mirror of
https://github.com/nhammer514/textfiles-politics.git
synced 2024-10-01 01:15:38 -04:00
2719 lines
189 KiB
HTML
2719 lines
189 KiB
HTML
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>incon003</title>
|
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="../CSSstyle.css"/>
|
|
<!--Fill in your link line for CSS and JS in the XSLT here! -->
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<h1 id="title-index">Politics-Conspiracies-Project</h1>
|
|
<nav id="menu">
|
|
<a href="../index.html">
|
|
<div class="button">Home</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../fulltext2.html">
|
|
<div class="button">Fulltext</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../analysis.html">
|
|
<div class="button">Analysis</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../gallery.html">
|
|
<div class="button">Gallery</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../methods.html">
|
|
<div class="button">Methods</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../about.html">
|
|
<div class="button">About</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
<a href="../GitHub.html">
|
|
<div class="button">GitHub <img alt="github icon"
|
|
src="https://logos-download.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/GitHub_logo.png"
|
|
width="15"/>
|
|
</div>
|
|
</a>
|
|
</nav>
|
|
<h2>incon003</h2>
|
|
<p> I N V I S I B L E C O N T R A C T S
|
|
George Mercier</p>
|
|
<p> BANK ACCOUNTS
|
|
[Pages 131-193]</p>
|
|
<p>[Certain conventions have been used in converting INVISIBLE CONTRACTS to an
|
|
electronic medium. For an explanation of the conventions used, please download
|
|
the file INCONHLP.ZIP for further illumination. Other background information as
|
|
well is contained in INCONHLP.ZIP. It is advisable to EXIT this file right now
|
|
and read the contents of INCONHLP.ZIP before proceeding with your study of this
|
|
file.]</p>
|
|
<p>Some years preceding his multiple prosecutions in 1984, Mr. Condo went down to
|
|
a bank, and initiated an Equity relationship with that corporation and the
|
|
King. Yes, Commercial contracts in effect with banks are invisible juristic
|
|
contracts in effect with the King. In the Armen Condo Letter, I mentioned that
|
|
banks are in a special Status with the King, and likewise so are the individual
|
|
people who experience profit and gain from any Commercial contract they enter
|
|
into with a bank. This relational effect of doing business in King's Commerce
|
|
is pronounced quite clearly in the INSTRUMENTALITY DOCTRINE the Supreme Court
|
|
initiated publicly with DAVIS VS. ELMIRA SAVINGS:</p>
|
|
<p>"National banks are instrumentalities of the Federal Government,
|
|
created for a public purpose, and as such necessarily subject to the paramount
|
|
authority of the United States." [170]</p>
|
|
<p>[170]============================================================= DAVIS VS.
|
|
ELMIRA SAVINGS, 161 U.S. 275, at 283 (1896). The factual setting giving rise to
|
|
DAVIS was a Bankruptcy proceeding. In the many quotations from the United
|
|
States Supreme Court and other judicial forums in this Letter, sentences were
|
|
rearranged and then quoted out of original order for enhanced logical
|
|
continuity; and in other places I made nominal punctuation and capitalization
|
|
changes. Therefore, please refer to the original citations before requoting.
|
|
=============================================================[170]</p>
|
|
<p>This Instrumentality Doctrine is very significant, and the word INSTRUMENTALITY
|
|
means an Equity Relationship that is quite strong in American Jurisprudence. As
|
|
nationally chartered banks are the Instrumentality of the Congress, consider
|
|
the subordinate Party (the banks) as being the "right hand" of the Master (the
|
|
Congress). This is a very powerful Doctrine indeed, and it needs to be
|
|
understood for what it really means. In the Armen Condo Letter, I mentioned
|
|
that, from a Judicial Perspective, any profit or gain experienced from a bank
|
|
carries with it the same identical full force and effect as if the King himself
|
|
created the gain. Consider, for a moment, the application of the
|
|
Instrumentality Rule to corporations:</p>
|
|
<p>"Under this Rule, corporate existence will be disregarded where a
|
|
corporate subsidiary is so organized and controlled and its affairs so
|
|
conducted as to make it only an adjunct and instrumentality of another parent
|
|
corporation." [171]</p>
|
|
<p>[171]============================================================= BLACK'S LAW
|
|
DICTIONARY, under the "Instrumentality Rule [case cites deleted].
|
|
=============================================================[171]</p>
|
|
<p>Now think what happens if the King is substituted for the parent corporation,
|
|
and your local bank is substituted for the subsidiary corporation. Under the
|
|
Instrumentality Doctrine, the local bank as a Person and a legal entity fades
|
|
away in significance as if it was transparent, and the King and the Secretary
|
|
of the Treasury then appear as the real contracting Persons you are entering
|
|
into Commercial agreements with. Are you beginning to see the legal
|
|
significance of this Doctrine? Are you beginning to appreciate the deeper
|
|
meanings of the bank account in that it is the King that you are really
|
|
contracting into Commerce with, and the bank is just the King's local agent?
|
|
That bank is literally the private personal property of the King. Entrepreneurs
|
|
who go out and capitalize a new bank from scratch do not own that bank. The
|
|
bank is owned by the King who created the corporation, and his Comptroller of
|
|
the Currency later issued out a banking charter to; and the individual
|
|
shareholders only hold an equitable interest in the bank's operations. [172]</p>
|
|
<p>[172]============================================================= "The
|
|
corporation is the legal owner of all of the property of the bank, real and
|
|
personal; and within the powers conferred upon it by the charter, and for the
|
|
purposes for which it was created, can deal with the corporate property as
|
|
absolutely as a private individual can deal with his own. This is familiar law,
|
|
and will be found in every work that may be opened in the subject of
|
|
corporations. A striking exemplification may be seen in the case of THE QUEEN
|
|
VS. ARMOUND, 9 Ad. & Ell. N.S. 806. The question related to the registry of a
|
|
ship owned by a corporation. Lord Denman observed:
|
|
"It appears to me that the British corporation is, as such, the sole
|
|
owner of the ship. The individual members to the corporation are no doubt
|
|
interested in one sense in the property of the corporation, as they may derive
|
|
individual benefits from its increase, or loss from its decrease; but in no
|
|
legal sense are the individual members the owners."
|
|
-THE BANK TAX CASES, 70 U.S. 573, at 584 (1865).
|
|
=============================================================[172]</p>
|
|
<p>The shareholders are only entitled to a limited withdrawal of some of the
|
|
bank's net earnings, under some limited circumstances. [173]</p>
|
|
<p>[173]============================================================= "The
|
|
interest of the shareholder entitles him to participate in the net profits
|
|
earned by the bank in the employment of its capital, during the existence of
|
|
its charter, in proportion to the number of his shares; and, upon its
|
|
dissolution or termination, to his proportion of the property that may remain
|
|
of the corporation after the payment of its debts."
|
|
-THE BANK TAX CASES, id., at 584.
|
|
=============================================================[173]</p>
|
|
<p>Many incarcerated Protestors were unaware of the existence of the Commercial
|
|
contract that they were into, and so having the strong political views that
|
|
they do, their political feelings, skewing off on a defiant tangent, retained
|
|
the upper hand over their better judgment -- an inquisitive judgment that would
|
|
be searching for answers to questions. So although the Protestors was at one
|
|
time unaware of the existence of a contract being in effect, the King was very
|
|
much aware, and so the Protestor's defiant behavior is increasingly improvident
|
|
when viewed from the perspective that the Commercial contract was written to
|
|
strongly favor the King, and is interstitially dispersed throughout with penal
|
|
clauses IN ESSE for no more than mere administrative negligence and default,
|
|
and any outs that exist for persons in default are the unintended default
|
|
technical errors that the King's LEX statutes can correct at the discretion of
|
|
the Congress.</p>
|
|
<p>Today, great Tax Protesting <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> like Condo, Schiff, and Saussey -- who
|
|
have established themselves in forward political positions -- have the strong
|
|
advantage of learning in advance the single most important fundamental starting
|
|
point in this Life; a starting point that most other folks won't even know of
|
|
until it is too late; a starting point that bifurcates the Law of Judgment into
|
|
two great subdivisions; Tort and Contract. Unknown to the world at large,
|
|
Heavenly Father has invisible Celestial Contracts operating on us all, just
|
|
like the King had multiple layers of Commercial and invisible political
|
|
contracts operating on Schiff, Condo, and Saussey (I will discuss those layers
|
|
later on). Maybe I am missing something somewhere, but I wish someone would
|
|
explain to me the prudence of Armen Condo's MODUS OPERANDI, as I cannot find
|
|
any; when presented with such valuable information (that invisible contracts
|
|
were actually in effect) Armen Condo summarily rebuffed that information
|
|
without any inquiry being made into its authenticity. I had told Armen
|
|
something he did not want to hear in his non-teachable state of mind; and in
|
|
ways similar to those invisible juristic contracts the King has on us that so
|
|
few people know much about, likewise our previous existence First Estate
|
|
Contracts with Father cast a regulatory contract jurisdiction over us all, and
|
|
all contract jurisdictions always call for our being self damaged by our own
|
|
mere neglectful technical default, nonchalant indifference swirling in carefree
|
|
insouciance, and miscellaneous compliance deflection Tort Law rationalizations:</p>
|
|
<p>"... yea, I lived with her for a while -- she was NICE, but there was
|
|
no damages nowhere and everyone consented -- so Father can't hold that against
|
|
me."</p>
|
|
<p>And just as Schiff, Condo, and Saussey were given unpleasant advance
|
|
introductions into what a contract Star Chamber is all about, so too will the
|
|
Last Day be a Contract Star Chamber -- the worst imaginable to those who have
|
|
used Tort Law behavioral defense arguments down here, as a well sculptured
|
|
slice of meat was repetitively bewitched into an elevated state of enchantment
|
|
("Gee, I didn't damage anyone"). [174]</p>
|
|
<p>[174]============================================================= Not that
|
|
Father is throwing us all into a LAKE OF FIRE AND BRIMSTONE to scorch us
|
|
thoroughly (<span class="NORP">Heathens</span> really get a good kick out of that foolish idea of being
|
|
roasted in a scorcher by a revengeful god for a few little impish smatterings);
|
|
but the Last Day Judgement will actually be the WORSE IMAGINABLE because of
|
|
knowledge we will then posses of the magnitude of the lost benefits involved,
|
|
and how stupid it was to lose it down here over some interesting feminine
|
|
musculature, and other inappropriate adventurism into peripheral areas that are
|
|
defined as being illicit by First Estate Covenants, but are not really illicit
|
|
practically due to the omission of damages. The LAKE OF FIRE AND BRIMSTONE
|
|
analogy that the Prophets of old were referring to is their characterization of
|
|
this state of mental anguish.
|
|
=============================================================[174]</p>
|
|
<p>But the Last Day will also be transparent for those who entered into, and were
|
|
successfully tried under, Father's NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT; for these, the
|
|
Last Day will be a smooth procedural formality, nothing that should be of any
|
|
impending concern. [175]</p>
|
|
<p>[175]============================================================= The NEW AND
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT has been of particular interest with all of our Patriarchs
|
|
and Prophets of old, right back down the line, clear back to Adam: Question:
|
|
What is this NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT? Answer: Without referring to
|
|
anyone's commentary or explanation, the name of this particular Celestial
|
|
Covenant reveals a slice of history by itself, as the words NEW AND EVERLASTING
|
|
possibly imply that other Covenants exist that might be just the opposite: OLD
|
|
AND TEMPORARY. Are there in fact such Covenants floating around? Yes, there
|
|
are, but they are invisible; Father extracted them out of us in the First
|
|
Estate before we came down here, and by their nature those temporary First
|
|
Estate Covenants were designed to be replaced with NEW AND EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANTS, Covenants that would never again be replaced, Covenants that are
|
|
EVERLASTING. The anonymous author who once wrote a Letter now known as HEBREWS
|
|
in the New Testament, once had a few words to say about OLD Covenants and NEW
|
|
Covenants, average Covenants and better Covenants, FIRST Covenants and SECOND
|
|
Covenants:
|
|
"... now he hath obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also
|
|
he is the mediator of a better Covenant, which was established upon better
|
|
promises. For if that FIRST COVENANT HAD BEEN FAULTLESS, THEN SHOULD NO PLACE
|
|
HAVE BEEN SOUGHT FOR THE SECOND [Covenant]. For finding fault with them, he
|
|
saith, 'Behold, the days come,' saith the Lord, 'when I will make a NEW
|
|
Covenant with the House of Israel, and with the House of Judah.' ... In that he
|
|
saith, 'A NEW Covenant,' he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth
|
|
and waxeth old is ready to varnish away."
|
|
-HEBREWS 8:6, et seq. The next chapter in HEBREWS talks about the HOLY
|
|
OF HOLIES, Temples, the ARK OF THE COVENANT, and First and Second Covenants,
|
|
which is advanced material I will talk about in another Letter. I do not know
|
|
who wrote this LETTER TO THE HEBREWS; within its content the text contains
|
|
little information about either its author, its original readers and their
|
|
circumstances, its date, its overt purpose, or its theological background.
|
|
HEBREWS commences immediately by laying on the heavy stuff, while the greetings
|
|
appear at the end. Even its literary form is somewhat mysterious in the sense
|
|
that by probing into dimensionally deep Christian doctrines, the left the other
|
|
Commentators behind him biting the dust; words and phrases appearing in HEBREWS
|
|
appear no where else [for example, the phrase JESUS, THE MEDIATOR OF THE NEW
|
|
COVENANT -- (see 12:24, 9:15, and 8:6) -- does not appear anywhere else in
|
|
either the Old or New Testaments]. Martin Luther once made the suggestion that
|
|
Apollos of Alexandria was the writer [APOLLOS is described in ACTS 18:24-28 as
|
|
being a caliber of a fellow who would and could write HEBREWS]. Suffice it to
|
|
say that the doctrinal ideas and ecclesiastical commentary presented in HEBREWS
|
|
will feel very comfortable to folks today after they have first been steeped in
|
|
the DOCTRINES OF THE NEW COVENANT for a while, as both originated from the same
|
|
Source (the significance of HEBREWS will be appreciated once you have an
|
|
enlarged basis of factual knowledge on the successive organic nature of
|
|
Covenants serving their purpose and then replacing previous Covenants, and in
|
|
turn being replaced by still other Covenants). While calling itself a WORD OF
|
|
EXHORTATION [13:22], the LETTER TO THE HEBREWS contains some of the most
|
|
eloquent writings and sermons in the New Testament, and whoever its author was,
|
|
had to be a gifted Christian thinker who probed into the deeper doctrines of
|
|
<span class="NORP">Christianity</span> where few others did. I will have more to say about HEBREWS in
|
|
some other Letter. ... I said that this NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT has been a
|
|
source of interest to all of the great Patriarchs back down the line -- and I
|
|
meant what I said -- so here are the citations:
|
|
"... and I will look upon it, that I may remember the EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANT between God and every living creature..."
|
|
-GENESIS 6:18
|
|
"... I will establish my Covenant between me and thee and thy Seed
|
|
[SEED meaning offspring] after thee in their generation for an EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANT, to be a God upon thee, and to thy Seed after thee."
|
|
-GENESIS 17:7
|
|
"... my Covenant shall be in your flesh for an EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-GENESIS 17:13
|
|
"And God said 'Sarah, thy wife, shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou
|
|
shalt call his name Isaac: And I will establish my Covenant with him for an
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT, and with his Seed after him."
|
|
-GENESIS 17:19
|
|
"Every Sabbath he shall set it in order before the Lord continually,
|
|
being taken from the children of Israel by an EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-LEVITICUS 24:8
|
|
"And he shall have it, and his Seed after him, even the Covenant of an
|
|
EVERLASTING PRIESTHOOD..."
|
|
-NUMBERS 25:13
|
|
"Although my house be not so with God, yet he hath made with me an
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT, ordered in all things, and sure: For this is all my
|
|
Salvation, and all my desire..."
|
|
-II SAMUEL 23:5
|
|
"He is the Lord our God; His Judgements are in all the Earth; be
|
|
mindful always of His Covenant; the word which He commanded to a thousand
|
|
generations; even of the Covenant He made with Abraham, and of his Oath unto
|
|
Isaac; and hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a Law, and to Israel for an
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT..."
|
|
-I CHRONICLES 16:14 et seq.
|
|
"He is the Lord our God; His Judgments are in all the Earth; He hath
|
|
remembered His Covenant for ever; the word which He commanded to a thousand
|
|
generations; which Covenant He made with Abraham, and his Oath unto Isaac; and
|
|
confirmed the same to Jacob for a Law, and to Israel for an EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANT..."
|
|
-PSALM 105:7 et seq.
|
|
"... the Earth is also defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because
|
|
they have transgressed the Laws, changed the Ordinance, broken the EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANT."
|
|
-ISAIAH 55:3
|
|
"... everlasting joy shall be unto them.. and I will direct their work
|
|
in Truth, and I will make an EVERLASTING COVENANT with them."
|
|
-ISAIAH 61:8 et seq.
|
|
"... and I will make an EVERLASTING COVENANT with them..."
|
|
-JEREMIAH 32:40
|
|
"... nevertheless, I will remember my Covenant with thee in the days of
|
|
thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-EZEKIEL 16:60
|
|
"Moreover, I will make a Covenant of peace with them; it shall be an
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT with them; and I will place them, and multiply them..."
|
|
-EZEKIEL 37:26
|
|
"... now the God of peace... that great shepard of the sheep, through
|
|
the blood of the EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-HEBREWS 13:20
|
|
"For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT..."
|
|
-DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS 1:15
|
|
"Wherefore, I, the Lord... gave commandments to others, that they
|
|
should proclaim these things unto the world... that mine EVERLASTING COVENANT
|
|
might be established."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 1:17 et seq.
|
|
"Behold, I say unto you that all old Covenants have I caused to be done
|
|
away with in this things; and this is a NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT, even that
|
|
which was from the beginning."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 22:1
|
|
"Wherefore I say unto you that I have sent unto you mine EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANTS, even that which was from the beginning."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 49:9
|
|
"Verily I say unto you, blessed are you for receiving mine EVERLASTING
|
|
COVENANT... sent forth unto the children of men, that they might have life and
|
|
be made partakers of the glories which are to be revealed in the last days, as
|
|
it was written by the Prophets and Apostles in days of old."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 66:2
|
|
"... in the telestial world... [there will be goofs;]... these are they
|
|
who say they are some of one and some of another -- some of Christ and some of
|
|
John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaisis, and some of
|
|
Isaiah, and some of Enoch [by being of Moses, of John, of Jack, of Pete, of
|
|
Harry, of Bob, of Ted -- they are spiritually disorganized in that they are OF
|
|
anyone except the right One]; but received not the Gospel, neither the
|
|
testimony of Jesus, neither the Prophets ["... it's all the same God -- I just
|
|
don't need me none of that Contract stuff"], neither the EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 76:98 et seq.
|
|
"Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, to prepare and organize
|
|
yourselves by a bond or EVERLASTING COVENANT that cannot be broken."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 78:11
|
|
"He that is appointed to be president, or teacher,... let him offer
|
|
himself in prayer upon his knees before God, in token or remembrance of the
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 88:128 et seq.
|
|
"I salute you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, in token or
|
|
remembrance of the EVERLASTING COVENANT, in which Covenant I receive you to
|
|
fellowship, in a determination that is fixed, immovable, and unchangeable, to
|
|
be your friend and brother through the grace of God in the bonds of love, to
|
|
wait in all the commandments of God blameless, in thanksgiving, forever and
|
|
ever."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 88:133
|
|
"When men are called unto mine Everlasting Gospel, and Covenant with an
|
|
EVERLASTING COVENANT, they are accounted as the salt of the Earth and the savor
|
|
of men..."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 101:39
|
|
"For behold, I reveal unto you a NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT, it was
|
|
instituted for the fullness of my Glory, and he that receiveth a fullness
|
|
thereof must and shall abide the Law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord
|
|
God. [Yes, those are pretty strong consequences; but where there are high
|
|
powered benefits, there will always be found correlative high powered
|
|
consequences]."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 132:6
|
|
"... verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is
|
|
my Law, and by the NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT... ye shall inherit thrones,
|
|
kingdoms, principalities, and powers dominions, all heights and depths... they
|
|
shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to the exaltation
|
|
and Glory in all things... and the angels are subject unto them."
|
|
-DOCTRINE & COVENANTS 132:19
|
|
=============================================================[175]</p>
|
|
<p>To <span class="NORP">Heathens</span> and agnostics, who spent their time playing with their own
|
|
salvation down here by fighting and resisting what they will then view as
|
|
something as simple as giving Father what he wanted, there will be no
|
|
opportunity then to throw multiple exploratory defense lines at Father by going
|
|
through multiple judgements, but much to our advantage we can have all the
|
|
prosecutions thrown at us that we want down here, to repetitively argue our
|
|
defense lines before Judges over and over again; and it is for this reason that
|
|
incarcerated Protestors will one day look back and be ever grateful that the
|
|
consequential significance of being in mere technical default on invisible
|
|
contracts was driven into them, under such strong circumstances. [176]</p>
|
|
<p>[176]============================================================= "The object
|
|
of our earthly existence is that we may have a fullness of joy, and that we may
|
|
become the sons and daughters of God, in the fullest sense of the word, being
|
|
heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ, to be kings and priests unto
|
|
God, to inherit glory, dominion, exaltation, thrones, and every power and
|
|
attribute developed and possessed by our Heavenly Father. This is the object of
|
|
our being on this Earth. In order to obtain unto this exalted position, it is
|
|
necessary that we go through this mortal experience, or probation, by which we
|
|
may prove ourselves worthy, through the aid of our elder brother Jesus."
|
|
-Joseph F. Smith, in a Funeral Service delivered over the daughter of
|
|
Daniel H. Wells, on April 11, 1878; 19 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 258, at 259
|
|
[London (1878)].
|
|
=============================================================[176]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, today, Condo, Schiff, and Saussey are either in a cage, or close to being
|
|
thrown into one, because of their default in juristic contracts; tomorrow -
|
|
after they have OPENED THEIR EYES, they will go forth and inherit, create, and
|
|
preside over Thrones, Dominions, and WORLDS WITHOUT END, also by Contract.
