On the other hand, sociopathic behavior, (now called 'asocial personality disorder) has been shown to be genetic, and (thru PET scans) a structural difference in how the brain is wired, which rsults in no empathy; therefore no compassion, and no 'sense of guilt'. It would NOT have been beneficial to survival, when 'we' were H/G'ers, (a social structure in which co-operation was a key component)and therefore would not have resulted in survival of the individual, or propogation to offspring. However, in 'civilised' society, (where COMPETITION is a key component) it IS a trait which can benefit the individual, and IS on the increase. (Estimates are there are over 500 million sociopaths, worldwide, today.)

However, while this trait IS 'beneficial' to the survival of the individual, and therefore propogation of the trait, it is NOT beneficial for the survival of the species.Sociopaths of low intelligence tend to criminality, filling our jails, if/when they get caught. Sociopaths with intelligence gravitate to professions such as Lawyers, Doctors, Lobbyists and Politicians and CEO's CFO's and Wall Street types (Brokers, Hedge fund managers, etc.; that is leaders in our society. And common traits of sociopaths; no conscience.No feeling of guilt. No compassion for others. They tend to think more in terms of short term, rather than long term, and (of course) think only of "how will this benefit ME" (no empathy, remember?) They have no hesitation to lie, cheat, manipulate, and, MOST of the time, they 'get away with it'. And so, (remember the H/G'er in the swamp?) they continue such behavior, under the EXPECTATION that they will continue to get away with it.And often times they do, for years.

Just from observation, I would guess Herman Cain is one, so is Romney. Ron Paul, probably not. (And as we will see, the 'advantages' of being a sociopath will probably insure he DOESN'T get elected).Jeff Skilling, and many CEO's and many on Wall Street. See the disproportionate effect on society these 'mutants' can have?
And 'they' are on the increase, as a percentage of the population, because in our 'civilised' society a lack of compassion can enable you to get ahead in a 'dog eat dog' system BASED on competition (rather than co-operation).

But, with leaders who are basing their actions and decisions on short term self interest, how can they possibly lead us in a direction which is in our (collective) long term best interests?

And so, I 'fall back' to the recomendation of Peter Drucker, in his less read sequel, :The Peter Prescription", (applying it to species). In this sequel, he outlined strategies for individuals to avoid falling victim to the "Peter Principle". Basically, how to avoid being promoted to your level of incompetence. As this applies to species, we were at our level of competence when we were Hunter/Gatherers; decentralised, in (relatively) small groups, co-operating rather than competing (because it was in our individual and collective self interest to do so), directly satisfying our (minimal, basic ) needs.

We humans will not make such a drastic change willingly and deliberately; it will only occur when there is a complete break down of the current system, FORCING us to adapt. I 'foresee' a collapse of the existing structures, institutions, etc. I don't see any way that i can, individually, or we can, collectively, either hasten or delay this collapse. Its like a 'train wreck' which we see coming, but can't effect.

All I can do is try to prepare, as best as i can, for me and mine. This is why a key element in my 'survival plan' involves the element of mobility; its both phylisophical and practical, to me.Phylisophical because I believe the H/G lifestyle is the 'more desirable' AND inevitable, and practical because not being locked in to one geographical location seems, to me, practical for survival. Yes, my 'plan' includes buying a piece of land, as ONE place to put my trailers. But, its a cheap piece of land, having no 'improvements'; so I'm 'spending' a minimal amount of my resources ($) in 'aquiring' it. Most of my resources (time, $ and energy) are going into a mobile shelter, which will also provide my energy needs. Its not perfect, but its MY plan, not reccomending it to anyone else.

Actually, 'talking' on this thread about getting rid of the FED, or installing an O.J. government isn't re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Its standing around, TALKING about re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic, knowing full well the ships crew isn't going to let us move one chair.Its fun as a mental excercise, is all. But, for all the rasons I've detailed, its really just Jim

[QuarterPole]

the WHOLE SYSTEM needs to be scrapped ... Competition instead of co-operation ... dependence on long supply chains for necessities ... financial 'bubbles' ... Sociopaths with intelligence gravitate to professions such as Lawyers, Doctors, Lobbyists and Politicians and CEO's CFO's and Wall Street types ... short term self interest ... TALKING about re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic

Fantastic post.
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." The problem that I see is that there is no work left. Capitalism has painted itself into a corner. All the cost saving/profit raising measures that industry takes have destroyed the customers. IE, Henry Ford made it a point to pay his people enough to buy his cars. Nowadays, robots build the cars and the people are out on their asses. So, they go work for McD's, but McD's has robots, too, and it's only a matter of time before 1 person can run a shift, mopping floors and playing gopher for the robo-cook. So who is left to buy the car, or the burger, even?
Personally, I'm leaning heavily on bringing back cooperation. Bubbles are natural, consider population boom and busts in the wild. The survivors are the ones who learned the lesson last time around. Evolve or die, just be sure to enjoy the ride.
Peace.