|
|
Having known the bitter Agony, they can cleave to the Celestial Ecstasy; in
|
|
both cases, contracts were the initiating catalytic instrumentality.</p>
|
|
<p>This banking INSTRUMENTALITY DOCTRINE is a pretty strong relational status for
|
|
the Judiciary to take cognizance of, so when we probe back down the line to
|
|
uncover why chartered banks are in such a status, we should not be too
|
|
surprised to uncover our old friend: A contract. [177]</p>
|
|
<p>[177]============================================================= "A charter
|
|
is certainly in form and substance a contract; it is a grant of powers, rights,
|
|
and privileges;
|
|
"... A charter to a bank... is certainly a contract, founded on
|
|
valuable consideration."
|
|
-Joseph Story, in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at page 258
|
|
(Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1833). This Joseph Story, who I will be quoting from
|
|
throughout this Letter, was born in Marblehead, Massachusetts in September of
|
|
1779. He entered Harvard College and graduated in 1798. When leaving Cambridge,
|
|
he immediately entered into the study of Law in the office of Mr. Samuel
|
|
Sewall, then an advocate at the Essex bar. In 1801, Joseph Story was admitted
|
|
to the Massachusetts bar. He was elected to the Massachusetts Commonwealth
|
|
Legislature in 1805, and was then elected to the Congress in 1808, and was soon
|
|
Speaker of the House of Representatives. In 1810 he argued the great Georgia
|
|
case FLETCHER VS. PECK, which involved contracts, before the Supreme Court. He
|
|
edited a book called CHITTY ON BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES, and
|
|
others. On November 18, 1811, Joseph Story was commissioned to be an Associate
|
|
Justice of the United States Supreme Court to fill the vacancy left by Mr.
|
|
Justice Cushing. He was then 32 years of age, the youngest man ever to be
|
|
called to such a position in either England or America, except for Justice
|
|
Buller. While on the Supreme Court, Joseph Story wrestled down questions on
|
|
Admiralty and Maritime regarding the rights and duties of ship owners,
|
|
insurance companies, and mariners. He was a major architect of, and wrote
|
|
extensively about, Patents and their role in English history [see THE INFLUENCE
|
|
OF MR. JUSTICE STORY ON AMERICAN PATENT LAW by Frank Prager in 5 American
|
|
Journal of Legal History, at 254 (January, 1961)]. He created a doctrine to
|
|
settle frictional disputes between the Federal-State layers of Government,
|
|
called the COMITY DOCTRINE, which is still quoted by the Supreme Court down to
|
|
the present day [see JOSEPH STORY'S CONTRIBUTION TO AMERICAN CONFLICTS LAW: A
|
|
COMMENT by Kurt Naddleman in 5 American Journal of Legal History, at 230
|
|
(January, 1961)]. And he also dealt with the banditry of PRIZE JURISDICTION,
|
|
which was still in vogue. Back at a time when banking in the United States was
|
|
operating under a LAISSEZ-FAIRE relational status to Government, Joseph Story
|
|
wrote that banking affects a public interest [very significant words], and that
|
|
banking involves that most ancient prerogative of national Sovereignty, THE
|
|
MONEY POWER, which our <span class="NORP">Framers</span> never restrained or abated in the Charter they
|
|
created for our King. >namely, the U.S. Constitution< [See JUSTICE STORY AND
|
|
THE AMERICAN LAW OF BANKING by Gerald Dunne, in 5 American Journal of Legal
|
|
History, at 205 (January, 1961)]; and this is a dominant theme in American
|
|
Jurisprudence remaining in effect down to the present day with George Mercier
|
|
enlarging on what Joseph Story started. While studying his COMMENTARIES ON THE
|
|
CONSTITUTION, I have been able to uncover only a few of Justice Story's
|
|
opinions and legal statements that were later reversed or otherwise toned down
|
|
in subsequent Federal rulings, and none of the reversals were really on-point
|
|
factual settings. Down to the present day in 1985, many of Joseph Story's
|
|
statements of Law that he applied to the hypothetical factual scenarios which
|
|
he created in 1833 for his COMMENTARIES were actually made with great
|
|
foresight, as they would later be coming to pass long after he returned Home in
|
|
1845. [For detailed biographies on all of the early Supreme Court Justices, see
|
|
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES by Hampton Carson [John Huber Company,
|
|
Philadelphia (1891)]; and also worthwhile is Morgan David's JUSTICE JOSEPH
|
|
STORY: A STUDY OF THE LEGAL PHILOSOPHY OF A JEFFERSONIAN JUDGE in 18
|
|
Vanderbuilt Law Review, at 643 (March, 1965).
|
|
=============================================================[177]</p>
|
|
<p>Originally applicable only to nationally chartered banks, the INSTRUMENTALITY
|
|
DOCTRINE has since been expanded under the enlarging regulatory penumbra of the
|
|
Federal Reserve Act of 1913 to include all state and Federally chartered member
|
|
banks of the Fed. During the Depression, banks who became members of the FDIC
|
|
and FSLIC insurance programs were deemed Instrumentalities, and this doctrine
|
|
is now applied in the United States to include all financial institutions where
|
|
there is any Federal regulatory interest in them. This now includes stock
|
|
brokerage houses, credit unions, insurance companies, and pension funds. (For
|
|
example, people acquiring a Merrill Lynch Cash Management Account, which is a
|
|
negotiable withdrawal instrument, are in the same Juristic Personality Status
|
|
(in King's Commerce) with a Merrill Lynch checking account that they are with a
|
|
checking account from any conventional depository banking institution, such as
|
|
Manufacturer's Hanover.) When a person initiates such a bank account
|
|
relationship with the King, an examination of Fourth Amendment Search and
|
|
Seizure cases relating to account records that banks send to depositors reveals
|
|
that the Federal appellate judiciary considers the Fourth Amendment to be
|
|
non-applicable to Seized bank account records. [178]</p>
|
|
<p>[178]============================================================= Exemplary
|
|
perhaps would be two EXCLUSIONARY RULE based cases from the Supreme Court:
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. MILLER, 425 U.S. 435 (1976). A criminally accused
|
|
person made a pre-Trial Motion to Suppress of copies of checks and other bank
|
|
records which federal agents had gotten a hold of. HELD: That the Motion to
|
|
Suppress was properly denied since the accused person possessed no Fourth
|
|
Amendment interest that could be vindicated by a challenge to the bank
|
|
accounts; and any infirmities or deficiencies in the bank account record
|
|
acquisition process, by way of a defective Subpoena or Search Warrant, were
|
|
irrelevant arguments since Subpoenas and Search Warrants were unnecessary
|
|
document acquisition tools to begin with; those bank account records are the
|
|
property of the Government, and they are available to the Government under
|
|
administrative devices (meaning an investigator's phone call or letter
|
|
inquiry); and
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. PAYNER, 447 U.S. 727 (1979). A criminal defendant
|
|
had been charged with falsifying his income tax return by denying that he held
|
|
a foreign bank account. Federal agents in Florida had broken into an apartment
|
|
and then surreptitiously copied bank records that a bank manager from the
|
|
Bahamas had brought with him on a trip, under circumstances that you or I would
|
|
be incarcerated for. Later on, detective work back at the office uncovered the
|
|
fact that the poor defendant did indeed maintain foreign bank accounts, so the
|
|
Government then threw a criminal prosecution at the fellow caught in the act of
|
|
defilement. Since the Government had violated the Constitutional rights of a
|
|
third party [the bank manager from the Bahamas], and not the criminally
|
|
accused, the Fourth Amendment offered no protection to the Defendant, since the
|
|
Defendant had no rights violated. State in other words, perhaps more
|
|
explicitly, emphasizing the consequences of maintaining bank account records:
|
|
When Government obtains your bank account records, regardless of how, through
|
|
whom, when, or under any circumstances, then arguing Fourth Amendment rights
|
|
defensively will likely not produce any sympathy from Federal Appellate Forums.
|
|
=============================================================[178]</p>
|
|
<p>In those cases, the Supreme Court will talk about how Courts cannot exclude
|
|
evidence under the Fourth Amendment unless that Court finds that an unlawful
|
|
Search or Seizure violated the defendant's own Constitutional rights. But that
|
|
the Constitutional rights of criminal defendants, who are being hanged with
|
|
their own bank account statements, are violated only when the Search and
|
|
Seizure conduct violated the defendant's own legitimate expectation of privacy,
|
|
rather than that of a third party. [179]</p>
|
|
<p>[179]============================================================= Paraphrased
|
|
from UNITED STATES VS. PAYNER, id., at 731.
|
|
=============================================================[179]</p>
|
|
<p>Since the "zone of privacy" inherent in the Papers Clause of the Fourth
|
|
Amendment does not facially protect information you have deposited into the
|
|
hands of third parties, like banking institutions, [180]</p>
|
|
<p>[180]============================================================= "... no
|
|
interest legitimately protected by the Fourth Amendment is implicated by
|
|
governmental investigative activities unless there is an intrusion into a zone
|
|
of privacy, into 'the security a man relies upon when he places himself or his
|
|
property within a constitutionally protected area.'"
|
|
-HOFFA VS. UNITED STATES, 385 U.S. 293, at 301 (1966).
|
|
=============================================================[180]</p>
|
|
<p>Federal Courts find it unnecessary to probe any deeper and explicitly tell you
|
|
the real underlying reason why bank accounts fall outside the protective
|
|
penumbra of the Fourth Amendment; Because a Commercial contract is in effect,
|
|
and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with or obstruct the
|
|
contemporary execution of Commercial contracts, for either party (and properly
|
|
so). But wait, as those Supreme Court cases dealt with bank accounts Seized
|
|
from a bank itself, and banks as regulated Commercial establishments have no
|
|
Fourth Amendment rights whatever. So there are no privacy rights in any
|
|
information you deposit with those banks, and this remains true whether or not
|
|
there was a Commercial contract in effect or not. Hmmm. But what if those bank
|
|
account records were Seized from a person's home where the Fourth Amendment
|
|
does apply? Now what? The Fourth Amendment still does not apply, and properly
|
|
so. [181]</p>
|
|
<p>[181]============================================================= "Respondent
|
|
[bank account holder] urges that he has a Fourth Amendment interest in the
|
|
records kept by banks because they are merely copies of personal records that
|
|
were made available to the banks for a limited purpose and in which he has a
|
|
reasonable expectation of privacy... Even if we direct our attention to the
|
|
original checks and deposit slips [that the bank account holder kept in his
|
|
home], rather than to the microfilm copies actually viewed and obtained by
|
|
means of a subpoena, we perceive no legitimate 'expectation of privacy' in
|
|
their contents. The checks are not confidential communications but negotiable
|
|
instruments to be used in commercial transactions. The lack of ANY legitimate
|
|
expectation of privacy concerning the information kept in bank records was
|
|
assumed by Congress in enacting the BANK SECRECY ACT, the express purpose of
|
|
which is to require records to be maintained because they 'HAVE A HIGH DEGREE
|
|
OF USEFULNESS IN CRIMINAL, TAX, AND REGULATORY INVESTIGATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS'
|
|
[12 U.S.C. Section 1829b(a)(1)]."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. MILLER, 425 U.S. 435, at 442 (1976) The ITALICS
|
|
were added here to underscore the extreme significance of those statements; the
|
|
Law in this FOURTH AMENDMENT/BANK ACCOUNT area is well settled: COMMERCIAL
|
|
contracts are in effect, and challenging it is improvident. Notice how the
|
|
Congress is playing cutesy by calling a sequential family of statutes the BANK
|
|
SECRECY ACT, freely conveying the initially impressive image that these
|
|
statutes protect or otherwise enhance the public's secrecy in banking accounts
|
|
and related records -- but in reality the BANK SECRECY ACT is a high-powered
|
|
statutory device, as the Supreme Court here exemplifies, to promote the
|
|
usefulness of those bank records in criminal prosecutions that the Government
|
|
will one day be throwing at you. Among other things, this Act empowers the
|
|
Secretary of the Treasury to adopt broad regulations compelling banks to record
|
|
their customer's transactions and requiring that the banks, as well as private
|
|
persons using banking services, also report a broad range of financial
|
|
transactions TO THE GOVERNMENT [now where is the "Secrecy"?] Pursuant to this
|
|
grant of statutory jurisdiction, the Treasury Secretary then turned around and
|
|
created his own multiplying slice of LEX by administrative promulgations
|
|
directing that each bank report each and every single deposit, withdrawal, and
|
|
transfer that took place in domestic transactions of $10000 or more [see 31
|
|
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS Section 103.22].
|
|
=============================================================[181]</p>
|
|
<p>This is what is really meant when the bank account evidence taken from a
|
|
patently unlawful residential Search and Seizure in a person's home is deemed
|
|
admissible, even though the Fourth Amendment's Exclusionary Rule would
|
|
otherwise attach if the property that was seized did not belong to the King
|
|
(guns, cocaine, etc.). Federal Judges will skew their Seizure of bank accounts
|
|
annulment justifications off to the side and talk about the "special facts in
|
|
this case" when annulling Fourth Amendment rights on bank account records
|
|
unlawfully Seized from a residence. [182]</p>
|
|
<p>[182]============================================================= Banking
|
|
records seized from residences merely contain the same information that other
|
|
documents located in public places contain; and so although those seized
|
|
records are "private papers," all the Government has to do is go down to the
|
|
bank [now that they know which bank to go to, and which account to sift
|
|
through], obtain duplicate copies of banking records, and then throw those
|
|
copies that were obtained directly from banks at Defendants:
|
|
"On their face, the documents [bank accounts] subpoenaed here are not
|
|
respondent's 'private papers.' Unlike claimant in BOYD VS. UNITED STATES [116
|
|
U.S. 616 (1886)], respondent [bank account holder] can assert neither ownership
|
|
nor possession. Instead, these are the business records of banks.
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. MILLER, 425 U.S. 435, at 440 (1976).
|
|
=============================================================[182]</p>
|
|
<p>And now we are finally getting down to the one real reason why the Bill of
|
|
Rights in general, and the Fourth Amendment, in particular, means absolutely
|
|
nothing when a bank account is involved with a contested Search and Seizure;
|
|
this special reason is never talked about by law schools; and this reason is
|
|
not to be found anywhere in any law book in any library that I am acquainted
|
|
with: But the reason is, as stated, because a Commercial contract with the King
|
|
is in effect, and so as a point of beginning, the Bill of Rights is irrelevant
|
|
from the scratch, and properly so; but you will never hear that explicit
|
|
explanation from anyone else, other than George Mercier. Never in any Court
|
|
Opinion is there any blunt discussion of Commercial contracts being in effect;
|
|
rather, Judges will continue to focus distracting attention and discussions
|
|
around the Fourth Amendment, creating the potential image, in some peripheral
|
|
factual setting cases, that the Fourth Amendment is the center of gravity here,
|
|
rather than the Commercial contract itself. Yet it is very proper and correct
|
|
that the Bill of Rights should not be allowed to interfere with, obstruct,
|
|
intervene, or otherwise restrain the execution or operation of contemporary
|
|
Commercial contracts -- for either party; but getting an official admission
|
|
like that from a Federal Judge will result in a can of worms being opened up
|
|
(as they perceive it), a can of worms they don't want to talk about and deal
|
|
with in the future. [183]</p>
|
|
<p>[183]============================================================= As I
|
|
mentioned in the Armen Condo Letter, Federal Judges have been asked not to let
|
|
the "cat out of the bag" by discussion the special and very quiet relationship
|
|
between bank accounts and Income Tax statute liability (although bank accounts
|
|
are not exclusive Equity Jurisdiction attachment instruments, they are
|
|
air-tight instruments of CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE whenever the King has a burden of
|
|
proving the defendant's entrance into Interstate Commerce).
|
|
=============================================================[183]</p>
|
|
<p>Additionally, but to a lesser extent, those bank account records are the
|
|
private personal property of the King, and so it is irrational that the King
|
|
cannot reclaim his own property whenever he feels like it, all pursuant to the
|
|
terms of the bank account contract. [184]</p>
|
|
<p>[184]============================================================= "The
|
|
depositor takes the risk, in revealing his affairs to another, that the
|
|
information will be conveyed by that person to the Government... This Court has
|
|
held repeatedly that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the obtaining of
|
|
information revealed to a third party and conveyed by [the third party] to
|
|
Government authorities, even if the information is revealed on the assumption
|
|
that it will be used only for a limited purpose and the confidence placed in
|
|
the third party will not be betrayed."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. MILLER, 425 U.S. 435, at 443 (1976). If you don't
|
|
know what contract I am referring to that gives the King the right to simply
|
|
reclaim his own property, then ask a bank for a copy of their bank rules that
|
|
all depositors and borrowers have agreed to be bound by. Under normal
|
|
circumstances, banks are reluctant to give depositors copies of Bank Rules
|
|
those depositors have agreed to be bound by. Sounds irrational, doesn't it?
|
|
Withholding the terms of contracts those depositors have just taken upon
|
|
themselves criminal compliance liability for? Yet, numerous attempts by people
|
|
associated with me have attempted to obtain a copy of these Bank Rules, and all
|
|
attempts resulted in the banking officer clamming up tight, deflecting
|
|
attention over to the "irregular and unusual" nature of the request, and then
|
|
telling the requesting person to go see MR. SO AND SO at the Federal Reserve
|
|
Board, who in turn also clammed up tight. So much for domestic American bank
|
|
accounts. =============================================================[184]</p>
|
|
<p>Those are the real reasons why the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are irrelevant
|
|
in bank account Administrative Seizures and in judicial prosecutions
|
|
evidentiarily based on bank accounts. Within the same line of Fourth Amendment
|
|
cases, those Federal Judges will also refer to bank accounts as being
|
|
interstate merchant and Commercial instruments, but never is there any
|
|
discussion to be found anywhere on the special Equity Relationship in effect
|
|
between Persons entering into such Commercial contracts, and the King.</p>
|
|
<p>Some folks have taken the position that if they entered into Equity with the
|
|
King by signing a bank account card under Objection on the grounds of
|
|
necessity, that Objection somehow will vitiate future liability; but there is
|
|
an inherent defect in that reasoning. Unlike signing Driver's License
|
|
applications under Objection and Notice of Duress to avoid incarceration, the
|
|
Supreme Court has ruled that the RIGHT TO TRAVEL is a Substantive and
|
|
Fundamental Right that cannot be infringed upon, absent very strong and
|
|
compelling state interests; and there are state statutes which criminalize the
|
|
act of an unlicensed driver operating a motor vehicle down the road. Taking
|
|
that Driver's License scenario as a model and applying it to justify possessing
|
|
bank accounts just does not cut it. Bank accounts are not entered into to avoid
|
|
incarceration, and banking is not a Substantive Right, and direct personal
|
|
financial profit and gain enrichment is experienced when possessing bank
|
|
accounts that is without parallel with a Driver's License. So, all factors
|
|
considered, the likelihood of escaping an Excise Tax liability by arguing bank
|
|
account possession by necessity, is remote. This remains true even though the
|
|
California Supreme Court ruled once that:</p>
|
|
<p>"For all practical purposes, the disclosure by individuals or business
|
|
firms of their financial affairs to a bank is not entirely volitional, since it
|
|
is impossible to participate in the economic life of contemporary society
|
|
without maintaining a bank account. In the course of such dealings, a depositor
|
|
reveals many aspects of his personal affairs, opinions, habits and
|
|
associations. Indeed, the totality of bank records provides a virtual current
|
|
biography." [185]</p>
|
|
<p>[185]============================================================= BURROWS VS.
|
|
SUPERIOR COURT, 13 Cal 3rd 238, at 247 (1974).
|
|
=============================================================[185]</p>
|
|
<p>The California Supreme Court is not a Federal Tribunal, and statements to the
|
|
effect that bank accounts are necessary for practical economic survival, and
|
|
perhaps are not purely volitional [VOLITIONAL means freely choosing or will to
|
|
do so, as in making a decision], although an interesting perception of the
|
|
passing scene, will in no wise vitiate your legal liability to the adhesive
|
|
Federal taxation reciprocity expectations resident in Title 26. Notice how the
|
|
California Supreme Court did not say that possession of bank accounts under a
|
|
documented factual setting of economic survival annuls Title 26 liability. So
|
|
let's not read out of that state court what it does not say; and even if that
|
|
state court did state inferentially that possession by necessity annuls
|
|
expectation of reciprocity liability in areas of taxation, then the California
|
|
Supreme Court is still not a Federal Judicial Forum. Federal Judges are taught
|
|
and trained certain things in those Seminars of theirs, and that BENCH BOOK of
|
|
theirs makes the Government's position sound more than reasonable, and so as a
|
|
result, Federal Judges are collectively sensitive towards certain things [such
|
|
as the significance of a Commercial contract] that State Judges are indifferent
|
|
to.</p>
|
|
<p>This DAVIS VS. ELMIRA SAVINGS Instrumentality Doctrine occasionally surfaces in
|
|
Supreme Court rulings, by sometimes being lightly mentioned in passing in
|
|
OBITER DICTUM, such as in ANDERSON NATIONAL BANK VS. LUCKETT, [186]</p>
|
|
<p>[186]============================================================= 321 U.S.
|
|
233, at 252 (1943).
|
|
=============================================================[186]</p>
|
|
<p>and on other occasions, this Instrumentality Doctrine is bluntly reaffirmed by
|
|
the Supreme Court, as in MARQUETTE NATIONAL BANK VS. FIRST OF OMAHA. [187]</p>
|
|
<p>[187]============================================================= 439 U.S. 308
|
|
(1978). =============================================================[187]</p>
|
|
<p>But if the Law of King's Commerce is correctly understood, there is no need for
|
|
the Supreme Court to reaffirm anything, as the circulation of paper money,
|
|
notes, or the circulation of any juristic currency, even carrying intrinsic
|
|
value, in King's Commerce (as distinguished from privately minted coins and
|
|
notes), has always been the closed private domain of the King of England. And
|
|
it has been the exclusive domain of the King ever since paper money was first
|
|
printed and circulated by King Richard II to finance an offensive war against
|
|
France that Parliament declined to levy taxes to wage. [188]</p>
|
|
<p>[188]============================================================= Gremlins
|
|
have had a few words to say about the utterly heinous issuance of paper
|
|
currency:
|
|
"Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind,
|
|
none is so effectual as that which deludes them with paper money. It is the
|
|
most perfect expedient ever invented for fertilizing the rich man's fields by
|
|
the sweat of the poor man's brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive
|
|
taxation, these bear lightly on the happiness of the community compared with
|
|
fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. Our own
|
|
history has recorded enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing
|
|
tendency, the injustice and intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well
|
|
disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way
|
|
countenanced by Government."
|
|
-Gremlin Nelson W. Aldrich, United States Senator, at a New York City
|
|
dinner speech on October 15, 1913 (two months before his pet Federal Reserve
|
|
System was passed by the Congress to create the very conditions he fraudulently
|
|
represented to oppose, in IV PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
|
|
#1, at 38 [<span class="GPE">Columbia</span> University, New York (1914)].
|
|
=============================================================[188]</p>
|
|
<p>So the circulation of paper money by Gremlins through the instrumentality of
|
|
kings, was born in tortious fraud intended to damage people, and was designed
|
|
to accomplish in the practical setting (the damages of taxation by Inflation)
|
|
what was not accomplished legally on the Floor of Parliament by common consent.
|
|
[189]</p>
|
|
<p>[189]============================================================= When the
|
|
United States Congress removed the last remaining attachment of paper Federal
|
|
Reserve notes to gold reserve requirements in 1968 -- the Gremlins were there.
|
|
From out of his nest on the 17th Floor of the Chase Manhattan Bank descended
|
|
one David <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span> on Congress, taking his jet and making his attack sortie
|
|
on Washington with Gremlin enscrewment in mind -- whose very appearance itself
|
|
at a Committee Hearing was designed to make an important Statement: That we
|
|
Gremlins now hold the upper hand in the United States, and our grand plans for
|
|
monetary enscrewment will no longer be restrained on account of some lingering
|
|
silly little anachronistic gold ratio requirements left over from another era.
|
|
This is the modern age with computers, Congress, and you just don't need to
|
|
concern yourself none with that old medieval stuff. See the "Statement of David
|
|
<span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span>" in the GOLD COVER HEARINGS ["Hearings Before the Committee on
|
|
Banking and Commerce of the United States Senate"], at page 141, 90th Congress,
|
|
Second Session ["Repeal of Gold Reserve Requirement"] (January, 1968)].
|
|
=============================================================[189]</p>
|
|
<p>So paper money has been designed from the outset to damage people, and the
|
|
unnecessary circulation of paper money today in the United States carries along
|
|
with it identical underlying enscrewment objectives. [190]</p>
|
|
<p>[190]============================================================= The Legal
|
|
Tender Acts, enacted during the Civil War, were billed as a war measure:
|
|
"... to handle the vast amount of means necessary for the prosecution
|
|
of this war, to enable the people to pay in and the Government to pay out, we
|
|
must have a larger and more abundant currency that we have heretofore found to
|
|
be necessary. The accustomed currency is wholly inadequate. The Government has
|
|
for many years used only gold and silver for this purpose... The business of
|
|
the Government and the business of the country require some substitute for
|
|
coin. We must therefore create a new [paper]... currency. We must therefore
|
|
create a public debt, establish a currency, and impose new taxes."
|
|
-Speech by Representative John Crisfield of Maryland, favoring
|
|
enactment of the Legal Tender Statutes [CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE, 37th Congress, 2nd
|
|
Session, Appendix, page 43 et seq. (February 5, 1862)].
|
|
=============================================================[190]</p>
|
|
<p>Back in an era when the United States was the American Colonies, the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> to
|
|
our Constitution never abated or restricted the King's standing right to issue
|
|
out his own money or to declare that someone else's money or notes are legal
|
|
and tender for those debts existing under the King's General Commerce
|
|
Jurisdiction; and neither did the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> ever restrict the King's right to
|
|
delegate any or all of the circulating process to a third party (as arguments
|
|
in this area of FEDERAL RESERVE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY DUE TO LACK OF COINAGE
|
|
DELEGATION JURISDICTION are in error). The Supreme Court has ruled often that
|
|
the Constitution of the United States must be applied today in light of English
|
|
Common Law then in effect at the time the Declaration of Independence was
|
|
executed, and properly so. [191]</p>
|
|
<p>[191]=============================================================
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649, at 645 (1897);
|
|
-VEAZIE BANK VS. FENNO, 75 U.S. 533 (1869);
|
|
-LOCKE VS. NEW ORLEANS, 71 U.S. 172 (1866), etc.
|
|
=============================================================[191]</p>
|
|
<p>"... Congress possesses all of the powers which existed in the States
|
|
before the adaption of the National Constitution, and which have always existed
|
|
in the Parliament in England." [192]</p>
|
|
<p>[192]============================================================= GILMAN VS.
|
|
PHILADELPHIA, 70 U.S. 713, at 725 (1865).
|
|
=============================================================[192]</p>
|
|
<p>So let us briefly examine English Common Law and see just what type of monetary
|
|
powers the King of England had. Consider the following words from a landmark
|
|
case in 1604: [193]</p>
|
|
<p>[193]============================================================= I call this
|
|
a "landmark" case because it was later cited by the Supreme Court of the United
|
|
States in the LEGAL TENDER CASES, 79 U.S. 457, at 548 (1871).
|
|
=============================================================[193]</p>
|
|
<p>"as the king by his prerogative may make money of what matter and form
|
|
he pleaseth, and establish the standard of it, so may he change his money in
|
|
substance and impression, and enhance or debase the value of it, or entirely
|
|
decry and annul it...
|
|
"And so it is manifest, that the kings of England have always had and
|
|
exercised the prerogative of coining and changing the form, and when they
|
|
found it expedient of enhancing and debasing the value of money within their
|
|
dominions; and this prerogative is allowed and approved not only by the common
|
|
law, but also by the rules of the imperial law." [194]</p>
|
|
<p>[194]============================================================= CASE OF
|
|
MIXED MONEY, Sir John Davies Reporter, at page 48 (1604).
|
|
=============================================================[194]</p>
|
|
<p>And so if the King of England had the right to invoke Sovereignty Jurisdiction
|
|
to circulate debased currency, then so also does the Congress of the United
|
|
States now have similar Sovereignty Jurisdiction, absent an explicit and blunt
|
|
jurisdictional restraining mandate to the contrary in this charter, the
|
|
Constitution -- paper currency restrainment language which does not exist.
|
|
[195]</p>
|
|
<p>[195]============================================================= Yes, the
|
|
Congress can do whatever it feels like with issuing currency, as an attribute
|
|
of its sovereignty:
|
|
"Congress, as the legislature of a sovereign nation, being expressly
|
|
empowered by the constitution to lay and collect taxes, pay the debts, and
|
|
provide for a common defense... [and also] to charter national banks, and to
|
|
provide a national currency for the whole people in the form of coin, treasury
|
|
notes, and national bank bills, and [also has] the power to make the notes of
|
|
the Government a legal tender in payment of private debts being one of the
|
|
powers belonging to sovereignty in other civilized nations, and not expressly
|
|
withheld from Congress by the Constitution..."
|
|
-JULLIARD VS. GREENMAN, 110 U.S. 421, at 466 (1884).
|
|
=============================================================[195]</p>
|
|
<p>Nowhere in our Constitution did the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> state that "no paper currency shall
|
|
issue out of Congress," or "circulating currency is required to physically
|
|
contain gold and silver," and <span class="NORP">Patriot</span> arguments to the effect that Article I,
|
|
Section 10 constitutes such a restrainment are defective, as I will explain
|
|
later on. Nor did the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> state that "monetary matters reside exclusively
|
|
within the Congress, and cannot be delegated..." Are you beginning to see what
|
|
happens when some agreement is reduced into writing? With the passage of time,
|
|
oral expectations in effect at the time the agreement was executed diminish
|
|
away into nothingness, and only the exact, literal content of the agreement, as
|
|
written, means anything. [196]</p>
|
|
<p>[196]============================================================= Earlier, I
|
|
mentioned that Contracts we enter into now down here with Heavenly Father
|
|
overrule and supersede our First Estate Contracts, and that the First Estate
|
|
Contracts then fade away in significance. The Principe of Law that this is
|
|
based on is called by business lawyers in Commerce as the MERGER DOCTRINE,
|
|
contracts that we enter into today overrule and extinguish contracts entered
|
|
into in a previous era; in other words, the most recent contract absorbs
|
|
previous contracts. The application of this MERGER DOCTRINE is found in many
|
|
settings. For example, in real estate transactions, just as the old prior oral
|
|
negotiations between a Seller and a Purchaser are washed out by the Deed [23 AM
|
|
JUR Deeds Section 261], so too do oral precontract negotiations loose their
|
|
identity and existence as those negotiations later unite in the confluence of
|
|
the written contract [PRICE VS. BLOCK, 124 F.2nd 738]. This MERGER DOCTRINE is
|
|
a correct Principle of Nature I touched on in the Armen Condo Letter [that
|
|
Commercial contracts we enter into today with the King overrule the
|
|
restrainments resident in the Constitution of 1787], and this Principle now
|
|
operates, and has operated, in all factual settings. The MERGER DOCTRINE
|
|
recognizes that there are different levels of importance or priorities in
|
|
NATURE, and what is done in the past is always of less significance than what
|
|
is done in the present (which is simply reason, logic and COMMON SENSE); so
|
|
lesser important contracts from out of the past, together with their lingering
|
|
oral expectations and the like, fade away in significance as they are MERGED
|
|
into contracts of greater importance:
|
|
"Whenever a greater Estate and a less [Estate] coincide and meet in one
|
|
and the same person, without any intermediate estate, the less is immediately
|
|
annihilated; or, in the law phrase, is said to be merged, that is, sunk or
|
|
drowned in the greater."
|
|
-2 BLACKSTONE COMMENTARIES 177. When corporations are said to MERGE,
|
|
what actually happens is that the two independent corporations lose their
|
|
existence altogether as separate entities having separate assets, liabilities,
|
|
franchises, legal rights, and powers; and are totally absorbed into the new
|
|
single corporation [see MORRIS VS. INVESTMENT LIFE INSURANCE, 272 N.E.2nd 105,
|
|
at 108]. And since NATURE, so called, merely replicates the mind, will and
|
|
intention of its great Creator, the Principle of Nature that lawyers practicing
|
|
Commercial Law call the MERGER DOCTRINE, also applies to have our great
|
|
contemporary Celestial Contracts with Father overrule and wash out our lessor
|
|
previous existence First Estate Contracts. Yes, when you know the Law in one
|
|
setting, you know the Law in all settings, as nothing changes from one factual
|
|
setting to the next.
|
|
=============================================================[196]</p>
|
|
<p>Today when we enter into contracts with one another down here, as unforeseen
|
|
circumstances surface later on, regrets are always quietly expressed about how
|
|
this or that should have been originally included into the agreement. It was
|
|
that way with Moses and the Ten Commandments, it was that way with the United
|
|
States Constitution of 1787, and this attribute of Nature [of people enlarging
|
|
their basis of factual knowledge over time, and therefore also changing their
|
|
desires] remains in full force and effect down to the present day with
|
|
Commercial contracts. An honest assessment of the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> would suggest that
|
|
they were unable to guard against all possible evils, since they simply did not
|
|
have, then, the exposure to the magnitude of evil that we have had thrown at us
|
|
today.</p>
|
|
<p>But as for currency, [197]</p>
|
|
<p>[197]============================================================= When words
|
|
have several different meanings, the word is said to be an ENTENTE. In Law, the
|
|
word CURRENCY is such an ENTENTE. Over a period of time, words change meaning
|
|
as new factual circumstances surface to alter the use or perspective of
|
|
something:
|
|
"The meaning of words changes. It is curious to note how many words
|
|
wholly lose their original or etymological meaning, and from usage and change
|
|
of circumstances acquire sometimes an opposite and often a different meaning...
|
|
The common legal word INDORSE, from the Latin IN, upon, and DORSUM, the back.
|
|
It used to be applied literally and strictly to a writing upon the BACK of a
|
|
paper. It is now well settled that a good instrument may be made on the FACE of
|
|
a bill or note."
|
|
-PILMER VS. STATE BANK, 16 Iowa Reporter 321, at 329 (1864). And on
|
|
one hand, speaking like an economist, CURRENCY has been defined to be:
|
|
"Currency is capital seeking investment. While invested, it takes the
|
|
form of money, or of promises to deliver money on demand, but so soon as it is
|
|
invested, it loses its character of currency, and assumes that of stocks,
|
|
houses, or commodities."
|
|
-Hugh Carey in ANSWER TO THE CURRENCY QUESTION, at page 6 [Lea &
|
|
Blanchard, Philadelphia (1840); RARE BOOK COLLECTION, University of Rochester,
|
|
Seward Collection #410]. Before the Civil War there were actually few United
|
|
States Treasury Notes floating around the Countryside, as Currency at that
|
|
time, because the King's LEGAL TENDER ACTS had not yet been enacted, and the
|
|
King had not yet decided that the time had come to pull another grab and enact
|
|
penal statutes to create a national exclusive monopoly on currency instruments
|
|
for himself. Privately minted coins, bank notes, and mining company script, and
|
|
the like, then constituted the nation's currency. With that in mind, the
|
|
Illinois Supreme Court once defined CURRENCY as:
|
|
"By the term currency is understood bank bills, or other paper money
|
|
issued by authority, which pass as and for coin... In the case of JUDAH VS.
|
|
HAINS [19 J.R. 144], the Court decided that a note, payable in bank notes
|
|
current in the City of New York, was a valid note. The Court said they will
|
|
take notice that notes current in the City of New York are of cash value
|
|
throughout the State, and are distinguished by those words from other bank
|
|
notes, which are received at a discount, and hence it is immaterial whether the
|
|
notes of banks of other States might be tendered in payment, provided they are
|
|
current in the City of New York; in that case they are considered cash, equally
|
|
with the current bills of this State.
|
|
"From those authorities, it would seem that current bills, or currency,
|
|
are of the value of cash, and exclude the idea of depreciated money. If, then,
|
|
currency is taken as and for coin, it follows that such is its value..."
|
|
-RICHARD SWIFT VS. JAMES WHITNEY, 20 Illinois 144, at 146 (1840). The
|
|
Supreme Court of Iowa once wrestled with a definition of CURRENCY:
|
|
"Currency is bank bills or other paper money which passes as a
|
|
circulating medium in the business community as, and for, the constitutional
|
|
coin of the country. The term 'current funds' means currency money, par funds,
|
|
or money circulating without any discount..."
|
|
"The word CURRENCY is, as we have seen, far from having a settled,
|
|
fixed and precise meaning. And even if it had such a meaning in general, it
|
|
might acquire in certain localities, or among certain classes, a different
|
|
signification."
|
|
-PILMER VS. STATE BANK, 16 Iowa Reporter 321, at 328 (1864). And in
|
|
more recent times, the King, having sealed up with his gun barrel muscle
|
|
tactics a national monopoly on circulating currency instruments, an Appellate
|
|
Court in Illinois now changed the meaning of CURRENCY once again:
|
|
"Currency has been defined as funds or money circulating in the
|
|
business community without any discount, excluding the idea of depreciated
|
|
paper money."
|
|
-JAKE LESS VS. S. ALPORT, 217 Illinois Appellate 14, at 17 (1920).
|
|
Here in the 1980's, the editors of BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, functioning as the
|
|
Government Billboards in the sense that the focus point of everything is always
|
|
juristic: Some slice of LEX over here, or some Case over there. Continuing on
|
|
with their Government center of gravity on everything the way they do, BLACK'S
|
|
defines CURRENCY as only to include those coins, banknotes, and paper money
|
|
that the King has officially recognized in his Legal Tender LEX [as if either
|
|
we or our Fathers in the 1800's really needed the King]:
|
|
"CURRENCY: Coined money and such banknotes or other paper money as are
|
|
authorized by law and do in fact circulate from hand to hand as the medium of
|
|
exchange. See... LEGAL TENDER [no cases are cited]."
|
|
-BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 5th Edition. When those cases from the 1800's
|
|
stated that CURRENCY meant Notes [and NOTES are promises to pay] that are
|
|
exchanged AT PAR, what they mean is that those paper Notes carry an immediate
|
|
or CURRENT maturity date. To redeem a Note AT PAR meant to receive 100%
|
|
exchange for the Face Value that was stated on the Note; if the Note stated the
|
|
Face Value of 10 Gold Eagles, then if the Note was redeemed AT PAR 10 Gold
|
|
Eagles would then be your's; if redeemed at 90% of par, then 9 Gold Eagles
|
|
would be your's. Therefore, when the Maturity Date was current (immediate), the
|
|
Note could be exchanged for gold or silver AT PAR, if in fact you wanted the
|
|
coin instead of the Note. If the Note was exchangeable for hard coin say, one
|
|
or five years out in the future, then such a Note was not CURRENT, and would
|
|
only be exchanged for coin at below par (the percentage differential between
|
|
the par and the sub-par negotiated was the interest carrying cost the new Note
|
|
holder had to bear while he sat and waited for the Maturity Date to arrive).
|
|
But today, BLACK'S has done away with all of this, we have Legal Tender
|
|
statutes now in the modern era, and you just don't need to concern yourself
|
|
with none of that privately minted stuff.
|
|
=============================================================[197]</p>
|
|
<p>itself as we now have it, synchronous with King Richard II's unsuccessful
|
|
conquest against France in the 1300's (and long before the King of England's
|
|
chartering of the Bank of England in 1694 under Gremlin prompting and
|
|
intellectual guidance), [198]</p>
|
|
<p>[198]============================================================= The King
|
|
modeled his bank after the BANK OF AMSTERDAM. Before the Bank of England was
|
|
established, English mercantile writers such as Sir Josiah Childe and Thomas
|
|
Yaranton placed the Crown on notice that "... the Amsterdam bank was of so
|
|
immense advantage to them..." because Dutch Government Debt Instruments "... go
|
|
in Trade equal with Ready Money, yea, better in many parts of the World than
|
|
Money." [quoted by Dickerson in THE FINANCIAL REVOLUTION IN <span class="GPE">ENGLAND</span>: A STUDY IN
|
|
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC CREDIT, 1688-1756, at page 5 (MacMillian Company,
|
|
London, 1967)]. The Bank of Amsterdam had begun as a Warehouse for the safe
|
|
storage of gold and silver belonging largely to Merchants. A Merchant would
|
|
deposit his precious metal for safekeeping, with a receipt given in return; and
|
|
the banker charged a fee for the safekeeping. But soon a few Merchants wanted
|
|
the receipts to be divisible, because they wanted to negotiate just the receipt
|
|
itself, without having to bother making arrangements to physically arrange an
|
|
exchange of the gold or silver. While the Merchants were looking at ways to
|
|
save time here and there, the bankers themselves were developing a few ideas of
|
|
their own; the bankers noticed that only some small percentage of the gold and
|
|
silver actually came and went in and out the doors, so they started to loan out
|
|
gold that was not theirs. Now this was getting interesting -- charging both for
|
|
the storage and also collecting interest on the property of others; and its
|
|
allure attracted the attention of a Gremlin, Mr. John Law, who used this
|
|
concept as a basis for developing a Government monetary theory similar to what
|
|
Gremlin John Maynard Keynes would be writing about two centuries later:
|
|
"This theory [of John Law's] was that the economic system of that day
|
|
was being starved because of insufficient supplies of money. And using the Bank
|
|
of Amsterdam as a model, he had a scheme for producing all the money a nation
|
|
needed."
|
|
-John Flynn in MEN OF WEALTH, at 51 [Simon and Schuster, New York
|
|
(1941)]. For nearly two decades, John Law shopped his theories around European
|
|
Juristic Institutions, with his plans falling on death ears, but one day a
|
|
window opened for his intrigues to be used. After King Louis the 14th of France
|
|
had depleted his Treasury funds in 1716, he turned to John Law who he had
|
|
previously rebuffed. John Law established the BANQUE GENERALE with himself at
|
|
the top; soon it was named the ROYAL BANK with a monopoly charter granted on
|
|
the issuance of money -- and John Law issued bales of paper money, and so, not
|
|
surprisingly, prosperity was rampant.
|
|
"It is not to be wondered that for a few brief months Paris hailed the
|
|
magician who had produced all these rabbits from his hat. Crowds followed his
|
|
carriage. People struggled to get a glimpse of him. The nobles of France hung
|
|
around his anteroom, begging a word from him."
|
|
-MEN OF WEALTH, id., at 75. John Law followed the Gremlin script for
|
|
enscrewment right down the line; all gold and silver was accumulated in the
|
|
hands of his ROYAL BANK; public ownership of gold was outlawed; devaluations
|
|
transpired; inflation mounted and illiquidity was in the air as debt
|
|
instruments began to be difficult to service. John Law fled France in 1720,
|
|
with the mobs who had once hailed him for being a financial genius now calling
|
|
for his head. If this economic scenario sounds at all familiar to you, it
|
|
should, because Gremlins find it unnecessary to change, alter, modify, or
|
|
rearrange their MODUS OPERANDI with the passage of time, as they go about their
|
|
work running one civilization into the ground after another:
|
|
"As a NEW DEALER [John Law] was not greatly different in one respect
|
|
from the apostles of the mercantilist school -- the Colberts, the Roosevelts,
|
|
the Daladiers, the Hitlers and Mussolinis... who sought to create income and
|
|
work by state-fostered public works and who labored to check the flow of gold
|
|
away from their borders. He introduced something new, however, that the
|
|
Hitlers, the Mussolinis, the Roosevelts, the Daladiers and the Chamberlains
|
|
have imitated -- the creation of funds for these purposes through the
|
|
instrumentalities of the modern bank. Law is the precursor of the inflationist
|
|
redeemers."
|
|
-MEN OF WEALTH, id. So the Bank of England was modeled after the Bank
|
|
of Amsterdam which had been created early in the 1600's, and the Dutch bank in
|
|
turn had been modeled after the Bank of Venice [as reported by Charles Wilson
|
|
in THE DUTCH REPUBLIC AND THE CIVILIZATION OF THE <span class="EVENT">SEVENTEENTH</span> CENTURY, at page
|
|
25; McGraw Hill, New York (1968)]. The Bank of England became so successful at
|
|
selling Government debt instruments that it soon became the prototype for
|
|
public banks where looters in other nations sought similar objectives of
|
|
grabbing more money for themselves without having to ask their subjects for it.
|
|
Under the direction of a series of astute financial moves, England's new Bank
|
|
quickly created investor confidence in Government funded debt instruments,
|
|
enabling the Crown to borrow large sums of money at steadily declining rates of
|
|
interest, rather than go through the nuisance and irritation of raising taxes
|
|
dramatically. Writing in THE SPECTATOR, Joseph Addison once compared Government
|
|
credit loans to:
|
|
"... a beautiful Virgin seated upon a throne of Gold possess'd of the
|
|
powers of a Croesus to convert whatever she pleas'd into that precious Metal
|
|
[CROESUS was a King of Lydia in the 6th Century, B.C., and possessed vast
|
|
wealth; hence CROESUS means any fabulously wealthy man.]