[Aaron]

make our own money without debt

Obviously the system is cancerous but it isn't the system that doesn't work,
it is the American people that doesn't work. Collectively we have become
lazy and complacent and don't take the Founding Father's wisdom to heart
enough that we don't literally take those crooks and throw them on the
street. It is OUR job to hold them accountable to doing what they are
constitutionally permitted to do. In a way, the system is fine IF it is
just applied and American's are doing enough to enforce our say so.

Thinking that some new system or fresh system will fix things is a band
aid and throws responsibility on the system instead of ourselves. The
system is just fine if are "eternally vigilant" - it isn't the system that has
failed us it is ourselves and we have to take responsibility for it.

But thinking congress is making decisions on what to spend money on without the banking master pulling their strings isn't being too realistic.
Congress has done a pathetic job but they are only doing what their
pimps are telling them to do. Congress needs to be thrown out
and locked up. We need to elect people that we WILL and SHOULD hold
accountable. As soon as they do something against what they said they
would, they're OUT!

Ron Paul mentioned something before about a law that gives people the
right to sue politicians for breaking their promises. I would say it should
have automatic jail time and fines attached as well.

The money is printed out of thin air anyway so it might as well be printed out of thin air WITHOUT debt attached, which is EXACTLY what congress should be doing instead of letting the fed print it out of thin air with interest. Doesn't have to be backed by gold either, which does seem to be
a trap. There simply needs to be quantity control of the number of bills
in circulation. It would be real money and not a fed note (iou) with
interested attached.

[aljhoa]

Text for Speed Readers

The Law

by Frederick Bastiat

The following is an English translation from the original French. The original was first published in 1850.

The Law

The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!...

The Law by Frederick Bastiat


Audio for Listeners

The Law By Frédéric Bastiat Audio Book Part 1/9
The Law By Frédéric Bastiat Audio Book Part 1/9 - YouTube


"The Law" as pdf file
http://www.fee.org/pdf/books/The_Law.pdf


Al

[KristenKr]

Thanks

I just want to say

Thanks

Very informatics....

[conradphd]

Dump all your food

I guess if one has a chest or side by side freezer and has it filled or lawfully owns a firearm is now
or can be considered a terrorist.

"There are laws on the books now that characterise who might be a terrorist: someone missing fingers on their hands is a suspect according to the department of justice. Someone who has guns, someone who has ammunition that is weatherproofed, someone who has more than seven days of food in their house can be considered a potential terrorist," Paul said. "If you are suspected because of these activities, do you want the government to have the ability to send you to Guantánamo Bay for indefinite detention?"

Military given go-ahead to detain US terrorist suspects without trial | World news | The Guardian

[dutchdivco]

Yes, AAron

So, we agree; its not that we need to changwe the system, its that we need to change the people. And yes, the politicians do the bidding of those with $, but WE (the people) keep electing them!

In fact, politicians serve 2 masters; that is to say there are 2 things which will get a politicians attention; $ and votes. If some issue comes up, and makes the headlines, and poills show "a majority of the voters feel THIS way about it", THAT will get their attention, and often bring about some action on their part.

And, if a lobbyist meets with their staff, and submits 'proposed ligislation' to them, and says if they 'sponsor' the bill, the lobbyist has a check for 'bundled' contributions for their next campaign, that will also get their attention.

And we have allowed this situation to develop. We don't have one party representing the corporations, and one representing the people; we have 2 parties, BOTH taking contributions from big $ interests. They purport to have differences, like "Pro-life" or Pro-choice"; what a false difference that is! Like a Senator can do ANYTHING to effect that issue!

So, since the 'problem' is with THE PEOPLE,rather than the system, any 'solution' which focuses on changing/fixing the system is bound to be a waste of time; we need a 'solution' which ADDRESSES the problem; how do we change the people?