|
|
-quoted by Dickerson in THE FINANCIAL REVOLUTION IN <span class="GPE">ENGLAND</span>: A STUDY
|
|
IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC CREDIT, 1688-1756, inside the front page
|
|
[MacMillian Company, London, 1967)].
|
|
=============================================================[198]</p>
|
|
<p>The special SUB ROSA relationship that was developed between the circulation in
|
|
King's Commerce of paper money by the King and a grand Tort the King intends to
|
|
work, still remains in full force and effect down to the present day in the
|
|
United States. [199]</p>
|
|
<p>[199]============================================================= "The history
|
|
of the law of money evidences a constant struggle between the customs of trade
|
|
and the doctrine of freedom of contract, on the one hand, and on the other, the
|
|
exercise of the political power for the needs of Government or the relief of
|
|
private debtors [meaning banking Gremlins]."
|
|
-Phanor J. Eder, writing in "Legal Theories of Money," 20 CORNELL LAW
|
|
QUARTERLY 52, at 53 (1934).
|
|
=============================================================[199]</p>
|
|
<p>Anglo-Saxon Kings have a long history of never bothering to stop pulling off
|
|
whatever they can get away with. [200]</p>
|
|
<p>[200]============================================================= There is
|
|
some value in turning around and looking back at the past to uncover the
|
|
movements of men in other ages, because once their behavior in that setting is
|
|
known, then the real meaning of the movements of men today are exposed:
|
|
"If we consider the shortness of human life, and our limited knowledge,
|
|
even of what passes in our own time, we must be sensible that we should be
|
|
forever children in understanding, were it not for this invention, which
|
|
extends our experience to all past ages, and to the most distant nations;
|
|
making them contribute as much to our improvement in wisdom, as they had
|
|
actually laid under our observation. A man acquainted with history may, in some
|
|
respect, be said to have lived from the beginning of the world, and to have
|
|
been making continual additions to his stock of knowledge in every country."
|
|
-David Hume in PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS ["Of the Study of History"], at
|
|
page 390; [Longmans Green, London (1898); Greene and Grosse, Editors]. But
|
|
Anglo-Saxon Kings are not the only looters to play this game. For a discussion
|
|
of Monetary Debasement being pulled off in B.C. times, see the writings of
|
|
Phanor J. Eder in THE GOLD CLAUSE CASES IN LIGHT OF HISTORY, 23 Georgetown Law
|
|
Journal 369, at page 722 (Part II) (1935).
|
|
=============================================================[200]</p>
|
|
<p>For example, in the 1500's, the King of England (actually Queen Elizabeth)
|
|
ordered a debasement of Britain's national currency for the express purpose of
|
|
working a Tort on rebels in Ireland. This carefully planned currency debasement
|
|
was explicitly designed to damage these Irish adversaries of the Crown as an
|
|
act of war. When these debased coins were issued out all over England to the
|
|
public at large, they became known as MIXED MONEY due to the novel alloy
|
|
composition in the coins, meaning a hybrid of part precious and part ordinary
|
|
metals. This degenerate mixed money was then sent by the King of England to
|
|
Ireland as a covert war military measure against the rebels there. The rebels
|
|
were buying supplies abroad, and they were making their purchases by using
|
|
valuable Britannic gold and silver coins, which always had an international
|
|
allure to them, and properly so. So the King decided that the best way to stop
|
|
the rebels from making their arms purchases would be by making their money
|
|
unattractive to their suppliers, foreign gun runners. In making their purchases
|
|
of guns and armaments, the rebels had been obtaining their gold and silver
|
|
English Crown coins from loyal British subjects in the course of ordinary
|
|
dealings, and those subjects in turn had received it from Queen Elizabeth's
|
|
soldiers and others functioning as Crown distribution agents. So the King,
|
|
knowing what he does about using both devalued coin and soft paper currency to
|
|
damage adversaries, simply reduced the value of the money the rebels were
|
|
getting, by clever debasement. Although debasing the currency to damage a rebel
|
|
out in some remote place carries the secondary consequence of damaging loyal
|
|
subjects who mean the Crown no harm; so as to not offend the Crown's subjects,
|
|
the Queen promised to redeem this debased money at face value later on [sound
|
|
familiar today?] [201]</p>
|
|
<p>[201]============================================================= The Queen
|
|
died shortly after making this promise to her subjects, but her successor
|
|
honored her commitment. See Simon, HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF IRISH COINS, at page
|
|
38 (1749). =============================================================[201]</p>
|
|
<p>But as for the rebels in Ireland, now the debased Crown coins were being
|
|
rejected by the foreign gun runners as payment for goods they had been selling
|
|
to the rebels, and so, as the supplies to the rebels were cut off at the source
|
|
in this slick and clever way, the plans for conquest by the rebels was
|
|
frustrated. [202]</p>
|
|
<p>[202]============================================================= For
|
|
additional Commentary on the use of debased currency against the Irish rebels,
|
|
see generally, John Hannigan, THE MONETARY AND LEGAL TENDER ACTS OF 1933-34 AND
|
|
THE LAW, 14 Boston University Law Review 485, at 504 (1934).
|
|
=============================================================[202]</p>
|
|
<p>The English Case of 1604 that I had quoted from above called THE MIXED MONEY
|
|
CASE was a challenge to the authority of the King of England to pull off what
|
|
he did against Irish rebels, and as you read above in a quotation from the
|
|
Case, the Judiciary has declared that it is a Sovereign prerogative of the King
|
|
to debase his own currency, whenever and however the King feels like it. [And
|
|
rather than snicker at Judges today for tossing aside your challenges to paper
|
|
money, the correct remedy lies in writing explicit and blunt restraining
|
|
language into the King's Charter (the Constitution), but our <span class="NORP">Framers</span> in 1787
|
|
never did that; and the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> of 1787 did not write in such explicit and
|
|
blunt restrainments for a very good reason; Because there was strong
|
|
reservations expressed on the floor of the Convention on whether such proposed
|
|
restrainments were really provident. [203]</p>
|
|
<p>[203]============================================================= "Once the
|
|
Convention was under way, proposals that the Federal Government be given the
|
|
power to coin money and fix its value and that both the Federal and State
|
|
Governments be vested with authority to emit bills of credit triggered heated
|
|
debate over the appropriate limits of governmental monetary power."
|
|
-Getman, THE RIGHT TO USE GOLD CLAUSES IN CONTRACTS, XLII Brooklyn Law
|
|
Review 479, at 489 (1976). See generally, Max Farrand, editor, THE RECORDS OF
|
|
THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 [Yale University Press (1937)], 4 volumes. So
|
|
what we are left with today is the milktoast of Article I, Section 10.
|
|
=============================================================[203]</p>
|
|
<p>That Mixed Money Case was a sleeper, as our <span class="NORP">Framers</span> never correctly designed
|
|
the Constitution to repel this special type of quiet SUB ROSA political
|
|
aggression; and 250 years later, that Mixed Money Case surfaced in the Supreme
|
|
Court of the United States, in the context of justifying the Civil War era
|
|
Legal Tender Acts. [204]</p>
|
|
<p>[204]============================================================= THE LEGAL
|
|
TENDER CASES, 79 U.S. 457, at 548 (1871).
|
|
=============================================================[204]</p>
|
|
<p>Down to the present day, the excitement of war is used as a justification to
|
|
either initiate or continue one more turn in Gremlin enscrewment objectives.
|
|
[205]</p>
|
|
<p>[205]============================================================= Professors
|
|
Peacock and Wiseman correctly point out that a Government's call for a spirit
|
|
of sacrifice leads to the general acceptance of a higher tax rate at the end of
|
|
a major war, rather than at the beginning of the war [see A.T. Peacock and J.
|
|
Wiseman in THE GROWTH OF PUBLIC EXPENDITURES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM (Princeton
|
|
University Press, Princeton, 1961);] but as is the caliber of collegiate
|
|
INTELLIGENTSIA, never is there any discussion of the quiet movements of
|
|
Gremlins in the shadows directing the administrative operations of their
|
|
nominees that they had previously planted and placed in political
|
|
jurisdictions; and so as a result, the true illicit nature of the LEX designed
|
|
to create Special Interest benefits and damages not related to legitimate
|
|
juristic police power operations, remains obscured. The last annulment
|
|
institution in the United States for illicit LEX, the Supreme Court, is moving
|
|
in the right direction generally, but they still need some fine tuning:
|
|
"The requirement of a legitimate public purpose guarantees that the
|
|
State is exercising its police power, rather than providing a benefit to
|
|
special interests."
|
|
-ENERGY RESERVES VS. KANSAS POWER, 459 U.S. 400, at 412 (1983).
|
|
=============================================================[205]</p>
|
|
<p>So now we should have some minimum discernment to see why contemporary
|
|
representations to the effect that gold is just too unsuitable by its heavy
|
|
bulk weight to be a modern circulating denomination of currency, as both
|
|
fraudulent and factually defective. Paper money is characterized by its
|
|
depreciating nature. [206]</p>
|
|
<p>[206]============================================================= "But the
|
|
history of paper money, without any adequate funds pledged to redeem it, and
|
|
resting merely upon the pledge of national faith, has been in all ages and in
|
|
all nations the same. It has constantly become more and more depreciated; and
|
|
in some instances has ceased from this cause to have any circulation
|
|
whatsoever, whether issued by the irresistible edict of a despot, or the more
|
|
alluring order of a republican congress."
|
|
-Joseph Story, III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at page 225
|
|
["Prohibitions - Paper Money"] (Cambridge, 1833).
|
|
=============================================================[206]</p>
|
|
<p>Fraudulent because people with sinister intentions use debased currency (and
|
|
non-redeemable Federal Reserve Notes that quietly lose a little decremental
|
|
value with each passing year are debased currency) for political conquest and
|
|
to damage their adversaries. [207]</p>
|
|
<p>[207]============================================================= "... the
|
|
reader should note especially the 'striking parallels to modern times' [in
|
|
comparison to King Solon in 594 B.C., when he pulled off currency debasement
|
|
acts by]... military adventures draining treasuries, threats of national
|
|
bankruptcy, inflations, massive liquidations of debt, debasement of all
|
|
coinage, disputes over sovereign prerogatives concerning money..."
|
|
-Henry Holzer, GOVERNMENT'S MONEY MONOPOLY, page 15 [Books in Focus,
|
|
New York City (1981)].
|
|
=============================================================[207]</p>
|
|
<p>And such representations are factually defective because the King's new
|
|
proposed money (which the Treasury Department has already quietly circulated
|
|
prototypes of) has thin strips of metal imbedded in between layers of paper,
|
|
and those strips of metal could just as easily have been alloyed with gold and
|
|
silver if our King wanted it -- but no, our King is not quite through with his
|
|
MAGNUM Tortfeasance, not just yet. [208]</p>
|
|
<p>[208]============================================================= Down to the
|
|
present day, pleas and petitions for a reinstatement of the Gold Standard, of
|
|
just some type, continuously falls on death ears in Congress [maybe because
|
|
that is not OUR Congress]. In December of 1981, the House Banking, Finance and
|
|
Urban Affairs Committee entertained such a petition [see GRASSROOTS HEARINGS ON
|
|
THE ECONOMY, PART III, "Petition for Hearings on HR 391 -- Rhode Islanders for
|
|
a Gold Standard," 97th Congress, First Session, starting at 499 (GPO, 1981)],
|
|
but the petition was tossed aside and ignored.
|
|
=============================================================[208]</p>
|
|
<p>And just as <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> go right ahead and argue defective reasoning based on the
|
|
milktoast language in Article I, Section 10, so too do <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> go right ahead
|
|
and try to argue the line, that well, since the United States has no express
|
|
grant of jurisdiction to create corporations, therefore, the Federal Reserve
|
|
Board is unConstitutional for this reason. I have concluded that if I were on
|
|
the Supreme Court, I would uphold the inherent jurisdiction of the King to
|
|
organize corporations (or any other instrumentality that had its own separate
|
|
treasury, with the King calling that instrument whatever he feels like). [209]</p>
|
|
<p>[209]============================================================= "A strange
|
|
fallacy has crept into the reasoning on this subject. It has been supposed,
|
|
that a corporation is some great, independent thing; and that the power to
|
|
erect it is a great, substantive, independent power; whereas in truth, a
|
|
corporation is but a legal capacity, quality, or means to an end; and the power
|
|
to erect it is, or may be, an implied and incidental power. A corporation is
|
|
never the end, for which other powers are exercised; but a means, by which
|
|
other objects are accomplished."
|
|
-Joseph Story, in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION 131, ["Powers
|
|
of Congress"] (Cambridge, 1833).
|
|
=============================================================[209]</p>
|
|
<p>That idea of a separate treasury is important to the Supreme Court, since that
|
|
is the determining logic behind their rulings making municipalities exempt from
|
|
the 11th Amendment, which otherwise operates to immunize actions against
|
|
states. [210]</p>
|
|
<p>[210]============================================================= LAKE COUNTY
|
|
ESTATES, 440 U.S. 391, at 401 (1978).
|
|
=============================================================[210]</p>
|
|
<p>My reasoning comes from a confluence of factors. First, getting a feel for the
|
|
lack of specificity in the Framer's drafting of the Constitution; for example,
|
|
no where is the King given permission to hire employees, to excavate sites for
|
|
office buildings, to sign leases, or to purchase assets or land in foreign
|
|
lands, etc. In examining those areas where the Supreme Court has ruled on
|
|
inherent meanings of Clauses, they have ruled, for example, that the "Adversary
|
|
Nature" of criminal prosecutions is inherent in the Sixth Amendment [MIRANDA
|
|
VS. ARIZONA and the counsel cases], and that Courts created by the United
|
|
States have inherent Contempt jurisdiction, regardless of the absence of the
|
|
conferment of any such jurisdiction. [211]</p>
|
|
<p>[211]============================================================= IN RE:
|
|
RUSSO, 53 Federal Rules Decisions 564 (United States District Court, 1971).
|
|
=============================================================[211]</p>
|
|
<p>And on and on. For these reasons there is very much a basis for an implied
|
|
grant of jurisdiction for the King to do something, not otherwise specifically
|
|
denominated in his Charter. The test to be applied to see if some jurisdiction
|
|
claimed operative by the King, but not exactly specified anywhere in that
|
|
Constitutional Charter of his which breathed life into the King his breath of
|
|
juristic life, lies in another strata: First, is the challenged LEX even
|
|
inferentially in conflict with any restraining mandate the <span class="NORP">Framers</span> wrote into
|
|
the Constitution? In the limited question of creating corporations, the answer
|
|
is no, it isn't. Next, we shift into the broader question and ask: Is the
|
|
creation of corporations even out of harmony with the LEIT MOTIF of the
|
|
Constitution to restrain the King from functioning as a Tortfeasor? [212]</p>
|
|
<p>[212]============================================================= "The Bill of
|
|
Rights is the primary source of expressed information as to what is meant by
|
|
Constitutional liberty. Its safeguards secure the climate which the Law of
|
|
Freedom needs in order to exist. It is true that they were added to the
|
|
Constitution to operate solely against Federal power [BARRON VS. BALTIMORE, 32
|
|
U.S. 243, at 247 (1833)]. But the Fourteenth Amendment was added in 1868 in
|
|
response for a demand for national protection against abuses of State power. A
|
|
series of decisions over the last 25 years has held that many rights were
|
|
indeed extended against the states by that Amendment. It is indeed fair to say
|
|
that from 1962 to 1969 the very face of the Law changed. Those years witnessed
|
|
the extension to the States of nine of the specifics of the Bill of Rights,
|
|
decisions which have profound impact on American life, requiring the deep
|
|
involvement of State courts in the application of Federal Law."
|
|
-Justice William Brennan in REMARKS, 36 Rutgers Law Review 725, at 727
|
|
(1984). <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> and Tax Protestors can carry on all they want with demanding,
|
|
and believing, that they posses some Constitutional Rights, and just like
|
|
Justice Brennan's REMARKS, there are many high, noble and lofty
|
|
characterizations of those Rights available -- but those REMARKS, together with
|
|
the Tax Protestor's demands, are all for naught when one tiny little device
|
|
surfaces in a grievance: A Commercial Contract. By the end of this Letter the
|
|
elevated priority in Nature that contracts ascend to in settling grievances
|
|
should become apparent, whenever they are in effect; a doctrinal concept if
|
|
unlearned now, Mr. May, will be learned in on uncertain terms before Father at
|
|
the Last Day.
|
|
=============================================================[212]</p>
|
|
<p>Does the challenged act of Congress (creating corporations or other political
|
|
instruments with separate treasuries), have the effect, in the practical
|
|
setting, of allowing or in any way assisting the King to function as a
|
|
Tortfeasor against us countryside folks? In other words, does the creation of
|
|
privately held corporations by the King, such as the Federal Reserve System,
|
|
provide the King with a mechanism to damage us that he would not otherwise be
|
|
privileged to do, or able to do in the practical effect with his own direct
|
|
employees? In the case of creating corporations, or in the creation of separate
|
|
juristic organizations with their own treasuries, the administrative form of
|
|
the corporation (the wording on the piece of paper that is its charter) offers
|
|
no possibility of a Tort on us that could not be otherwise worked by Executive
|
|
Agencies operating under direct Presidential administrative jurisdiction. This
|
|
is true even in the case of the Federal Reserve System. The Fed is very much a
|
|
Tortfeasor in its control over the rate of inflation, [213]</p>
|
|
<p>[213]============================================================= Inflation is
|
|
a Tort, and can be claimed as such in damage awards. See the Supreme Court in
|
|
JONES & LAUGHLIN STEEL CORPORATION VS. PFIFER, 462 U.S. 523 (1983). And
|
|
Inflation is also a tax, and is treated as income by the Treasury Department;
|
|
in the ANNUAL REPORT of the Secretary of the Treasury for 1919, on page 213,
|
|
there lies the interesting admission that the large federal deficits of 1917 to
|
|
1919, totaling then some $23 billion, were financed by money creation, and
|
|
other devices.
|
|
=============================================================[213]</p>
|
|
<p>and in its proclivities to do so; and from its being such a dominate financial
|
|
market maker and control of re-discount rates its Open Market Committee can and
|
|
will fix rates of interest at whatever level it feels like; and the Gremlins
|
|
running the Fed know very much that they posses considerable power to determine
|
|
prosperity levels. [214]</p>
|
|
<p>[214]============================================================= "The purpose
|
|
of the Federal Reserve System is to contribute, to the maximum extent that
|
|
monetary policy can contribute, to the achievement of sustained high
|
|
employment, stable values, and a rising standard of living for all Americans."
|
|
-William McChesney Martin, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, in
|
|
THE FEDERAL RESERVE AFTER 50 YEARS ["Hearings before the Subcommittee on
|
|
Domestic Finance"], 88th Congress, 2nd Session, Volume I, page 16 [GPO
|
|
Washington (January and February, 1964)].
|
|
=============================================================[214]</p>
|
|
<p>By controlling these financial market forces, the Fed single-handedly controls
|
|
the relative level of economic prosperity or decline in the land. [215]</p>
|
|
<p>[215]============================================================= Economists
|
|
watch Fed monetary statistics quite closely, as if they were national policy
|
|
tools (which they are). Statistics generally targeted for close observation are
|
|
those two monetary velocity instruments called M-1 and M-2, as they are
|
|
indications of the direction of the future percentage advance of the GNP and
|
|
Inflation. See THE VELOCITY OF MONEY by George Garvey and Martin Blyn, [Federal
|
|
Reserve Bank, New York (1969)]. The true point of origin of all directional
|
|
changes in the economy necessarily originates with that institution that
|
|
controls the aggregate issuance of its circulating instruments; at the present
|
|
time, this is the Fed and its OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE, a fact that the Congress
|
|
collectively is well aware of but not always acknowledged publicly. See CONDUCT
|
|
OF MONETARY POLICY in Hearings before the Committee on Banking, Finance and
|
|
Urban Affairs, House of Representatives, 96th Congress, First Session, Serial
|
|
Number 96-22 (July, 1979), which discusses the cascading effect of decisions of
|
|
the OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE on multiple macroeconomic indicia.
|
|
=============================================================[215]</p>
|
|
<p>If the Fed were an administrative agency under, perhaps, the Comptroller of the
|
|
Currency, then all of the regulatory assertions it now makes over member banks
|
|
would remain in effect, and it would still control prosperity through its
|
|
regulatory mechanisms. (Incidentally, the mere absence of prosperity, under
|
|
such highly managed and tightly controlled monetary circumstances, is a Tort
|
|
against us by the Fed). [216]</p>
|
|
<p>[216]============================================================= An
|
|
INTELLIGENTSIA clown once hired by Gremlins to do some writing for them wrote a
|
|
few words to talk about the Gremlin perception of prosperity:
|
|
"An economic system does not have to be expansive -- that is,
|
|
constantly increasing its production of wealth -- and it might well be possible
|
|
for people to be completely happy in a nonexpansive economic system if they
|
|
were accustomed to it. In the twentieth century, however, the people of our
|
|
culture have been living under expansive conditions for generations. Their
|
|
minds are psychologically adjusted to expansion, and they feel deeply
|
|
frustrated unless they are better off each year than they were the previous
|
|
year. The economic system itself has become organized for expansion, and if it
|
|
does not expand it tends to collapse [and when it does collapse, it is because
|
|
the Gremlins were there]."
|
|
-Carroll Quigley in TRAGEDY AND HOPE, at 497 [MacMillian Company, New
|
|
York (1966)].
|
|
=============================================================[216]</p>
|
|
<p>If the Federal Reserve were an Article II Executive Agency under Presidential
|
|
Jurisdiction (which as a privately owned and independently managed business
|
|
entity, it is not), then every single decision made by the Federal Reserve
|
|
Board and its Open Market Committee (and its predecessor) down to the present
|
|
time, would still have been made and carried out. [217]</p>
|
|
<p>[217]============================================================= The Federal
|
|
Reserve Board is a very handy instrument to massage economies, create
|
|
depressions, and run civilizations into the ground with. For example, in the
|
|
late 1920's, there was an era of speculation in the securities markets of the
|
|
United States; after a while in any market, what appears to be SPECULATION will
|
|
always surface when rising prices and highly leveraged loans make their
|
|
institutionalized appearance on the scene. Economists, bureaucratic theorists,
|
|
and other clowns will cast SPECULATION into an illicit image, but SPECULATION,
|
|
so called, is nothing more than a manifestation of strong prosperity -- and
|
|
Gremlins do not want you and I to have sustained protracted prosperity, they
|
|
want us to experience economic starvation like they wanted physical starvation
|
|
for those millions of Ukrainians who were murdered in the great manufactured
|
|
Famine of 1932-33. Easy high percentage loans are an important ingredient to
|
|
create SPECULATION, so one of the devices used by Rothschild Gremlins to create
|
|
a balloon of American speculation was to lower the rate of interest charged by
|
|
the Federal Reserve Board to member banks:
|
|
"Nothing did more to spur the boom in stocks than the decision made by
|
|
the New York Federal Reserve Bank, in the Spring of 1927, to cut the rediscount
|
|
rate. Benjamin Strong, Governor of the bank, was chief advocate of this unwise
|
|
measure, which was taken largely at the behest of Montagu Norman of the Bank of
|
|
England [Montagu Norman was a Rothschild nominee planted in the Bank of
|
|
England]. Ostensibly, this easy money policy was designed to stop the flow of
|
|
gold out of England [as usual, DECEPTION is present when Gremlins are running
|
|
the show]. Its primary effect, however, was to cause a reevaluation of all
|
|
securities [upward], and to further inflate our already inflationary credit
|
|
system by making large sums of money available for financing stock
|
|
speculation."
|
|
-Bernard Baruch,, in his autobiography BARUCH: THE PUBLIC YEARS, at
|
|
221 [Holt Rheinhart & Winston, New York (1960)]. The well known Gremlin
|
|
economist John K. Galbraith dismisses the view that the action of the Federal
|
|
Reserve Board authorities in cutting the rediscount rate in the Spring of 1927
|
|
had much effect on the elevated speculation which followed, on the grounds that
|
|
this:
|
|
"... explanation obviously assumes that people will always speculate if
|
|
they can get the money to finance it. Nothing can be farther from the truth.
|
|
There were times before and there have been long periods since when credit was
|
|
plentiful and cheap -- far cheaper than in 1927 to 1929 -- and when speculation
|
|
was negligible. Nor, as we shall see later, was speculation out of control
|
|
after 1927, except that it was beyond the reach of men who did not want in the
|
|
least to control it."
|
|
-John K. Galbraith in THE GREAT CRASH, page 16 [Houghton Mifflin,
|
|
Boston (1955)]. SPECULATION is actually fueled by the ability to easily obtain
|
|
highly leveraged loans in a market characterized by rapidly rising prices. Your
|
|
analogy of 1927, Mr. Galbraith, to previous eras is defective because other
|
|
previous periods of cheap credit was deficient in possessing the twin important
|
|
structural SPECULATION requirements of easily obtainable highly leveraged loans
|
|
and rapidly rising prices; if both highly leveraged loans and rapidly rising
|
|
prices are not present, then cheap credit loans will not induce SPECULATION.
|
|
And so the failure of cheap and plentiful credit loans in previous eras to
|
|
trigger SPECULATION then, is not relevant and does not negate the highly
|
|
stimulating effect that such inexpensive credit loans created in the American
|
|
securities markets from 1927 to 1929, since declining rates of interest very
|
|
much act as an accelerant on markets already structurally conditioned for
|
|
SPECULATION by the twin important indicia of highly leveraged loans and rapidly
|
|
rising prices. You really are not competent to be an economist, Mr. Galbraith
|
|
-- and incidentally, managing SPECULATION, so called, was very much WITHIN the
|
|
reach of your brothers who very much wanted to control it, TOTALLY. Sorry, Mr.
|
|
Galbraith, but you don't do a very good job of covering the tracks of your
|
|
Gremlin brothers from the First Estate who, like you, are repeating the same
|
|
judgment mistakes now that you made then. Having created something ILLICIT,
|
|
having created something that just NEEDS and IS BEGGING for a corrective
|
|
solution, Gremlins acting through their instrumentality, the Federal Reserve
|
|
Board, in 1929 now had just the right medicine to fix this wicked SPECULATION,
|
|
as one visible Rothschild nominee, Mr. Montagu Norman, once again made his
|
|
descent sortie on Washington in vulture trajectory, and told Andrew Mellon what
|
|
to do next:
|
|
"... the Federal Reserve Board issued a formal statement today
|
|
declaring that it conceived it to be its duty in 'the immediate situation' to
|
|
restrain the use, either directly or indirectly, of Federal Reserve credit
|
|
facilities in aid of the froth of speculative credit...
|
|
"No information could be obtained from Mr. Norman or American officials
|
|
concerning the purpose of his visit [to Washington] other than he had come here
|
|
for a general discussion of international financial conditions with the System
|
|
and members of the [Federal Reserve] Board...
|
|
"All efforts to obtain any further interpretation of the action of the
|
|
Federal Reserve Board than that contained in its formal statement were
|
|
futile...
|
|
"The decision by the Federal Reserve Board to take so definite a stand
|
|
in connection with its attitude towards speculative activities, was made, it is
|
|
understood, only after a conference in which Secretary Mellon, as Chairman [of
|
|
the Federal Reserve] EX-OFFICIO participated [meaning that Gremlin Andrew
|
|
Mellon DIRECTED, after having received his instructions from the Rothschilds
|
|
through Montagu Norman]...
|
|
"The frankness of its announcement today therefore added to the
|
|
interest it caused in financial circles."
|
|
-THE NEW YORK TIMES ["Loan Curb Hinted by Federal Reserve Board;
|
|
States Duty in 'the Immediate Situation' is to restrain Speculative Credit"],
|
|
page 1 (February 7, 1929). Who is Montagu Norman? A Gremlin who was recognized
|
|
as being very powerful at that time [Carroll Quigley claims the WALL STREET
|
|
JOURNAL for November 11, 1927 characterized Montagu Norman as "... the currency
|
|
dictator of Europe."] Like all good hardworking Gremlins putting in their
|
|
honest days' labor, they are answerable to another person up the line [even the
|
|
Rothschilds know from whence their benefits originate]; and like a few other
|
|
WORLD CLASS Gremlins, Montagu Norman held the high honor of running an entire
|
|
civilization into the ground:
|
|
"... Norman held the position [of CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER] for
|
|
twenty-four years (1920-1944), during which he became the chief architect of
|
|
the liquidation of Britain's global preeminence."
|
|
-Carroll Quigley in TRAGEDY AND HOPE, at 325 [MacMillian Company, New
|
|
York (1966)]. He had brilliance, he had genius, he had SAVIOR-FAIRE, and
|
|
Montagu Norman tied it all together with slick Gremlin FINESSE when he so
|
|
smoothly ran Great Britain into the ground with so very few people even knowing
|
|
that he had done so; and so when Montagu Norman brought his conquests to other
|
|
continents, for and on behalf of his Rothschild sponsors, he would also be
|
|
leaving the ruins of those once majestic civilizations with little indication
|
|
that he had been there. The year 1929 started out to be a great year, and
|
|
American businessmen had positive expectations [see the many businessmen quoted
|
|
through the WALL STREET JOURNAL for January 1, 1929]; but the world's Gremlins
|
|
had a few ideas of their own:
|
|
"On February 15, 1929, the Federal Advisory Council adopted the
|
|
following resolution:
|
|
"The Council believes that every effort should be made to correct the
|
|
present situation in the speculative markets before resorting to an advance in
|
|
rates.
|
|
"The Council in reviewing present conditions finds that in spite of the
|
|
cooperation of member banks, the measures so far adopted have not been
|
|
effective in correcting the present situation of the money market. The Council,
|
|
therefore, recommends that the Federal Reserve Board permit the Federal Reserve
|
|
banks to raise their rediscount rate immediately and maintain a rate consistent
|
|
with the cost of commercial credit."
|
|
-Transcript of the minutes of the 3:10pm Meeting of the FEDERAL
|
|
ADVISORY COUNCIL in the Federal Reserve Board Room (April 19, 1929) {National
|
|
Archives ["Federal Reserve Board File"], Washington, D.C.}. The Federal Reserve
|
|
Board's FEDERAL ADVISORY COUNCIL was abolished in the 1930's. The FEDERAL
|
|
ADVISORY COUNCIL had also met twice earlier that day, at 10:05am and at
|
|
12:10pm. There had been an ominous atmosphere of excitement in the air that
|
|
day:
|
|
"The prospect of further developments of importance in regard to the
|
|
Government's attitude on the credit situation appeared today when members of
|
|
the Federal Advisory Council... met in a special session and later held a joint
|
|
conference with the Board [the 12:10pm meeting]. Resolutions were adopted by
|
|
the Council and transmitted to the Board, but their purport was closely
|
|
guarded. ...An atmosphere of deep mystery was thrown about the proceedings both
|
|
by the Board and the Council. No advance announcement had been made that an
|
|
extraordinary session of the Council was contemplated, and in fact that the
|
|
members were in the city became known only when newspaper correspondents
|
|
happened to see some of them entering the Treasury Department building. Even
|
|
after that evasive replies were given, until it became apparent that such
|
|
tactics were futile... While the joint meeting was in progress at the Treasury
|
|
Department, every effort was made to guard the proceedings and a group of
|
|
newspaper correspondents were asked to leave the corridor. The meeting of the
|
|
Council attracted particular attention in view of the fact that it had met here
|
|
in regular session on February 14th, a week following the Reserve Board's
|
|
warning statement against the excessive use of Reserve System credit in
|
|
speculative operations on the stock market."
|
|
-THE NEW YORK TIMES ["Reserve Council Confers in Haste: Atmosphere of
|
|
Mystery is Thrown About Its Meeting in Washington"], page 9 (April 20, 1929). A
|
|
month later, one more Gremlin turn of the screws was administered to the
|
|
economy:
|
|
"The Federal Advisory Council has reviewed carefully the credit
|
|
situation. It continues to agree with the view of the Federal Reserve Board as
|
|
expressed in its statement of February 5, 1929 that 'an excessive amount of the
|
|
country's credit has been absorbed in speculative security loans.' The policy
|
|
pursued by the Federal Reserve Board has had a beneficial effect due largely to
|
|
the loyal cooperation of the banks of the country. The efforts in this
|
|
direction should be continued, but the Council notes that while the total
|
|
amount of Federal Reserve credit being used has been reduced, 'the amount of
|
|
the country's credit absorbed in speculative security loans' has not been
|
|
substantially lowered.
|
|
"Therefore, the Council recommends to the Federal Reserve Board that
|
|
the time has come to grant permission to raise the rediscount rates to six
|
|
percent to those Federal Reserve Banks requesting it, thus bringing the
|
|
rediscount rates into closer relation with generally prevailing commercial
|
|
money rates. The Council believes that improvement in financial conditions and
|
|
a consequent reduction of the rate structure will thereby be brought about more
|
|
quickly, thus best safeguarding commerce, industry, and agriculture."
|
|
-Resolution approved by the FEDERAL ADVISORY COUNCIL, in its 2:30pm
|
|
Meeting on May 21, 1929 {National Archives ["Federal Reserve Board File"],
|
|
Washington, D.C.}. While the Gremlins controlling the Federal Reserve were busy
|
|
raising interest rates, the analytical staff of the Federal Reserve was
|
|
cognizant of the extreme economic damages such an elevated rate of interest was
|
|
doing to Commerce, Industry, and Agriculture [directly contrary to the
|
|
beneficial effect claimed by the Federal Advisory Council]:
|
|
"The higher money rates do not appear to have restricted short term
|
|
commercial borrowings, but in a number of ways the present high level of money
|
|
rates is beginning to have a detrimental effect upon business.
|
|
"1.The volume of building operations has been declining largely
|
|
because of difficulty in obtaining second mortgage money and loans for building
|
|
operations and also difficulty in selling real estate bonds. Stock financing
|
|
which has been resorted to in some cases has only partly met the requirements.
|
|
"2.A good many state, municipal, railway and other projects,
|
|
ordinarily financed through bonds and notes, have been postponed because of
|
|
difficulty in securing at reasonable prices...
|
|
"3.Reduced foreign financing in the United States... are diminishing
|
|
the purchasing power of those countries for our products, a tendency which is
|
|
likely to be reflected sooner or later in reduced exports.
|
|
"It thus seems reasonably certain that present money conditions, if
|
|
long continued, will have a seriously detrimental effect upon business
|
|
conditions, and the longer they are continued the more serious will be the
|
|
effect. The volume of business now appears to be sustained in part by the
|
|
production of automobiles considerably in excess of retail purchases with a
|
|
consequent stimulating effect upon the steel industry..."
|
|
-PRELIMINARY MEMORANDUM FOR THE OPEN MARKET INVESTMENT COMMITTEE
|
|
["Effects on Business"]; Prepared for the 5:00pm Meeting of the Fed's Open
|
|
Market Investment Committee on April 1, 1929 {National Archives ["Federal
|
|
Reserve Board File"], Washington, D.C.}. In September of 1929, the OPEN MARKET
|
|
COMMITTEE would be warning that:
|
|
"... there are some indications of a possible impending recession." Six
|
|
months earlier in April, the economy was still experiencing the stimulating
|
|
effect of surplus automobile production, but by September, now automobile
|
|
manufacturing was going to the dogs:
|
|
"Building activity has been reduced still further; automobile
|
|
production has been receding, and steel production has reflected these
|
|
tendencies." And as for the claimed STIMULATING effect high rates of interest
|
|
would be having on agriculture, in fact Gremlin enscrewment was beginning to
|
|
produce its desired objective of damages:
|
|
"The size of the year's crops is expected to be generally smaller than
|
|
a year ago. With higher prices the total return to the farmer may be not short
|
|
of a year ago... The continued pressure on the credit situation has also been
|
|
reflected by increasing reports from some localities of difficulties of
|
|
agriculture in securing an adequate supply of credit."
|
|
-All three quotations are from the MINUTES OF THE OPEN MARKET
|
|
INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, September 24, 1929 {National Archives ["Federal Reserve
|
|
Board File"], Washington, D.C.}. That greasy little Gremlin, Paul Warburg, very
|
|
much had his nose in all of this. He slipped into a FEDERAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
|
|
Meeting that was held on May 21, 1929, as the alternate for W.C. Potter, and he
|
|
made a Statement and engaged in conversation that Walter Lichtenstein, Council
|
|
Secretary, did not feel like recording [see MINUTES OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
|
|
for May 21, 1929]. The combined effect of the many manipulative devices pulled
|
|
by Gremlins in the Fed in the latter 1920's was a great contraction in the
|
|
economy [see generally a protracted chapter called "The Great Contraction" in A
|
|
MONETARY HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES, 1867-1960 by Milton Friedman [Princeton
|
|
University Press, Princeton (1963)].
|
|
=============================================================[217]</p>
|
|
<p>The only existential reason for the Fed's corporate organizational legal
|
|
structure lies in the fact that the Fed was sponsored, as you know, by a
|
|
Special Interest Group for their own private enrichment: [218]</p>
|
|
<p>[218]============================================================= "Experience
|
|
should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the
|
|
Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert
|
|
to repel invasion of the liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to
|
|
liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without
|
|
understanding."
|
|
-Justice Louis Brandeis in OLMSTEAD VS. UNITED STATES, 277 U.S. 438,
|
|
at 479 (1927). Although the Gremlins who sneaked the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT
|
|
through Congress were by no means well meaning, they did try to convey the
|
|
image that this piece of legislation was so oriented.
|
|
=============================================================[218]</p>
|
|
<p>A network of Gremlins operating under the intellectual aegis of Rothschild
|
|
nominee Paul Warburg and associates, who prodded and tricked an otherwise
|
|
reticent and naive Congress into enacting the initiating legislation in 1913.
|
|
[219]</p>
|
|
<p>[219]============================================================= Greasy
|
|
little Gremlins like Paul Warburg are steeped in the strategic use of deception
|
|
as a tool to accomplish their objectives; and like the mentor from the First
|
|
Estate, Lucifer, they find many circumstances come to pass where the use of
|
|
such deception has yielded impressive immediate benefits -- yet Father
|
|
continues to warn against it. This deceptive intellectual orientation of
|
|
Gremlins has been so ingrained in them from the First Estate, that Gremlins
|
|
find the accurate presentation of facts now to be very difficult to construct.
|
|
This deception surfaced, for example, when one Gremlin was speaking highly of
|
|
another Gremlin:
|
|
"... it is known only to a very few exactly how great is the
|
|
indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg. For it may be stated without
|
|
fear of contradiction that in its fundamental features the Federal Reserve Act
|
|
is the work of Mr. Warburg more than any other man in the country... the
|
|
Federal Reserve Act has frankly accepted the principles of the Aldrich bill;
|
|
and these principles... were the creation of Mr. Warburg and Mr. Warburg
|
|
alone... But having set out on the task [to create the Federal Reserve], there
|
|
was no stopping [Paul Warburg], and from year to year essay upon essay flowed
|
|
from his facile pen, giving more precision and point to his fundamental
|
|
principles until he was recognized as the real leader in the new movement. The
|
|
Federal Reserve Act will be associated in history with the name of Paul
|
|
Warburg..."
|
|
-Gremlin Edwin Seligman offering introductory remarks in IV
|
|
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE #4, at 387 [<span class="GPE">Columbia</span>
|
|
University, New York (April, 1914)]; there then follows numerous essays written
|
|
by Paul Warburg praising the circulation of paper currency and the Federal
|
|
Reserve System. Yet Paul Warburg did not intellectually create the Federal
|
|
Reserve System -- the Rothschilds did, but the Rothschilds wanted to stay in
|
|
the background and blend themselves into the shadowy corners of Europe; Paul
|
|
Warburg was hired by them to take all the flack among those who could be
|
|
expected to probe a little deeper in searching for the Fed's Gremlin sponsors.
|
|
"Paul Warburg is the man who got the Federal Reserve Act together after
|
|
the Aldrich Plan aroused such nationwide resentment and opposition. The
|
|
mastermind of both plans was Baron Alfred Rothschild of London."
|
|
-Elisha Garrison in ROOSEVELT, WILSON AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE LAW
|
|
[Christopher Publishing Housing, Boston (1931)].
|
|
=============================================================[219]</p>
|
|
<p>Designed by Gremlins the way it was, [220]</p>
|
|
<p>[220]============================================================= The illicit
|
|
statutory sponsorship of the Federal Reserve Board is often disputed by
|
|
collegiate INTELLIGENTSIA clowns who, without possessing any factual elements
|
|
to countermand the background workings of determined Gremlins, continue to
|
|
point to Congress itself as the institution responsible for the creation of the
|
|
Federal Reserve. Gremlin Paul Warburg himself has had a few words to say about
|
|
just where the true origin of statutes is to be found:
|
|
"I am told that Congress and the State Legislatures make the laws...
|
|
Instead of saying that legislators make the laws, it would be far more correct
|
|
to say that legislatures merely put the finishing touches on the law. To say
|
|
that they "make the laws" is like saying that the books are made by
|
|
bookbinders, forgetting that there are authors, printers, and proofreaders too.
|
|
"... The motive power in lawmaking is all supplied from somewhere
|
|
outside the legislative halls... Some intellect outside the realm of active
|
|
politics first conceives an idea. It spreads to the minds of other individuals,
|
|
slowly at first, but gradually gaining momentum. Presently there is an
|
|
organized movement in its favor; then comes the deluge of propaganda, until the
|
|
proposal becomes an issue and the politicians begin to take note of it. A law
|
|
is half made, and more than half made, when a large body of aggressive support
|
|
has been mobilized among the voters; yet during this part of the process the
|
|
legislative bodies have nothing whatever to do with it."
|
|
-Gremlin Paul Warburg explaining himself in Volume I THE FEDERAL
|
|
RESERVE SYSTEM: ITS ORIGINS AND GROWTH, at 3 [MacMillian Company, New York
|
|
(1930)]. =============================================================[220]</p>
|
|
<p>and because of its private corporate ownership and lack of public
|
|
accountability to the Congress and to the public. [221]</p>
|
|
<p>[221]============================================================= General
|
|
Public accountability of the Fed is appropriate to the extent that the Fed has
|
|
been endowed by its creator with a limited juristic mission in monetary areas
|
|
touching a general public interest; and one of the most important instruments
|
|
of Federal Reserve power lies in the OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE. Numerous attempts
|
|
just to get some minimal public dissemination on transcripts of the Federal
|
|
Open Market Committee meetings has fallen on death ears; shrouding their daily
|
|
maneuverings behind a veil of secrecy -- a veil they would like to maintain
|
|
erected for as long as possible (time has a way of greatly diminishing the
|
|
possible adverse reaction that unfavorable information triggers). The Congress
|
|
was once propositioned with the idea of requiring the FOMC to publish publicly,
|
|
detailed minutes of their meetings. In trying to disable the Congress from
|
|
doing this, an old Gremlin stratagem was relied upon: Agree with the necessity
|
|
for the idea being expounded (so now your adversary is off guard), but create
|
|
impediments to the idea by raising technical reservations that appear to be
|
|
difficult to overcome and otherwise discredit the idea as being infeasible for
|
|
some technical reason. And in overcoming HR 4478, this is just what Gremlins in
|
|
the Fed did (Gremlins do not want Government in the sunshine) [see the
|
|
testimony of imp bureaucrat Fredrick Schultz as he said he agreed with the
|
|
objectives, but then turned around and threw technical reservations at the idea
|
|
to try and discredit the idea on its merits, in A BILL TO AMEND THE FEDERAL
|
|
RESERVE ACT ["Hearings Before a Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy on HR
|
|
4478 of the House Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs"], 97th
|
|
Congress, First Session (September, 1981)].
|
|
=============================================================[221]</p>
|
|
<p>The Fed has never been audited by the GAO, [222]</p>
|
|
<p>[222]============================================================= "It is no
|
|
secret that I have long been concerned about the aloofness of the Federal
|
|
Reserve from both the executive branch and the Congress. Although the Federal
|
|
Reserve System is a creature of Congress, it is not subject to any of the usual
|
|
Government budgetary, auditing and appropriations procedures."
|
|
-Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Committee on Domestic Finance,
|
|
in THE FEDERAL RESERVE AFTER 50 YEARS ["Hearings before the Subcommittee on
|
|
Domestic Finance"], 88th Congress, 2nd Session, Volume 1, page 8 [GPO,
|
|
Washington, D.C. (January and February, 1964)].