Personally, I think the whole system is in the process of imploding. And THIS implosion will change the people. We are in the process of waking up, and realising that the American dream is just that; a dream. George Carlin said there is a reason they call it "The American Dream";,...cause you have to be dreaming to believe it!

This is the point where my foresight fails me; and thats what makes it interesting; I know the system is on the verge of collapse. I don't believe there is anything 'THEY' or we can do to avoid it, or prolong the agony much further. I DON'T know EXACTLY how the collapse will take place; will it be a 'financial' collapse? A "Complete breakdown of 'civil order'"? A breakdown in the supply chains we have developed, and which are very tenous?

I just don't know! This is what I meant earlier, when I said i couldn't see "what good" the FEMA camps would do. If EVERYTHING 'breaks down', not sure "THEY" are going to have much success, herding everyone into camps.And, I should think the 'lesson of Catrina', (to avoid 'shelter of last resort, at ALL COSTS) will be remembered.

Personally, I don't think "THEY" have engineered this whole thing. I think "THEY" are doing what they always done, atempting to manage the crisis of the moment, to their advantage. When the whole thing blows up, I don't think "THEY" are going to have much of an idea as to what to do. I think they are going to be like the engineers at Fuktupashima, who were going door to door asking people for flashlights, so they could read the guages to try to understand what was happening in the reactor. Cause some bean counter said it was a waste of $, to have flashlights in a Nuclear power plant!

I know I've said it before, and it is an area of disagreement with many on this forum; but I just think many give "Them" far more credit than "THEY" deserve; "THEY" are 'mostly' human (see above post on sociopaths) and like all of us in our daily lives, they focus on the crises of today, and are not very good at anticipating problems and dealing with them, pre-emptively. Like the guy who notices his car is leaking oil, and ays he "will do something about it", but then gets distracted by his kids 'bad' report card, or 'is his wife having an affair?' or some other crises of the moment. And so, as one 'crises' after another comes up and is dealt with, he puts off addressing the oil leak, until one day the engine siezes. NOW the engine becomes a crises, and he deals with it.

This is something wired into our human nature, and aggravated by our modern, civilised lifestyle; i.e we seem to have more and more 'crises', demanding our attention. And, it should be remembered that sociopaths are particularly deficient at long term planning; its inherent in the 'condition'.
Just as its wired into us that if something had a certain outcome (good or bad) before, that it will, again. In the case of "Them", they have gotten away with their foolishness for so long, they can't really concieve of not being able to continue. You see it in the behavior of the mid-east dictators, who keep responding to 'the people', the same way they always have before, even when it obviously isn't working. You see it in Herman Cain, who (assuming the allegations are true) believed that because he had always gotten away with it before, that he would continue to.

And so, while I think some of "THEM" might be realising whats coming, they can't really concieve of the full magnitude of it, or that they won't be able to continue the way they always have.And, I think they are wrong! But,....we'll see! Old Chinese curse; "May you live in INTERESTING times!" Well, somebody sure cursed us, cause whatever else it is, its going to be INTERESTING! Jim

[Aaron]

trash the fed

Yeah, we do agree.

"They" want us to believe they have more power than they actually do.

But I think they have it engineered further that we think but I believe
they are counting on people blinding walking into their own demise rather
than fighting back since that is what the mass majority has almost always done -
complacently swallowed every of garbage tossed to them.

I agree it will implode and it is doing that now. It is a house of cards already.

I still think we need to print our own money debt free and tell the
fed where to stick their illegal debt. Zero it out and be done with them.

We aren't evolved enough to have a non-money system but at least
real money is preferable to fiat money.

If We The People and our elected officials stuck together on that as improbable
as it is, there is nothing the banks can do because it is our govt and
military that they use against us. Big dream but it always remains a
possibility. I'm open to the possibility of some external influence changing
the course of events for the better if enough people wake up.

[dutchdivco]

Or,...

"I guess if one has a chest or side by side freezer and has it filled or lawfully owns a firearm is now
or can be considered a terrorist."

Instead of a side by side, consider an old soda machine, you can pick one up on craigslist, fairly cheap.Good lock, and you can (as an option) cut the plug off the cord, and leave it laying in plain site, making it clear its not working, and so there's no $ in it.