|
|
=============================================================[222]</p>
|
|
<p>the Fed as a privately owned corporation is able to provide its European owners
|
|
with an exceptionally lush American gold mine they would not otherwise
|
|
experience if title to Federal Reserve stock were ever to be reclaimed by the
|
|
Congress under EMINENT DOMAIN JURISDICTION, or simple repeal, or repurchased
|
|
under a reservation in its charter. [223]</p>
|
|
<p>[223]============================================================= But don't
|
|
expect such a repurchase to ever take place; the Federal Reserve Board gives
|
|
the Congress all profits from certain selected trading activities. In the
|
|
latter 1970's, this was amounting to approximately $10 billion a year; not an
|
|
easy loss of revenue for a greedy fat Congress to go without. So the Congress
|
|
does not want to disturb the Fed, and your letters to them, encouraging them to
|
|
do so, will continue to fall on death ears.
|
|
=============================================================[223]</p>
|
|
<p>So the Fed exists as a private independent corporation because it was created
|
|
to act as a financial enrichment velocity accelerant for its owners [I have a
|
|
hunch that it is also the single most profitable wealth institution in the
|
|
world, outdancing and outdazzling the top Fortune 100, as well as the Vatican
|
|
and several "for profit" political jurisdictions]. The Status of the Federal
|
|
Reserve System as a Tortfeasor is not related to its legal charter organization
|
|
as a corporation, and neither would its Tortfeasance be changed, either
|
|
negative or positive at all, if it ever were to be absorbed into the Executive
|
|
Presidential bureaucracy of Article II. As an Executive Article II agency, then
|
|
it would still control inflation since it would still be controlled by
|
|
Gremlins; and it would continue to control interest rates and relative levels
|
|
of prosperity through its regulatory mechanisms. [224]</p>
|
|
<p>[224]============================================================= Those
|
|
Rothschild Gremlins never stop with their conquests. After mentioning the
|
|
dominance of the Rothschilds in European financial affairs, a United States
|
|
Senator once wrote:
|
|
"... it might be... possible for 20 or 30 individuals if they
|
|
controlled the United States Federal Reserve Board, the Bank of England, the
|
|
Bank of France, and the Bank of Germany, to enter into a conspiracy to regulate
|
|
the volume of the world's currency, thereby resultantly controlling the prices
|
|
of the world's commodities, so vitally affecting the happiness, contentment,
|
|
occupation, and prosperity of the world's population. If successful in
|
|
effecting such a control, by expanding the world's currency they could inflate
|
|
prices of all the world's commodities and then distribute at fictitious values
|
|
the securities which they had accumulated. After such accomplishments the could
|
|
then decrease the volume of money thus resultantly deflating or diminishing the
|
|
prices of all the world's commodities with resultant greatly diminished prices
|
|
in securities and then buy back at bargain prices the securities that they had
|
|
distributed previously at inflated prices. If such a conspiracy existed and
|
|
continued unchecked this expansion of the volume of money with increased prices
|
|
and distribution of securities held by the few followed by a period of
|
|
decreased volume of money with resultant decreased prices of all the world's
|
|
commodities with reaccumulation of securities at bargain prices would
|
|
ultimately result in all the people outside of the few conspirators becoming
|
|
practically vassals and peons with the inevitable result that the people
|
|
themselves would rise up in their wrath and take from the conspirators their
|
|
wealth and probably their lives."
|
|
-Senator Jonathan Bourne, Jr. of Oregon, expressing comments on the
|
|
Wheeler Bill (S. 2487), in Senate Document #109 entitled INDEPENDENT
|
|
BIMETALLISM OR BOLSHEVISM, 72nd Congress, First Session, pages 8 and 9 [GPO
|
|
(June 15, 1932)]. Senate Bill 2487 provided for the free coinage of silver and
|
|
gold at a ratio of 16-to-1.
|
|
=============================================================[224]</p>
|
|
<p>That this Tortfeasance is transparent to its organized form is true because all
|
|
Torts originate with people, and at the Fed, there is now a man as chairman who
|
|
is uniquely qualified to operate as a joint Tortfeasor with the Rothschilds and
|
|
work MAGNUM OPUS Torts on us all: Gremlin Paul Volcker. [225]</p>
|
|
<p>[225]============================================================= After
|
|
characterizing Gremlin Volcker's politics as being something of an enigma, the
|
|
NEW YORK TIMES went on to say that Paul Volcker:
|
|
"... recognizes 'that Gold and the fates have put him in a unique
|
|
position,' a role for which he believes... that he is singularly well
|
|
equipped."
|
|
-THE NEW YORK TIMES ["Sacrificial Way of Life for Reserve Chairman"],
|
|
page 26 (<span class="LOC">Sunday</span>, June 19, 1983). Yes, Mr. Volcker is VERY well equipped for his
|
|
mission -- but not to usher in a generation of prosperity; neither is his
|
|
Federal Reserve position attributable to "God and the fates," but actually to
|
|
his brother from the First Estate, Lucifer, whom Paul Volcker once betrayed --
|
|
and now Lucifer is going to get even at Father's Last Day.
|
|
=============================================================[225]</p>
|
|
<p>This is the same Treasury Department staff member Paul Volcker who played a
|
|
supporting role in the theft of American gold bullion deposits from Fort Knox
|
|
in the 1960's, [226]</p>
|
|
<p>[226]============================================================= The theft of
|
|
American gold bullion deposits from the Fort Knox Depository in Kentucky by the
|
|
Four <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span> Brothers, in which Paul Volcker participated, was a smooth
|
|
inside job -- a job which only duplicated a previous inside Treasury job that
|
|
was pulled off earlier in 1943:
|
|
"... 14000 tons of silver from the Treasury reserve of American paper
|
|
money was secretly taken from the Treasury vaults (although still carried
|
|
publicly on the Treasury balance sheets)..."
|
|
-Carroll Quigley in TRAGEDY AND HOPE, at 855 [MacMillian Company, New
|
|
York (1974)]. [Mr. Quigley wants us to believe that the 14000 tons of silver
|
|
in its entirety went into an Oak Ridge Government building for electrical
|
|
wiring]. =============================================================[226]</p>
|
|
<p>and the same Paul Volcker who now holds a controlling executive position in the
|
|
Fed, a position that when he campaigned for it in 1978, he openly called for
|
|
the "controlled disintegration" of the United States. [227]</p>
|
|
<p>[227]============================================================= During a
|
|
speech at a FRED HIRSCH MEMORIAL LECTURE at Warwick University, Coventry,
|
|
England, on November 9, 1978.
|
|
=============================================================[227]</p>
|
|
<p>Since the corporate structure of the King's peripheral Commercial interests, of
|
|
and by themselves, do not provide the King with a mechanism to work Torts on us
|
|
he would be otherwise restrained from doing through executive agencies, I have
|
|
no objection to the King creating corporations, and I would suggest that
|
|
arguments to the contrary will likely be rebuffed by the Supreme Court. [228]</p>
|
|
<p>[228]============================================================= During
|
|
Constitutional ratification discussions, our Founding Fathers did not want to
|
|
even talk about the possibility that a National Bank might be created someday,
|
|
due to the possible rejection the draft Constitution might encounter as it went
|
|
from one State to the next for Ratification:
|
|
"The power to incorporate a bank is not among those enumerated in the
|
|
constitution. It is known, that the very power, thus proposed, as a means, was
|
|
rejected, as an end, by the convention [of 1787], which formed the
|
|
Constitution. A proposition was made in that body, to authorize Congress to
|
|
open canals, and an amendatory one to empower them to create corporations. But
|
|
the whole was rejected; and one of the reasons of the rejection urged in debate
|
|
was, that they then would have a power to create a bank, which would render the
|
|
great cities, where there was prejudices and jealousies on that subject,
|
|
adverse to the adoption of the Constitution [Volume 4, Jefferson's
|
|
Correspondence, pages 523 and 524]."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at 128 ["Powers
|
|
of Congress"] (Cambridge, 1833). However, just because the CREATION OF
|
|
CORPORATIONS CLAUSE never made it into the final draft of the Constitution,
|
|
does not disable the United States today from creating corporations, since many
|
|
other enabling acts were written into the Constitution that, although sounding
|
|
nice and making the Constitution look complete in appearances, were actually
|
|
jurisdictionally unnecessary.
|
|
=============================================================[228]</p>
|
|
<p>If at all you question the legal authenticity of my conclusory statements, then
|
|
please read M'CULLOCH VS. MARYLAND, [229]</p>
|
|
<p>[229]============================================================= 17 U.S. 316
|
|
(1819). =============================================================[229]</p>
|
|
<p>and tell me that the Congress cannot create corporations or nationally
|
|
chartered banks. In that case, the Supreme Court specifically talks, at length,
|
|
about the Constitutionality of creating corporations, and the implied powers of
|
|
Congress to do so. [230]</p>
|
|
<p>[230]============================================================= "That a
|
|
national bank is an appropriate means to carry into effect some of the
|
|
enumerated powers of the Government, and that this can be best done by erecting
|
|
it into a corporation, may be established by the most satisfactory reasoning.
|
|
It has a relationship, more or less direct, to the power of collecting taxes,
|
|
to that of borrowing money, to that of regulating trade between the states, and
|
|
to those raising and maintaining fleets and armies. And it may be added, that
|
|
it has a most important bearing upon the regulation of currency between the
|
|
states. It is an instrument, which has been usually applied by Governments in
|
|
the administration of their fiscal and financial operations."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION 134, ["Powers of
|
|
Congress"] (Cambridge, 1833).
|
|
=============================================================[230]</p>
|
|
<p>Also foolish is the line that I hear that no tax could possibly be due to the
|
|
King, because the IRS is not an Article II Executive Agency and functions as a
|
|
private contracting corporation. [231]</p>
|
|
<p>[231]============================================================= The IRS is
|
|
not a Federal Agency; see:
|
|
-Title 5, Section 903 [PRESIDENTIAL REORGANIZATION JURISDICTION];
|
|
-GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ORDER Number 26 (1952);
|
|
-GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ORDER Number 1 (1950);
|
|
-39 THE FEDERAL REGISTER, Number 62 (26 March 1974), Section 1111.4,
|
|
et seq. =============================================================[231]</p>
|
|
<p>I see no general impediment to the King hiring private contractors to assist
|
|
him in tax collections. [232]</p>
|
|
<p>[232]=============================================================
|
|
Responsibility for the administration and enforcement of the Revenue Laws is
|
|
vested in the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to Title 26, Section 7801(a).
|
|
In turn, by one more layer of delegation, the Internal Revenue Service is
|
|
vested with the tax collection responsibilities for the Secretary. See
|
|
DONALDSON VS. UNITED STATES, 400 U.S. 517, at 534 (1970), and 39 THE FEDERAL
|
|
REGISTER 2417, et seq. (1970).
|
|
=============================================================[232]</p>
|
|
<p>Private contract bounty hunters have been used to find criminal fugitives for
|
|
centuries, so why aren't you Protestors objecting to that? Incidentally, in the
|
|
old days of our Mother England in the 1700's, there was a practice going around
|
|
Europe called PRIVATEERING, which is when small privately owned armed navies
|
|
would roam the High Seas in search of prizes to steal for themselves. A
|
|
PRIVATEER, then, is an armed vessel, owned, fitted out, and manned by private
|
|
parties with a legal commission from a political jurisdiction authorizing it to
|
|
capture the vessels and cargo's of the enemy. This legal commission, called a
|
|
LETTER OF MARQUE, impressed upon the PRIVATEER'S banditry an aura of legitimacy
|
|
in International Law, without which Privateers would be hung as pirates by any
|
|
nation's ships fast enough to capture one. But back safely at home, the LETTER
|
|
OF MARQUE also served as a legal basis for an Admiralty Court to condemn the
|
|
captured property, the Prize, and assign it over to the Privateers themselves
|
|
who stole it (this was also called PRIZE JURISDICTION). [233]</p>
|
|
<p>[233]============================================================= PRIVATEERING
|
|
and all of its associated intrigue of smuggling, thievery, and pirates, was
|
|
once quite active on the High Seas from the 1600's up until the American Civil
|
|
War. On the <span class="PERSON">North</span> Coast of Africa there was once numerous occasions in the
|
|
early 1800's when American hostages were grabbed and military engagements were
|
|
entered into against those little hoodlums called the BARBARY CORSAIRS. [See
|
|
THE BARBARY CORSAIRS by S. Lane-Poole, State Mutual Books and Periodical
|
|
Service, New York (1985)]. PRIVATEERING was somewhat abolished, or perhaps
|
|
toned down, by the DECLARATION OF PARIS in 1856; but PRIVATEERING was extensive
|
|
during the Civil War, and the United States Congress soon would be giving
|
|
President Abraham Lincoln a grant of jurisdiction to commission Privateers.
|
|
[See THE BARBARY COAST by Henry Field, C. Scribner's Sons, New York (1893); and
|
|
THE BARBARY SLAVES by Stephen Clissold, P. Elek Publishers, London (1977)]. For
|
|
a short story on PRIVATEERS during the Civil War, see the NEW YORK TIMES for
|
|
Tuesday, September 29, 1863, page 1, in an article entitled "Another Privateer
|
|
Fitting Out," discussing how the Confederate ship THE FLORIDA was offered
|
|
French police protection from seizure from Union ships by France while she was
|
|
parking at Brest shipyards for repairs. Yet, a variation on PRIVATEERING
|
|
continued into the 1900's, as <span class="NORP">Russian</span> volunteer vessels once seized neutral
|
|
commerce in the Red Sea [see Edwin Moxen in RUSSIAN RAIDS ON NEUTRAL COMMERCE,
|
|
3 Michigan Law Review 1 (1904)]. For a discussion from a legal perspective on
|
|
Privateering and LETTERS OF MARQUE, see THE FIRST FEDERAL COURT by Henry J.
|
|
Bourguignon, page 3 [American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia (1977)].
|
|
Today, PRIVATEERING is a crime for American Citizens [see Title 18, Section
|
|
1654 "Arming or Serving as Privateers"].
|
|
=============================================================[233]</p>
|
|
<p>[In remarkably similar ways today in the United States, private
|
|
contracting Privateers are at work in the IRS, acting under a legal commission,
|
|
which largely precludes the imposition of Civil Rights damages because of their
|
|
operating under the recourse protective umbrella (color) of Governmental
|
|
authority; and like the Privateers of old, today's tax loot is also handed over
|
|
to a private party: To the owners of the Federal Reserve System, for payment on
|
|
the King's National Debt. And even more astounding in parallel, today's IRS
|
|
collection of loot and banditry is also governed under a Federal Court acting
|
|
under the rules of Admiralty Jurisdiction, as I will explain later on.]</p>
|
|
<p>That analogy between the PRIVATEERS of old out on the High Seas, and of today's
|
|
private contracting termites inside the IRS sounds pretty good, doesn't it? The
|
|
requisite blend of comparative background elements of thievery are present, an
|
|
underlying tone of IRS illegitimacy runs throughout the analogy, and that,
|
|
generally is the kind of talk Tax Protestors like to hear... "looters,"
|
|
"theft," "banditry" and the like. Yes, analogies like that are music to the
|
|
ears of Tax Protestors EXTRAORDINAIRE like Irwin Schiff, [234]</p>
|
|
<p>[234]============================================================= HOW ANYONE
|
|
CAN STOP PAYING INCOME TAXES [Freedom Books, Hamden, Connecticut (1982)].
|
|
=============================================================[234]</p>
|
|
<p>and Representative George Hansen. [235]</p>
|
|
<p>[235]============================================================= TO HARASS
|
|
OUR PEOPLE: THE IRS AND GOVERNMENT ABUSE OF POWER [Positive Publications,
|
|
Washington, D.C. (1984)].
|
|
=============================================================[235]</p>
|
|
<p>But just one tiny little problem surfaces here which makes the PRIVATEERS TO
|
|
IRS TERMITES analogy fall apart and collapse, a tiny little problem Irwin
|
|
Schiff and George Hansen do not want to talk about -- a tiny little problem
|
|
most folks had better start to talk about, NOW, before getting in front of
|
|
Father at the Last Day: An invisible Contract. Today, the Protestor has entered
|
|
into a series of invisible contracts with the King, numerous contracts which
|
|
are invisible to the Protestors, as I will explain later on, so now all of
|
|
those termites in the IRS are merely collecting monies rightfully due the King
|
|
by contract, whereas in contrast the PRIVATEERS of old had no such contract in
|
|
effect to grab the property belonging to others. Therefore, if I was a Federal
|
|
Magistrate, I don't know if I would be as patient as some of the State and
|
|
Federal Magistrates I have seen in hearings and trials in trying to explain
|
|
error to a Constitutionalist, so called, but whose words were falling on death
|
|
ears. One prime example of how the carefully chosen words of a Federal Judge
|
|
falls on death ears, occurs when a petitioner is being rebuffed when throwing a
|
|
challenge to the Constitutionality of either the Federal Reserve System or
|
|
Federal Reserve Notes at the Judge. One of the reasons why Federal Magistrates
|
|
and the United States Supreme Court are so reluctant to declare the Fed or its
|
|
Notes as being unConstitutional [aside from the fact that many Federal Judges
|
|
find the idea to be philosophically uncomfortable and ideologically irritating]
|
|
is because, as a matter of Law, the use and recirculation of Federal Reserve
|
|
Notes falls under the governing doctrine applicable to Commercial Contract Law
|
|
Jurisprudence, so the Constitution is largely irrelevant right from the
|
|
beginning, as the entire closed private domain of King's Commerce is a
|
|
benefit/privilege created by the Congress, and there is nothing in the
|
|
Constitution to restrain it. [236]</p>
|
|
<p>[236]============================================================= Federal
|
|
Judges took their cue long ago to lay off legislative prerogatives in this area
|
|
of circulating paper money:
|
|
"The case of TREVETT VS. WELDON, in 1786, in Rhode Island, is an
|
|
instance of this sort... The judges in that case decided, that a law making
|
|
paper money a tender in payment of debts was unconstitutional and against the
|
|
principles of magna carta. They were compelled to appear before the legislature
|
|
to vindicate themselves; and the next year... they were left out of office for
|
|
having questioned the legislative power."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at 469,
|
|
footnote 1 (Cambridge, 1833).
|
|
=============================================================[236]</p>
|
|
<p>Assuming for a moment, ARGUENDO, that the interposition of Contract Law was
|
|
irrelevant, then aside from that there are a large number of separate and
|
|
distinct sources of jurisdiction the King can claim as authority to issue out
|
|
debased paper currency. But before listing those sources, we need to back up a
|
|
step. An examination of the Federal Reserve's Charter also reveals that, in
|
|
Warburg's devilishly brilliant cleverness, the Congress never recited any
|
|
specific sources of Constitutional Jurisdiction when it created the Fed.
|
|
Nowhere in its Charter does it say something like "... the powers of Article I,
|
|
Section 10 are hereby invoked..." An examination of numerous other statutory
|
|
programs reveals that the Congress rarely ever bothers to recite its claimed
|
|
sources of Constitutional Jurisdiction for those programs either (in those Acts
|
|
that I have searched through). Since the Congress did not recite any
|
|
Constitutional sources of authority when it allegedly passed the Federal
|
|
Reserve Act, [237]</p>
|
|
<p>[237]============================================================= Whether or
|
|
not there was a legal minimum quorum in the United States Senate on that
|
|
pre-Christmas December day of 1913, is disputed.
|
|
=============================================================[237]</p>
|
|
<p>this now means that whenever a Protestor comes forward today and throws a Case
|
|
at a Federal Judge where the Constitutionality of the Federal Reserve is being
|
|
challenged, the United States Attorney General is thereby free to throw any set
|
|
of defensive arguments back at the Protestor that the Attorney General feels
|
|
like, in order to justify the Constitutionality of the challenged Act of
|
|
Congress. The bottom line is that the Attorney General can and will claim
|
|
sources of Constitutional Jurisdiction at some future date that the Congress
|
|
never really contemplated when it originally created the program (if a quorum
|
|
ever really did exist to create the Fed). However unfair this appears to be,
|
|
would someone please show me where the Constitution requires the Congress to
|
|
recite its enabling Jurisdiction on each Act it passes? The <span class="NORP">Framers</span> were also
|
|
negligent in this respect, and so there is no such recital requirement, and so
|
|
now the Attorney General is free to come up with a long list of claimed sources
|
|
of Constitutional Jurisdiction that the Protestor never ever dreamed of; a list
|
|
that the Congress never really considered at the time of possible enactment; a
|
|
list that Federal Judges are well acquainted with; a list that I will be
|
|
showing you later on.</p>
|
|
<p>But first, we need to cover some background material so the concepts I am about
|
|
to explain can be understood easily. Remember that correct Principles of Nature
|
|
operate across all factual settings; if the Principle is correct, what works in
|
|
one factual setting will work for similar reasons in another setting. So with
|
|
that in mind, if we had a power boat built for us, and that boat had say, 12
|
|
gas tanks built into it (perhaps distributed throughout the hull as ballast to
|
|
achieve some desired weight and loading balancing effects), or if we were
|
|
piloting an L-1011 jet aircraft with the numerous bladder, wing, and fuselage
|
|
fuel tanks that it has located throughout its body, then in order for the boat
|
|
or jet to be stopped dead cold, all fuel tanks individually need to be empty,
|
|
first. If so much as one fuel tank has any fuel in it at all, then the boat or
|
|
jet will continue forward at maximum cruising velocity, without any letup,
|
|
until all tanks are completely empty. Only the complete exhaustion of all fuel
|
|
from all of the separate fuel tanks, without any exceptions, will return the
|
|
jet or boat into that quiescent state of rest that it once came from. The fact
|
|
that one or several of the fuel tanks may be vacant of fuel will offer no
|
|
propulsion impairment or reduction in velocity -- NONE WHATSOEVER.</p>
|
|
<p>As we turn from a high-powered machine or aviation setting where a manufactured
|
|
product is under propulsion from multiple and independent sources of fuel, as
|
|
we turn from that setting to a setting where a legal product was also
|
|
manufactured by men, like the Federal Reserve Board (Incorporated), we found
|
|
out that its propulsion also originates from multiple sources of jurisdictional
|
|
fuel. And so in order to return the Federal Reserve Board to its quiescent
|
|
STATUS QUO ANTE state of non-existence, of pre-December, 1913, then a large
|
|
number of separate and distinct sources of Constitutional fuel need to be
|
|
individually voided. If so much as one single source of Constitutional fuel is
|
|
left remaining -- just so much as one single Clause -- by having survived the
|
|
blows of a Protestor in adversary judicial proceedings, then the Federal
|
|
Reserve Board will carry on at maximum cruising velocity with the same
|
|
identical full force and effect as if the Protestor had never thrown anything
|
|
at the Fed. Mindful of this background information, now we can discuss the
|
|
multiple sources of jurisdictional fuel that the King has got up his sleeve to
|
|
retortionally throw back at pesky little Protestors.</p>
|
|
<p>While examining the main Legal Tender and National bank related cases in the
|
|
Supreme Court, [238]</p>
|
|
<p>[238]=============================================================
|
|
-M'CULLOCH VS. MARYLAND, 17 U.S. 316 (1819);
|
|
-HEPBURN VS. GRISWOLD, 75 U.S. 603 (1870);
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457 (1871);
|
|
-JULLIARD VS. GREENMAN, 110 U.S. 421 (1884).
|
|
=============================================================[238]</p>
|
|
<p>we see that the right of the Congress to create a bank and have that bank issue
|
|
out national currency, as well the right of Congress to designate anything it
|
|
wants as Legal Tender, is a power directly related to the right of the
|
|
Congress, by both express and incidental powers:</p>
|
|
<p>1.To declare war; [239]
|
|
2.To suppress insurrection;
|
|
3.To raise and support armies; [240]
|
|
4.To provide and maintain a navy (notice the words "maintain" and
|
|
"support," as they mean financially through taxes and money);
|
|
5.To regulate Interstate Commerce; [241]
|
|
6.To facilitate the laying and collecting of taxes; [242]
|
|
7.Existing as an attribute of Sovereignty; [243]
|
|
8.To coin and circulate money pursuant to Article I, Section 8;
|
|
9.To pay debts and facilitate the borrowing of money on the credit of
|
|
the United States (Article I, Section 8); [244]
|
|
10.To provide for the common defense and general welfare.</p>
|
|
<p>[239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244]====================================</p>
|
|
<p>[239]The Legal Tender statutes were enacted in the Civil War era, when
|
|
national resources were stretched thin:
|
|
"... to handle the vast amount of means necessary for the prosecution
|
|
of this war, to enable the people to pay in and the Government to pay out, we
|
|
must have a larger and more abundant currency that we have heretofore found to
|
|
be necessary. The accustomed currency [of hard gold and silver] is wholly
|
|
inadequate. The Government has for many years used only gold and silver for
|
|
this purpose, and it is deeply lamented that it is obliged to depart from this
|
|
desirable standard. But we are left with no option."
|
|
-Representative John Crisfield of Maryland, in a speech before
|
|
Congress on February 5, 1862 [CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE, 37th Congress, 2nd Session,
|
|
Appendix, page 48 et seq.].</p>
|
|
<p>[240]"... the National Government [can] exercise... its powers to establish
|
|
and maintain a bank, implied as an incident to the borrowing, taxing, war, and
|
|
other powers specifically granted to the National Government by Article I,
|
|
Section 8 of the Constitution."
|
|
-HELVERING VS. GERHARDT, 304 U.S. 405, at 411 (1937).</p>
|
|
<p>[241]"The power to regulate commerce is general and unlimited in its terms.
|
|
The full power to regulate a particular subject implies the whole power, and
|
|
leaves no residium."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at 513 ["Powers
|
|
of Congress -- Commerce"] (Cambridge, 1833).</p>
|
|
<p>[242]"Here the substantive power to tax was allowed to be employed for
|
|
improving the currency."
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457, at 544 (1871).</p>
|
|
<p>[243]"The power to coin money is one of the ordinary prerogatives of
|
|
Sovereignty, and is almost universally exercised in order to preserve a proper
|
|
circulation of good coin of a known value in the home market... In England,
|
|
this prerogative belongs to the Crown; and in former ages, it was greatly
|
|
abused; for base coin was often coined and circulated by its authority, at a
|
|
value far above its intrinsic worth; and thus taxes of a burdensome nature were
|
|
indirectly laid upon the people."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at 17 ["Powers
|
|
of Congress -- Coinage"] (Cambridge, 1833).</p>
|
|
<p>[244]"A bank has a direct relation to the power of borrowing money, because it
|
|
is an unusual, and in sudden emergencies, an essential instrument, in the
|
|
obtaining of loans to Government. A nation is threatened with a war; large sums
|
|
are wanted on a sudden [basis] to make the requisite preparations; taxes are
|
|
laid for this purpose; but it requires time to obtain the benefit of them;
|
|
anticipation is indispensable. If there is a bank, the supply can at once be
|
|
had; if there be none, loans from individuals must be sought. The progress of
|
|
these is often too slow for the exigency; in some situations they are not
|
|
practical at all."
|
|
-Joseph Story in III COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION, at 139
|
|
[footnote -- "Powers of Congress -- Bank"] (Cambridge, 1833).</p>
|
|
<p>====================================[239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244]</p>
|
|
<p>all of which were involved, to a lessor and greater extent, at the time the
|
|
LEGAL TENDER ACTS were enacted by the Congress in the Civil War era of the
|
|
1800's. [245]</p>
|
|
<p>[245]============================================================= "We do not
|
|
propose to dilate at length upon the circumstances i which the country was
|
|
placed when Congress attempted to make Treasury Notes a Legal Tender. They are
|
|
of too recent occurrence to justify enlarged description. Suffice it to say
|
|
that a Civil War was then raging which seriously threatened the overthrow of
|
|
the Government and the destruction of the Constitution itself. It demanded the
|
|
equipment and support of large armies and navies, and the employment of money
|
|
to an extent beyond the capacity of all ordinary sources of supply. Meanwhile,
|
|
the public Treasury was nearly empty, and the credit of the Government, if not
|
|
stretched to its utmost tension, had become nearly exhausted. Moneyed
|
|
institutions had advanced largely of their means, and more could not be
|
|
expected of them. They had been compelled to suspend specie payments. Taxation
|
|
was inadequate to pay even the interest on the debt already incurred, and it
|
|
was impossible to await the income of additional taxes. The necessity was
|
|
immediate and pressing. The army was unpaid. There was then due to the soldiers
|
|
in the field nearly a score of millions of dollars. The requisition from the
|
|
War and Navy Departments for supplies exceeded fifty millions, and the current
|
|
expenditure was over one million per day. The entire amount of coin in the
|
|
country, including that in private hands, as well as that in banking
|
|
institutions, was insufficient to supply the need of the Government for three
|
|
months, had it all poured into the Treasury. Foreign credit we had none. We say
|
|
nothing of the overhanging paralysis of trade, and of business generally, which
|
|
threatened loss of confidence in the ability of the Government to maintain its
|
|
continued existence, and therewith the complete destruction of all remaining
|
|
national credit.
|
|
"It was at this time and in such circumstances that Congress was called
|
|
upon to devise means for maintaining the army and navy, for securing the large
|
|
supplies of money needed and, indeed, for the preservation of the Government
|
|
created by the Constitution. It was at such a time and in such an emergency
|
|
that nothing else would have supplied the absolute necessities of the Treasury,
|
|
that nothing else would have enabled the Government to maintain its armies and
|
|
navies, that nothing else would have saved the Government and the Constitution
|
|
from destruction, while the Legal Tender Acts would, could any one be bold
|
|
enough to assert that Congress transgressed its powers? Or if these enactments
|
|
did not work these results, can it be maintained now that they were not for a
|
|
legitimate end, or 'appropriate and adapted to that end?' in the language of
|
|
Chief Justice Marshall? That they did work such results is not to be doubted.
|
|
Something revived the drooping faith of the people; something brought
|
|
immediately to the Government's aid the resources of the nation, and something
|
|
enabled the successful prosecution of the war, and the preservation of national
|
|
life. What was it, if not the Legal Tender enactments?"
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457, at 539 (1871).
|
|
=============================================================[245]</p>
|
|
<p>And the correlation in effect between the right to enact Legal Tender Statutes
|
|
and the various War Powers of the Congress applies both in times of war, [246]</p>
|
|
<p>[246]=============================================================
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457 (1871).
|
|
=============================================================[246]</p>
|
|
<p>and also in times of peace. [247]</p>
|
|
<p>[247]============================================================= JULLIARD VS.
|
|
GREENMAN, 110 U.S. 421 (1884).
|
|
=============================================================[247]</p>
|
|
<p>So what is important for Tax Protestors to understand is that when they attack
|
|
either the Federal Reserve in whole or part, or the designation of its
|
|
CIRCULATING EVIDENCES OF DEBT at Legal Tender -- and the Protestor goes through
|
|
all of the Supreme Court rulings on the MONEY COIN CLAUSE in Article I, Section
|
|
8, [248]</p>
|
|
<p>[248]============================================================= As a point
|
|
of beginning, Article I, Section 10 limits itself to the STATES ["No State
|
|
shall..."], and not to the Congress.
|
|
"The states can no longer declare what shall be money, or regulate its
|
|
value."
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457, at 545 (1871). Protestors trying to argue
|
|
now that Article I, Section 10 restrains the Congress -- meaning something
|
|
directly contrary to what is written, is considerable foolishness.
|
|
=============================================================[248]</p>
|
|
<p>and all the Constitutional Convention debates on the MONEY COIN CLAUSE, and the
|
|
material discussed in secret Convention meetings back in 1787, and all of the
|
|
Legislation enacted pursuant thereto, and all of the quotations from the
|
|
Founding Fathers, such as in Max Farrand's works [249]</p>
|
|
<p>[249]============================================================= THE RECORDS
|
|
OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787 [Yale University Press, New Haven (1937); 4
|
|
volumes]. =============================================================[249]</p>
|
|
<p>or "The Federalist," and numerous other private correspondence, and all the
|
|
lower court opinions on CHOSES IN ACTION and coins and debasement theories, and
|
|
of their citations on the monetary disabilities of the United States; after the
|
|
Tax Protestor goes through all that work and effort, he has only told the
|
|
Supreme Court about 10% of what the Supreme Court needs to hear in order to
|
|
invalidate the Status of Federal Reserve Notes as Legal Tender instruments:
|
|
Because the right to create banks and let that bank circulate Legal Tender is
|
|
also related to WAR POWERS and the SUPPRESSION OF DOMESTIC INSURRECTIONS, to
|
|
RAISING TAXES, [250]</p>
|
|
<p>[250]============================================================= See THE
|
|
FEDERAL TAXING POWER AS A MEANS OF ESTABLISHING A UNIFIED BANKING SYSTEM, Notes
|
|
["Legislation"], 46 Harvard Law Review 143 (1932).
|
|
=============================================================[250]</p>
|
|
<p>the INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE, the Article I, Section 8 MONEY COIN CLAUSE, and
|
|
the RAISING AND FINANCING ARMIES AND NAVIES CLAUSES, and of course SOVEREIGNTY
|
|
itself -- and they are independent stand-alone sources of jurisdiction that
|
|
have to be attacked individually, just like a jet or boat with several fuel
|
|
tanks needs to have each separate tank vacated before the vehicle will come to
|
|
a stationary state. [251]</p>
|
|
<p>[251]============================================================= "It is
|
|
absolutely essential to independent national existence that Government should
|
|
have a firm hold on the two great Sovereign instrumentalities of the sword and
|
|
the purse, and the right to wield them without restriction on occasions of
|
|
national peril. In certain emergencies Government must have at its command, not
|
|
only the personal services -- the bodies and lives -- of its Citizens, but the
|
|
lessor, though not less essential, power of absolute control over the resources
|
|
of the country. Its armies must be filled, and its navies manned, by the
|
|
Citizens in person. Its materials of war, its munitions, equipment, and
|
|
commissary stores must come from the industry of the country. This can only be
|
|
stimulated into activity by a proper financial system, especially as regards
|
|
the currency."
|
|
-KNOX VS. LEE, 79 U.S. 457 [Justice Bradley, concurring] (1871).
|
|
=============================================================[251]</p>
|
|
<p>Will someone please tell me how to challenge the Fed based on the INTERSTATE
|
|
COMMERCE CLAUSE? [252]</p>
|
|
<p>[252]============================================================= "The power
|
|
of Congress over interstate commerce is 'complete in itself, may be executed to
|
|
its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in
|
|
the Constitution'."
|
|
-UNITED STATES VS. DARBY, 312 U.S. 100, at 114 (1940).
|
|
=============================================================[252]</p>
|
|
<p>What grant of intervening and manipulative power is more broad than the
|
|
Interstate Commerce Clause? With that Clause, anything goes. How are you going
|
|
to attack Federal Reserve Notes as being a defective use of the RAISING AND
|
|
FINANCING OR ARMIES AND NAVIES CLAUSES? [253]</p>
|
|
<p>[253]============================================================= Remember the
|
|
Legal Tender statutes were born in the fires of the Civil War, when there was a
|
|
great exigency and importance associated with the idea of raising a lot of
|
|
money very quickly; yet, there were also disagreements on the floor of the
|
|
Congress, and reservations were expressed then as to the Constitutionality of
|
|
the proposed paper money that would be circulating:
|
|
"The sum of the whole argument has been made in favor of the
|
|
Constitutionality of the power of Congress to declare the Treasury notes
|
|
contemplated by this bill a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and
|
|
private, may be stated in these three propositions:
|
|
"First, Congress may declare these notes a legal tender because
|
|
it is not inhibited;
|
|
"Secondly, the Government must maintain itself, and Congress
|
|
may exercise all the power and adopt any measure it judges necessary for that
|
|
object;
|
|
"Thirdly, that the power to declare these notes a legal tender
|
|
is a means necessary and proper to the full execution of the power to regulate
|
|
commerce.
|
|
"This provision is as inexpedient as it is unconstitutional. It is a
|
|
legislative declaration of national bankruptcy. It is saying to the world that
|
|
this Government is unable to meet its obligations at their real value; and must
|
|
compound with its creditors at a discount...
|
|
"This provision attempts the impossible thing of giving to paper the
|
|
value of gold..."
|
|
-Representative John Crisfield of Maryland, in a speech in Congress on
|
|
February 5, 1862 [CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE, 37th Congress, 2nd Session, Appendix,
|
|
page 48 et seq.]
|
|
=============================================================[253]</p>
|
|
<p>The answer is that you are not going to. There are some sharp attorneys like
|
|
Edwin Vieira (Mr. Solyom's attorney), [254]</p>
|
|
<p>[254]============================================================= Edwin Vieira
|
|
represented Richard Solyom in a Stated related EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDING, and
|
|
challenged the right of a State to force the acceptance of Federal Reserve
|
|
Notes as the QUID PRO QUO for his land that the State wanted to grab. Edwin
|
|
Vieira argued the monetary disabilities of Article I, Section 10 in an action
|
|
against a STATE, which at least is a correct point of beginning -- a lot more
|
|
than what I can say for Tax Protestors throwing Article I, Section 10 arguments
|
|
at THE CONGRESS. Edwin Vieira also wrote a book discussing the monetary powers
|
|
and disabilities of the United States Constitution; see PIECES OF EIGHT by
|
|
Edwin Vieira, Jr. [Devin-Adair, Old Greenwich, Connecticut (1983)].
|
|
=============================================================[254]</p>
|
|
<p>and on the other hand there are some INTELLIGENTSIA clowns; and any judicial
|
|
rebuffment experienced by attorneys throwing Protestor caliber arguments at
|
|
Federal Judges is a FULLY EARNED ACCOUNT >phrase originated by Ayn Rand<, as
|
|
any flaky arguments centered singularly around just the GOLD AND SILVER COIN
|
|
CLAUSE of Article I, Section 10 are just plain stupid: You are misleading your
|
|
readers, delivering naught to your clients for your fees, and as attorneys you
|
|
should know better. [255]</p>
|
|
<p>[255]============================================================= You lawyers
|
|
use that license of your's as a tool to impress and intellectually intimidate
|
|
people, and since that is your standard, I would then hold you to it and order
|
|
your disbarment if I had any supervisory jurisdictional interest in your
|
|
license, just like Jerome Daly from Minnesota was once suspended from the
|
|
Practice of Law for his flaky money arguments. In the JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
|
|
COURT for Credit River, Minnesota, on December 7, 1968, Jerome Daly once scored
|
|
an impressive victory before a jury, on what was largely a stipulated factual
|
|
setting of FAILURE OF CONSIDERATION on a $14000 mortgage that Jerome Daly had
|
|
defaulted on. Seemingly, he was off to a good start, but a continuing series of
|
|
rebuffments later on before judges cast his money arguments off on an illicit
|
|
tangent, and when he refused to back off, his license was suspended.
|
|
=============================================================[255]</p>
|
|
<p>Other rulings also affirm the broad application of monetary powers. Later on in
|
|
VEAZIE BANK VS. FENNO, [256]</p>
|
|
<p>[256]============================================================= 75 U.S. 533
|
|
(1869). =============================================================[256]</p>
|
|
<p>the Chief Justice, speaking for the Supreme Court, ruled that it is the
|
|
Constitutional right of the Congress to provide a currency for the whole
|
|
country; and that this might be done with coin, or by United States Notes, or
|
|
by notes of banks chartered by the Congress. Other cases replicate the same
|
|
line. For example:</p>
|
|
<p>"In VEAZIE BANK VS. FENNO [75 U.S. 533 (1869)], decided at the present
|
|
term, this court held, after full consideration, that it was the privilege of
|
|
Congress to furnish this country with the currency to be used by it in the
|
|
transaction of business, whether this was done by means of coin, of notes of
|
|
the United States, or of banks created by Congress." [257]</p>
|
|
<p>[257]============================================================= HEPBURN VS.
|
|
GRISWOLD, 75 U.S. 603 (1870).
|
|
=============================================================[257]</p>
|
|
<p>So asking a Federal Judge to declare the Federal Reserve System or its Notes as
|
|
being unConstitutional based on the MONETARY CLAUSE of Article I, Section 8 is
|
|
facially only a small slice of the larger total argument pie that Judges need
|
|
to hear. [258]</p>
|
|
<p>[258]============================================================= When I
|
|
advocate folks taking cognizance of the fact that the King has many different
|
|
independent sources of jurisdiction to pull from in order to justify the
|
|
existence of the Federal Reserve Board and those paper notes that his Legal
|
|
Tender statutes have designated to be his currency, please do not construe that
|
|
with any philosophical inclination on my part that might appear to favor the
|
|
King issuing out such paper based circulating instruments that excite Gremlins
|
|
so much in elevated enscrewment ecstacy; I am different from Protestors only in
|
|
the limited sense that I always evaluate both sides of an issue before throwing
|
|
something at a Judge. Refusing to badmouth adversaries does not mean that you
|
|
agree with them philosophically, nor does it inferentially suggest that one is
|
|
in alignment with the adversary's objectives; refusing to badmouth means no
|
|
more than realizing that the true remedy for correcting these currency Torts
|
|
will not lie in a Courtroom. Therefore, by examining the case from the
|
|
adversary's perspective, frequently I uncover real error in positions taken by
|
|
Protestors, but by examining the case from the King's perspective, that does
|
|
not mean that I am sympathetic with the King's MODUS OPERANDI or his
|
|
objectives. Unlike Protestors, I do not walk into a judicial confrontation with
|
|
anyone assuming that I am absolutely right, convinced that there is nothing the
|
|
other fellow has to say that is of any value, and then simply expecting justice
|
|
to be administered in my favor -- such a person is necessarily in a very
|
|
UNTEACHABLE state of mind -- he will miss many low profile movements going on
|
|
that are suggestive of error. There may very well be some error in my position
|
|
that I did not see (or understand the significance of), so my excursions into
|
|
judicial arenas are always exploratory in nature, and I keep myself in a
|
|
teachable state of mind (a MODUS OPERANDI Protestors would be wise to consider
|
|
emulating). =============================================================[258]</p>
|
|
<p>One of the reasons lies in the right of Congress to regulate Interstate
|
|
Commerce through its COMMERCE CLAUSE (and arguing deficiencies in that
|
|
jurisdiction is foolishness). So any Constitutional infirmity or tension in
|
|
effect between the Federal Reserve System and Article I, Section 8 offers no
|
|
reason whatever for dissolving the Fed; as the COMMERCE CLAUSE neatly picks up
|
|
all the loose ends where the restrictive coinage jurisdiction conferred by
|
|
Article I, Section 8 might possibly be imperfect, and renders Judicial
|
|
dissolution of the Fed inappropriate. [259]</p>
|
|
<p>[259]============================================================= Some Federal
|
|
Reserve Protestors I know are planning to throw some novel protesting arguments
|
|
at Federal Judges. Having concluded that quoting Constitutional restrainments
|
|
is unlikely to perfect judicial dissolution of the Federal Reserve System [and
|
|
correctly so as a factual matter], these Protestors have decided to step down
|
|
one level and just cite judicial reasoning in an attempt to dismantle a small
|
|
appendage of the Fed, called the FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE, or FOMC. By
|
|
researching Supreme Court cases back in the 1930's, an era when Judicial
|
|
annulment of Nelson Rockefeller's social welfare LEX [through his public
|
|
nominee, imp FDR] was in vogue, these Protestors intend to cite Cases like:
|
|
-PANAMA REFINING COMPANY VS. RYAN, 293 U.S. 388 (1934);
|
|
-SCHECHTER POULTRY VS. UNITED STATES, 295 U.S. 495 (1935);
|
|
-JAMES CARTER VS. CARTER COAL COMPANY, 298 U.S. 238 (1936); and then
|
|
pursuant to reasoning in those Cases, argue that the delegation of regulatory
|
|
commercial matters by the Congress to a non-juristic business association of
|
|
some type, is unConstitutional:
|
|
"But would it be seriously contended that Congress could delegate its
|
|
legislative authority to trade or industrial associations or groups as to
|
|
empower them to enact the laws they deem to be wise and beneficent for the
|
|
rehabilitation and expansion of their trade or industry? Could trade or
|
|
industrial associations or groups be constituted legislative bodies for that
|
|
purpose because such associations or groups are familiar with the problems of
|
|
their enterprises? And could an effort of that sort be made valid by such a
|
|
preface of generalities as to permissible aims as we find in [this NATIONAL
|
|
INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT that the Supreme Court is about to run into the
|
|
ground]? The answer is obvious. Such a delegation of legislative power is
|
|
unknown to our Law and is utterly inconsistent with the Constitutional
|
|
prerogatives and duties of Congress."