Its mostly about behavior; if you don't draw attention to yourself, you 'fly under the radar. Jim

[rickoff]

Congress passes National Defense Authorization Act

An amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act bill would allow the President to arbitrarily order the US military to arrest ANYONE, including a US citizen, ANYWHERE, including inside the US, then hold that arrested person INDEFINITELY and WITHOUT TRIAL.

Talk about trashing the Constitution! This is despicable, and anyone in Congress who supported this unconstitutional amendment to the Defense bill must be held accountable.

Senator Udall offered an amendment that would have stripped the defense bill of this controversial provision, but the Senate, voting 61 to 37, rejected his amendment.

The final Senate vote to approve the Defense bill as written was 88 in favor and only 12 opposed. Those opposing the bill, and who should be thanked, were:

Burr (R-NC)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Lee (R-UT)
Merkley (D-OR)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Rubio (R-FL)
Wyden (D-OR)

In the House vote, the final tally was 283 ayes to 136 nays.

This Congress definitely needs to go!

[rickoff]

Last night's Republican debate

Fox News streamed last night's Republican debate on the Internet, and viewers were offered the option of rating each of the candidate's answers to questions. Viewers were given two choices to input, via Twitter:
1. The candidate answered the question.
2. The candidate dodged the question.



Quite interestingly, Ron Paul was the only candidate to remain in the green throughout the entire debate, and was only one of two to finish in the green. Ron finished half way through the green side of the dial, while Newt finished just barely into the green. Romney finished with the dial straight up as shown above, equally divided between red and green.

Good luck on finding anything today in the media that mentions this strong viewer support for Ron Paul. Nearly all sources will tout counterfeit conservatives Gingrich or Romney as the debate winner. Commenters on the Fox News network, during the debate, never once mentioned the ongoing results of the constantly updated Twitter feed which Fox had made available to viewers, and several times made disparaging remarks about Ron Paul. It's all to be expected, of course, and everything we hear from the media should be considered as disinfo unless proven otherwise.

[dutchdivco]

Ironic,

That you should express it this way;

"We aren't EVOLVED (my emphasis) enough to have a non-money system but at least
real money is preferable to fiat money."

"Modern" man has been on the earth for 100,000 years, according to archeologists. "Civilisation" has only existed for the last 10,000 years. Obviously, prior to the developement of "Civilisation" there was NO fiat $!

So, is it really "evolving" or "devolving"? Has "Progress" really improved our lot?

Its truly amasing the # of things that evolved from that initial decision to stay in one place and raise food; Property, (as hunter gatherers, you have minimal property; only what you can carry with you, and you don't 'own' the land). The development of towns, then cities, therefore specialisation instead of generalisation, Competition instead of co-operation, Governments, MONEY,taxes, courts, police and armies.Employment (one person WORKING for another), and of coarse money. Which then leads to loaning, inevitably.
And, with efficiency as the goal, the centralised supply chains we have developed for our necessities.

George Carlin, again, on "STUFF!" Peruse craigslist for awhile, and look at all the "Stuff" people are selling. Look around your house, at all the "Stuff" you "own". And then marvel that for 90,000 years, "Modern" man existed with only the "Stuff" he/she could carry!

Biology also gives us valuable clues; the organs we developed to deal with "Stress" are about the size of a pea; there's 2 of them, one on each kidney. They're called "Adrenal Glands". They evolved to deal with short, intense periods of stress (fight or flight) followed by long 'refractory' periods of no/low stress, and to deal with 'famine' situations, (the other major source of stress, in 'primitive' society). In civilised life, we encounter more Fight or flight stress in a day, than 'uncivilised' man encountered in a year. And, when we 'diet', our body thinks we are in a 'famine' situation, and the adrenals do what they evolved to do, to deal with famine; store FAT!

Look at what remaining examples there are, of 'hunter/gatherers; the African Bushman, and the Australian aboriginal; no wars, no crime, certainly no murder. No 'Government', no laws, no taxes because no money. Co-operation rather than competition.

Their priority when they awake in the a.m.; What am I going to eat, today, what am I going to drink, today, and where am I going to shelter from the elements, today. How am I going to stay cool if its hot, or stay warm if its cold. Once they have answered those questions, the rest of the day is theres to do what they want.