|
|
-SCHECHTER POULTRY VS. UNITED STATES, 295 U.S. 495, at 537 (1935). No
|
|
where in the Constitution does it state that "... the Congress shall not
|
|
delegate any of its regulatory powers over Commerce to business
|
|
associations..." -- as there are numerous negative restrainments and positive
|
|
requirements deemed binding on the Congress, but no where appearing in the
|
|
Constitution; many are reasonably inferred as existing incidental to what the
|
|
Constitution otherwise expressly mandates. By going after just the FEDERAL OPEN
|
|
MARKET COMMITTEE appendage within the Fed, and not the Fed itself, these
|
|
Protestors are emulating a successful MODUS OPERANDI used extensively by
|
|
Gremlins themselves -- by selectively hacking away at something here a little,
|
|
and there a little -- slowly and patiently. Whether or not these Protestors
|
|
will ultimately succeed is inconclusive at the present time. There is some
|
|
merit to their DELEGATION QUESTION arguments as limited just to the FEDERAL
|
|
OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE itself within the Fed; and these arguments are not
|
|
overruled by the other wide ranging fundamental sources of jurisdictional fuel
|
|
the King has to create the larger Federal Reserve. ... And for Protestors
|
|
searching for something to throw at the Gremlin's enrichment Goliath, that's
|
|
enough. I am concerned about whether or not these Protestors can create a sound
|
|
JUSTICIABLE CONTROVERSY, which is another question; to the extent that the
|
|
FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE massages around and regulates with juristic force
|
|
banks and related financial institutions, STANDING is necessarily limited to
|
|
the affected parties absent an evidentiary presentation of the cascading train
|
|
of damages originating within the inner sanctums of the FOMC, that were
|
|
eventually experienced by the Plaintiff. I would feel more comfortable with the
|
|
probable outcome of this impending Case if an FOMC regulated institution itself
|
|
appeared as the Plaintiff. Nevertheless, these Protestors will find that
|
|
judicial reaction will be mixed -- there are Federal Judges who are sympathetic
|
|
with their arguments (as there is merit to them), while there are other TOUGH
|
|
COOKIE Federal Judges who will take advantage of the factual opportunity this
|
|
impending Case presents to them, by throwing snortations at the Protestors.
|
|
=============================================================[259]</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, Virginia, Paul Warburg knew what he was doing. But even that is not the
|
|
full story.</p>
|
|
<p>QUESTION: How are you Protestors going to attack Federal Reserve Notes on the
|
|
floor of the United States Supreme Court? How are you going to attack
|
|
Sovereignty itself? Are you going to try and attack the essence of Sovereignty
|
|
itself by quoting from the devil himself? If you can't find a quotation from
|
|
Lucifer slicing down Sovereignty, then maybe a quotation from one of his hard
|
|
working Gremlin assistants might be a point of beginning. [260]</p>
|
|
<p>[260]============================================================= Gremlin
|
|
Zbigniew Brzezinski writing in BETWEEN TWO AGES: AMERICA'S ROLE IN THE
|
|
TECHNETRONIC AGE, once advocated that the fiction of Sovereignty must be
|
|
replaced with reality:
|
|
"The doctrine of sovereignty created the institutional basis for
|
|
challenging the secular authority of established religion, and this challenge
|
|
in turned paved the way for the emergence of the abstract conception of the
|
|
nation-state. Sovereignty vested in the people, instead of Sovereignty vested
|
|
in the king, was the consummation of the process which in the two centuries
|
|
preceding the French and American revolutions radically altered the structure
|
|
of authority in the West and prepared the ground for a new dominant concept of
|
|
reality...
|
|
"The nation-state as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has
|
|
ceased to be the principal creative force: 'International banks and
|
|
multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in
|
|
advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.' But as the
|
|
nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty, the psychological
|
|
importance of the national community is rising, and the attempt to establish an
|
|
equilibrium between the imperatives of the [Corporate Socialist <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span>
|
|
Cartel's] new internationalism and the need for a more intimate national
|
|
community is the source of frictions and conflicts."
|
|
-Gremlin Zbigniew Brzezinski in BETWEEN TWO AGES: AMERICA'S ROLE IN
|
|
THE TECHNETRONIC AGE, at 70 and 56 [Viking Press, New York City (1970)].
|
|
=============================================================[260]</p>
|
|
<p>Well, an attack on Sovereignty like that, although a majestic goal for Gremlins
|
|
as they tear down our existing Constitution and the Juristic Institution it
|
|
created, and try and replace it with their own, is not much. So now just how
|
|
does an inherent prerogative of the Sovereign, of this right to issue out money
|
|
any way he feels like it, violate the King's Charter? Answer: There is no
|
|
violation -- there is no express Clause restraining the Congress to circulate
|
|
only that currency that physically contains gold and silver -- and you are not
|
|
going to get the chance before the Supreme Court to attack it. [261]</p>
|
|
<p>[261]============================================================= Juristic
|
|
institutions descend to the level of Commercial game players whenever they
|
|
enter into the world of Commerce; so it can be argued that Sovereignty takes a
|
|
back seat under some circumstances [this interesting Supreme Court Doctrine on
|
|
the declension in status and loss of Sovereignty whenever the King enters into
|
|
Commerce, appears in this Letter later with discussing those CIRCULATING
|
|
EVIDENCES OF DEBT, Federal Reserve Notes].
|
|
=============================================================[261]</p>
|
|
<p>Our Founding Fathers did not tie the King's giblets down tight enough with that
|
|
level of explicit and blunt language that all Kings need to be restrained by.
|
|
[262]</p>
|
|
<p>[262]============================================================= For example,
|
|
the original draft versions of the Second and Fifth Amendments were far more
|
|
specific and restrictive than the negotiated comprised milktoast versions that
|
|
finally made it through the Congress of 1787. Yes, the Constitution was an
|
|
INSPIRED DOCUMENT, but an INSPIRED DOCUMENT does not mean PERFECT DOCUMENT:
|
|
"We believe that God raised up George Washington, that He raised up
|
|
Thomas Jefferson, that He raised up Benjamin Franklin and those other <span class="NORP">Patriots</span>
|
|
who carved out with their swords and with their pens the character and
|
|
stability of this great Government which they hoped would stand forever, an
|
|
asylum for the oppressed of all nations, where no man's religion would be
|
|
questioned, no man would be limited in his honest service to his Maker, so long
|
|
as he did not infringe upon the rights of his fellow men. We believe those men
|
|
were inspired to do their work, as we do that Joseph Smith was inspired to
|
|
begin this work; just as Galileo, Columbus, and other mighty men of old... were
|
|
inspired to gradually pave the way leading to this Dispensation; Sentinels,
|
|
standing at different periods down the centuries, playing their parts as they
|
|
were inspired of God; gradually dispelling the darkness as they were empowered
|
|
by their Creator so to do, that in culmination of the grand scheme of schemes,
|
|
this great nation, the Republic of the United States, might be established upon
|
|
this land as an asylum for the oppressed; a resting place [a sanctuary] it
|
|
might be said, for the ARK OF THE COVENANT, where the Temple of our God might
|
|
be built; where the PLAN OF SALVATION might be introduced and practiced in
|
|
freedom, and not a dog would wag his tongue in opposition to the purposes of
|
|
the Almighty. We believe that this was His object in creating the Republic of
|
|
the United States; the only land where His work could be commenced or the feet
|
|
of his people come to rest. No other land had such liberal institutions, had
|
|
adopted so broad a platform upon which all men might stand. We give glory to
|
|
those <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> for the noble work they did; but we given first glory to God,
|
|
our Father and their Father, who inspired them. We take them by the hand as
|
|
brothers. We believe they did nobly their work, even as we would fain do ours,
|
|
faithfully and well, that we might not be recreant in the eyes of God, for
|
|
failing to perform the mission to which He has appointed us."
|
|
-Orson F. Whitney, in a discourse delivered at the Tabernacle on April
|
|
19, 1885; 26 JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES 194, at 200 [London (1886)].
|
|
=============================================================[262]</p>
|
|
<p>And so any attack on Federal Reserve Notes will require such an explicit and
|
|
bluntly worded Constitutional Amendment, and that is a political operation for
|
|
the Legislatures to handle, not something lending itself well in nature to a
|
|
Judicial remedy. At best the Judiciary can rule on cases with the outcome
|
|
carefully designed to give the Congress an incentive to get going. An honest
|
|
assessment of the total factual setting of monetary history in the United
|
|
States will emphasize general naivete among the members of the American
|
|
legislatures in 1787: They didn't know what they were doing, collectively
|
|
speaking, although there were a few who did raise their voices in opposition to
|
|
paper money, like Roger Sherman. [263]</p>
|
|
<p>[263]============================================================= For example,
|
|
in the Continental Congress on August 28th, 1787, "Article 12 was being
|
|
discussed. Article 12 was proposed to be as follows:
|
|
"Article XII. No state shall coin money; nor grant letters of marque
|
|
and reprisals; nor enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; nor grant
|
|
any title of Nobility." "Mr. Wilson and Mr. Roger Sherman moved to insert after
|
|
the words COIN MONEY the words TO EMIT BILLS OF CREDIT, NOR MAKE ANY THING BUT
|
|
GOLD AND SILVER COIN A TENDER IN PAYMENT OF DEBTS, thus making those
|
|
prohibitions against paper money absolute. "Mr. Ghorum thought the purpose
|
|
would be well secured by the provision of Article XIII, which makes the consent
|
|
of the General Legislature necessary, and in that mode, no opposition would be
|
|
excited; whereas an absolute prohibition of paper money would rouse the most
|
|
desperate opposition from its partizans. "Mr. Sherman thought this a favorable
|
|
crisis for crushing paper money. If the consent of the Legislature could
|
|
authorize emissions of it, the friends of paper money would make every exertion
|
|
to get into the legislature in order to license it."
|
|
-see Max Farrand's II RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION OF 1787, at
|
|
page 439 [Yale University Press, New Haven (1911-1937)]. Notice how Mr. Sherman
|
|
and Mr Ghorum were concerned, knowledgeable and aware of the exterior
|
|
opposition to prohibiting the emission of paper bills. There was opposition
|
|
lying around the Countryside, opposed to making hard gold and silver mandatory
|
|
with no legislative discretion allowed to substitute paper bills for gold and
|
|
silver coin. So the reason why we have fraudulent Federal Reserve Notes running
|
|
around today is because our Founding Fathers failed to tie the King down
|
|
yesterday -- and Federal Judges are not Commie pinkos when tossing out
|
|
arguments attacking Federal Reserve Notes. Our Founding Fathers specifically
|
|
declined to make explicit and blunt prohibitions against the emission of paper
|
|
bills because they knew then that few people wanted such a mandatory
|
|
restrainment operating on the Congress, and our Fathers in 1787 did not want to
|
|
create opposition to the proposed new Constitution designed to replace the
|
|
ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION. So what we are left with today is the milktoast of
|
|
Article I, Section 8. Gremlins have merely take advantage of what our Fathers
|
|
circumvented back then; and our Fathers found themselves in such a position
|
|
because a lot of folks did not want prohibitions against the emission of paper
|
|
bills. We did this to ourselves, and <span class="NORP">Patriots</span> are snickering at the wrong
|
|
people. =============================================================[263]</p>
|
|
<p>Remember that the Britannic Crown was still quite popular then, and the
|
|
American Revolution was a minority rights operation, with many bleeding heart
|
|
native Americans opposing severance from the Crown. And there were also just
|
|
too few George Masons to go around. The experientially wise know that you
|
|
never, ever deal with a King with negative restraining clauses in contracts
|
|
except under the most explicit and blunt words that the English Language
|
|
offers, because the King will always figure out ways to claim some implicit
|
|
permission to work his way around a restraining clause that is sounding in
|
|
milktoast; but our Fathers didn't do that. And compounding the problem drafting
|
|
such specific language, sprinkled in between the floor debates and political
|
|
comprises, were a few traitors of strong influence (like Alexander Hamilton,
|
|
who married indirectly into the House of Rothschild). [264]</p>
|
|
<p>[264]============================================================= Alexander
|
|
Hamilton was born Alexander Levine, of Jewish lineage, in St. Croix, the West
|
|
Indies. After changing his name and his geographical situs, he married
|
|
Elizabeth Schuyler, the second daughter of Phillip Schuyler, at the bride's
|
|
home in <span class="GPE">Albany</span>, New York, on December 14, 1780. The bride's mother was
|
|
Catherine van Rensselaer, daughter of Colonel John R. van Rensselaer, who was
|
|
the son of Hendrik, the grandson of Killiaen, the first Partroon, and Engeltke
|
|
(Angelica) Livingston. The bride had been characterized as:
|
|
"... a brunette with the most good natured, dark, lovely eyes that I
|
|
ever saw, which threw a beam of good temper and benevolence over her entire
|
|
countenance." The bride was just over 23, and the groom was 25. Alexander's
|
|
courtship with Elizabeth that year had been very brief, as the arranged
|
|
marriage that it was. While others have uncovered payment records in the
|
|
British Museum in London from the Rothschilds to their nominee Alexander
|
|
Hamilton, an examination of his political orientation [particularly his drive
|
|
to create a national bank] magnifies his Gremlin stature. There is quite a
|
|
large number of Alexander Hamilton related biographics and profile sketches
|
|
floating around. See "THE INTIMATE LIFE OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON," by Allan
|
|
Hamilton [Charles Scribner's Sons, New York (1910) [quote on the bride's
|
|
description, id., at page 95]; and "ALEXANDER HAMILTON: YOUTH TO MATURITY, 1755
|
|
- 1788," by Broades Mitchell [MacMillian Company, New York (1957)].
|
|
=============================================================[264]</p>
|
|
<p>who knew exactly what they were doing, for and on behalf of their sponsors.
|
|
[265]</p>
|
|
<p>[265]============================================================= There has
|
|
always been a period of Time in the United States when well sponsored imps have
|
|
ascended into positions of political prominence; sometimes into Juristic
|
|
Institutions, and other times they operate on the outside, perhaps as a
|
|
director of a foundation, a historian, or a university professor of some type.
|
|
One such imp, financially sponsored by <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span> Cartel interests, has been
|
|
Rexford Tugwell, who likes to create the image that he is a historian. In one
|
|
of his books, entitled THE EMERGING CONSTITUTION, he really shows off his
|
|
Gremlin colors. He tries to throw derogatory characterizations at our Founding
|
|
Fathers by pointing attention over to such things as the acreage of land once
|
|
owned by Thomas Jefferson and other economic profile information; but the fact
|
|
that the Four <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span> Brothers are financially sponsoring little Tug
|
|
himself to write a new Constitution to enrich the Brothers is, of course,
|
|
something this little imp, speaking with a forked tongue, remains silent on.
|
|
And he has, of course, just the right solution for all those CRUCIAL American
|
|
legal ailments: A new Constitution >see TEXT FILE on THE NEWSTATES
|
|
CONSTITUTION, available on some BBS's for downloading< -- designed along
|
|
Corporate Socialist lines that would enrich his sponsors in the <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span>
|
|
Cartel. Under this new Constitution, large private corporations assume several
|
|
of the functions once held exclusively by Juristic Institutions -- such as
|
|
criminal prosecutions, the regulation of business, issuance of commercial
|
|
licenses, and, of course, there is no Trial by Jury. Rexford Tugwell shows off
|
|
his true Gremlin colors by coming down on those great triple Gremlin irritants:
|
|
LAISSEZ-FAIRE, INDIVIDUALISM, and the INDEPENDENCE of national Sovereignty:
|
|
"So much for the Constitution. But it did not end there; continuing
|
|
suspicion of authority allowed LAISSEZ-FAIRE to thrive beyond its time and
|
|
allowable scope; and the propensity to contrive produced an affluence we did
|
|
not use to advantage because we held to INDIVIDUALISM and INDEPENDENCE in
|
|
theory although we created a system of social and economic complexes requiring
|
|
integration and organic management. If these generalizations are accepted, they
|
|
describe a curious and unanticipated outcome. It is not certain, for instance,
|
|
how much of our affluence is owed to the INDIVIDUALISM that now threatens to
|
|
choke its own further growth...
|
|
"Yet the myth of INDEPENDENCE and INDIVIDUALISM persists, mostly
|
|
nowadays as a political appeal, but it furnishes assurances to unthinking
|
|
citizens. These words are regarded with cynical tolerance by intellectuals; but
|
|
they still have an appeal to the electorate, and they will until a more
|
|
realistic approach has made its way into people's minds...
|
|
"The laws establishing [administrative] agencies did not clearly
|
|
recognize that the businesses involved were using resources belonging to the
|
|
people, and lacking this, their authority to make allocations was hazy. They
|
|
were handicapped also by the prevailing belief in LAISSEZ-FAIRE..."
|
|
-Rexford Tugwell in THE EMERGING CONSTITUTION, at 17, 27 and 145
|
|
[Harper & Row, New York (1974); Sponsored by the Rockefeller's FUND FOR THE
|
|
REPUBLIC in Santa Monica, California]. Notice what difficulty Gremlins like
|
|
little Tug have in restraining themselves not to throw invectives at those
|
|
heinous institutions of INDIVIDUALISM, LAISSEZ-FAIRE, and the INDEPENDENCE of
|
|
national Sovereignty. Gremlins do not want INDIVIDUALS to amount to something
|
|
great on their own volition [they want men to remain boys, and for everyone to
|
|
keep their diapers on by looking to Government for security, for protection,
|
|
and as a source of remedies for society's problems]; they do not want
|
|
LAISSEZ-FAIR [they want total top down Government control of everything, so
|
|
that when Government controls it, then they can control it]; and Gremlins do
|
|
not want the world divided up into multiple independent Sovereignties [they
|
|
want a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT, under their control]. Those are the great Gremlin
|
|
objectives, and getting rid of that United States Constitution -- and
|
|
everything else Majestic, Celestial, and developmental of INDIVIDUALS that it
|
|
represents -- is a glorious dream for imps to bask in. [For other attacks on
|
|
the Founding Fathers by sponsored self-proclaimed "historians," see imp Charles
|
|
Beard in AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION [The Free
|
|
Press, New York (1913)]; who uncovered detailed financial profile information
|
|
on the Founders, and then came to the conclusion, as he was paid to do, that
|
|
the Constitution was just a legal instrument to self-enrich its creators. Like
|
|
his brother Rexford Tugwell, CHARLES BEARD SHOULD BE THE VERY LAST ONE TO
|
|
TALK.] =============================================================[265]</p>
|
|
<p>One might think that with the passage of time, an increase in political SAVOIR
|
|
FAIRE might just develop nationally. But no. If a Constitutional Convention
|
|
were held over again today, as is quite close to happening, I am afraid of the
|
|
consequences. We need a Constitutional Convention today in the 1980's like we
|
|
need the Ortega Brothers >of <span class="NORP">Nicaraguan</span> infamy< in the United States Senate
|
|
representing the State of New Hampshire. Conservatives believing a new
|
|
Constitutional Convention, called for the purpose of a BALANCED BUDGET
|
|
AMENDMENT, are playing into the hands of Gremlins, who fully intend to use that
|
|
Constitutional Convention to replace our Father's Constitution with their own;
|
|
in fact that is how the Constitution of 1787 was proposed to the States, as a
|
|
replacement for the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION. And if you don't think Gremlins
|
|
are smart enough to use parliamentary devices to work their way around wording
|
|
in some State Resolutions calling for such a Convention (attempting to limit
|
|
the subject matter discussed in the Convention to just the content of the
|
|
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT), then you have no knowledge whatsoever of Gremlins,
|
|
and you are not even qualified to exercise such political judgment today when
|
|
in fact Gremlins now hold the upper hand in the United States. [266]</p>
|
|
<p>[266]============================================================= If you
|
|
CONSERVATIVES were smart, you would not consider donating money or voting for
|
|
any candidate expressing sympathy with either the milktoast Democratic or
|
|
Republican Party Platforms; such a candidate is no adversary of Gremlins. As
|
|
far as I am concerned, if in fact the Gremlins can pull off this Constitutional
|
|
switch at the impending Constitutional Convention, then they fully deserve the
|
|
avalanche of benefits such a juristic instrument will generate for them. I
|
|
admire victors of battles for their tactical SAVIOR FAIRE, even though I may
|
|
not be sympathetic with their doctrines or objectives.
|
|
=============================================================[266]</p>
|
|
<p>And Gremlins are not about to let a Constitutional Convention come and go in
|
|
the United States without putting up a good fight. [267]</p>
|
|
<p>[267]============================================================= "In
|
|
connection with the attack on the United States, the Lord told the Prophet
|
|
Joseph Smith [that] there would be an attempt to overthrow the country by
|
|
destroying the Constitution. Joseph Smith predicted that the time would come
|
|
when the Constitution would hang as it were by a thread, and at that time...
|
|
the Elders of Israel, widely spread over the nation, will, at the crucial
|
|
time... [participate by providing] the necessary balance of strength to save
|
|
the institutions of Constitutional Government. Now is the time to get ready."
|
|
-Ezra Taft Benson in CONFERENCE REPORTS, page 70 (October, 1961).
|
|
=============================================================[267]</p>
|
|
<p>If you want to get a good preview and feel for the class of new Constitution
|
|
that such a convention would produce, just examine the caliber of Presidents
|
|
elected in recent history. [268]</p>
|
|
<p>[268]============================================================= If you are
|
|
unaware of the interest certain Gremlins have towards using that impending
|
|
Convention for their own proprietary purposes, then consider these words from
|
|
our Gremlin friend EXTRAORDINAIRE, Zbigniew Brzezinski:
|
|
"The approaching two hundredth anniversary of the Declaration of
|
|
Independence could justify the call for a national constitutional convention to
|
|
reexamine the nation's formal institutional framework. Either 1976 or 1987 --
|
|
the two hundredth anniversary of the Constitution -- could serve as a target
|
|
date for culminating a national dialogue on the relevance of existing
|
|
arrangements, the workings of the representative process, and the desirability
|
|
of imitating the various European regionalization reforms and of streamlining
|
|
the administrative structure. More important still, either date would provide a
|
|
suitable occasion for redefining the meaning of modern democracy -- a task
|
|
admittedly challenging but not necessarily more so than when it was undertaken
|
|
by the founding fathers -- and for setting ambitious and concrete social
|
|
goals."
|
|
-Gremlin Zbigniew Brzezinski in BETWEEN TWO AGES: AMERICA'S ROLE IN
|
|
THE TECHNETRONIC AGE, at 258 [Viking Press, New York City (1970)]. Those
|
|
"social goals" that Brzezinski wants involve a NEW ECONOMIC ORDER which
|
|
Brzezinski openly admits would seriously threaten "the traditional American
|
|
values of individualism, free enterprise, the work ethic, and efficiency." --
|
|
but pesky little anachronisms like those are nuisances today, and his employer
|
|
David <span class="PERSON">Rockefeller</span> has no room for nuisances. What David decrees is what's
|
|
important, and David has decreed that Corporate Socialism is important.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|