Another irony is what we define as "Uncivilised' behavior, and what we define as "Civilised" behavior, as the definitions are reversed. An African Bushman would never think of stealing a 'possesion' of another; it simply wouldn't occur to them. Or competing with another, when co-operation is so obviously in everyones individual and collective self interest.As for going to War with another tribe, over 'territory' they would see that as INSANE.(and of coarse, they're right.) And we call THEM "Uncivilised", and think of ourselves as "Civilised"?!!!

Sociopaths would have inevitably, eventually been driven from the tribe, because of their behavior, and so it would have been a genetic mutation which would NOT have promoted survival.

On the other hand, as previously posted, in our modern society, sociopathic behavior is rewarded, and so is on the increase.

My 'premise' is that this 10,000 year old experiment is a failure; it just doesn't work, and no amount of jiggering around can make it work.

However, in the 'short term', its very likely that one country after another will follow the lead of Iceland, and repudiate their debts, and tell the "centralised banks" and the IMF to get stuffed. What happens when this reaches the U.S., and China, Japan and other 'holders' of U.S. debt are told to get stuffed is anybodies guess. That may be the 'trigger' that brings the whole house of cards down. In which case, the sooner the better! So, get out and start campaigning for Ron Paul.

Unfortuantely, most all are clinging to the idea that we can somehow still keep the system going; again brain wiring programmed by evolution; we fear the 'unknown' and will accept a certain amount of uncomfortable "Known" rather than venture into the unknown. Order over chaos. So MOST will vote for a Candidate that they will believe will maintain the status quo, rather than one which will tear it down. Jim

[rickoff]

I still think we need to print our own money debt free and tell the fed where to stick their illegal debt. Zero it out and be done with them.

We aren't evolved enough to have a non-money system but at least
real money is preferable to fiat money.

From 1862 to 1971 U.S. Notes were issued. Like Federal Reserve Notes, the U.S. Notes were fiat currency not backed by gold or silver, so they could not be referred to as "money" unless they bore the designation of being a gold or silver certificate which could be exchanged on demand for payment in gold or silver. The difference between U.S. Notes and Federal Reserve Notes, of course, was that the U.S. Notes were printed by the U.S. Treasury and distributed interest free.



Like Federal Reserve Notes, the U.S. Notes were designated (and still are) as legal tender. On the back, they give notice that: This Note is Legal Tender for All Debts Public and Private Except Duties On Imports And Interest On The Public Debt; And Is Redeemable In Payment Of All Loans Made To The United States.


Notice how Interest On The Public Debt is excluded. Therefore, the Treasury could not merely print up $10,000 denomination U.S. Notes and use them to pay off the 454 billion annual interest expense on the national debt charged by the Federal Reserve. This exclusion could be remedied, however, by asking holders of Federal Reserve Notes to turn them in in exchange for U.S. Notes. The Federal Reserve Notes could then be used to pay the interest owed.



Notice also that U.S. Notes are Redeemable In Payment Of All Loans Made To The United States. So, they could be used to payoff the entire National Debt, and it wouldn't cost taxpayers, or the federal government, anything more than the paper and ink required to print the U.S. Notes. Any sane person would have to ask why in hell this isn't being pursued by Congress as the only realistic fix to our current economic quagmire.The answer, of course, is that nearly everyone currently seated in our so-called "government" is in the back pocket of the Federal Reserve, and owes their allegiance to the Fed, not to the People of the United States of America.
Incidentally, since 1968 Silver Certificates have been redeemable only in Federal Reserve Notes (imagine that ) and are thus rendered obsolete.



Gold certificates were issued by the U.S. Treasury from 1882 to 1933, and were redeemable for the face value in gold coin. These were all withdrawn from circulation in 1933, and it was made illegal for anyone to possess one or more of these certificates up until 1968, when they were converted to legal tender at face value only, and made available to collectors. Here's a $100,000 Gold Certificate from 1929, which was only used for transfers between Federal Reserve banks:

Notice that it is President Wilson who appears on the face of this 1929 certificate. Yes, President Wilson, the very man who could have, but failed to veto the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act of 1913, during the first year of his Presidency. No wonder the Federal Reserve gave him this dubious "honor." Charles Lindberg senior spoke of the Act, about to be signed by Wilson, saying,
"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

Wilson later regretted signing the Federal Reserve Act into law. Just 3 years later, in 1916, Wilson said, "A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation, therefore, and all our activities are 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 civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men." And shortly before his death, Wilson is reported to have said, "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country."