Act for a Change: Vote for Change YOU Want

A call for action:

Not many opportunities for real change come along.  President Obama has asked for input from the public citizenry on ways to improve our US government.   I spent some hours there yesterday and today, voting and commenting on dozens of proposals, many of them of critical importance, IMO.

I’ve spent years working on what I believe is the root cause of all of the world’s greatest evils: MONEY.  The money creation process, now in private hands, must be transferred to the public domain.  Even if you are not familiar with this issue, or think is is above your pay grade, I urge you to visit the site and read the short proposal and the comments.  Then I hope you will vote your approval of the idea.

You should know that this money proposal only returns to congress the authority given them by our US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8.  Congress gave this authority away in 1913 to the Federal Reserve, a PRIVATE banking system, by trickery and deceit.  This act has cost the American people trillions of dollars in needless interest on our national debt since then.  Now it is on the verge of bankrupting our nation, to the great profit of the international bankers who hold most of our debt paper.  This is the prime cause of all other problems in our nation, and in the world.  Everything relates back to it.  Wars, poverty, hunger, pollution…Everything.  Please read it and vote.

There are many other good proposals there also.  If you have time, look through the pages by category or popularity.  I will hopefully follow this note up with a brief summary of a few other great ways that our government could be changed for the better.

I know you will do the right thing.

Jere L Hough

(Kansas City Metro Area)

A message of truth to Sibel Edmonds

A message of truth to Sibel Edmonds on 3rd Party Voting:  Lesser of Two Evils or Wasted Vote?

by Jere L Hough

Sibel Edmonds is one of my heroes.  She is a whistleblower and a truth-teller.  I honor her as I would someone who gives all, even life itself, in support of eternal values such as truth, goodness and beauty.  I hold her and all who honor truth in the same high esteem that many hold Mother Theresa, right up there with the saints and heroes of history.

Sibel asked a question about voting for 3rd or 4th party candidates in America, and whether of not voting for someone who might only get a small percentage of the vote was the right thing to do.   She feels that it is not correct to vote for “the lesser of two evils” when both major party candidates are bad, or do not represent her positions.

I can relate.  I can sympathize.  I understand the rationale.  But I do not agree.

I have heard this issue argued so many times, and have addressed it so many times, that I will now post it on my blog site, so I don’t have to keep going over and over this same ground for the few years that I may have remaining here, should that be God’s will.  I am in my seventies, and have long endured chronic health problems.  I wish to pass on what little light I have attained without undue repetition.  I hope some people read it, and comment, or give their thoughts on the subject.

The answer Sibel leans to is to vote for the best candidate regardless of the situation or the field or the parties or the percentages.  She praised one answer that said something to the effect that ‘as long as one votes for the best possible candidate nobody can fault that choice’, regardless of whether the person voted for can win or not.  She seems to thing that kind of clear moral conviction is right.  Even ‘writing in’ the best candidate is the ‘right thing to do’ according to this line of reasoning.

I’ve heard so many good people make the same argument.  On first glance it seems faultless.  Who could criticize one’s casting a vote for the “best candidate”?  But let us look more closely.  Is voting for the best possible candidate regardless of chance of winning the best policy?  Of course not.  In most cases it is a totally wasted vote.  Here is why:

It ignores the consequences, or outcomes, of your choice.

It ignores the practical reality.  It ignores circumstances or the situation at hand.  The importance of an election is all about the outcome, the results.  It’s not about YOU or YOUR conscience, or smugly leaving the voting booth thinking that at least you didn’t vote for “the lesser of two evils”.  It’s about the consequences of you vote, and that depends of the wisdom of your choice in any given situation in evaluating outcomes.    Quite often that means making sure the worst possible choice  – the one who could do the most harm – is defeated, and kept out of power. Continue reading

Tragedy and Hope – An Introduction

I recently found this review of the most important history book I’ve ever read.  It has also been the most suppressed.  I urge those who are concerned about our times to read it.  – JLH

Here is a link to the text of Tragedy and Hope and one of the most informative websites anywhere.

************

Tragedy and Hope – An Introduction

By Michael L. Chadwick

In 1965 one of the nation’s leading professors quietly finished the last draft of a 1311 page book on world history. He walked over to his typewriter and secured the last pages of the book and placed them into a small box and wrapped it for mailing. He then walked to the Post Office and mailed the final draft to his publisher in New York City. The editor was somewhat overwhelmed and perhaps even inhibited by the scholarly treatise. The last thing he wanted to do was to read the huge draft. He knew and trusted the professor. After all, he was one of the leading scholars in the western world. They had been acquaintances for several years. He had already signed an agreement to publish the book before it was finished. He had read several chapters of the early draft. They were boring, at least to him. He decided to give the book to a young editor who had just been promoted to his assistant. The young editor was also overwhelmed but happy to oblige the Senior Editor. The young editor was unaware of the importance of the manuscript and of the revelations which it contained. To the young editor this was just another textbook or so he thought.

Somehow one of the most revealing books ever published slipped through the editorial of offices of one of the major publishing houses in New York and found it way into the bookstores of America in 1966.

Five years later I was meandering through a used bookstore and stumbled upon this giant book. I picked up the book, blew the dust off and opened it to a page where the author stated that:

“…[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. this system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations….

“It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called ‘international’ or ‘merchant’ bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks.  This dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world. They could dominate the financial and industrial systems of their own countries by their influence over the flow of current funds though bank loans, the discount rate, and the re-discounting of commercial debts; they could dominate governments by their own control over current government loans and the play of the international exchanges. Almost all of this power was exercised by the personal influence and prestige of men who had demonstrated their ability in the past to bring off successful financial coupes, to keep their word, to remain cool in a crisis, and to share their winning opportunities with their associates.”

I could hardly believe what I was reading. I sat in the bookstore and read until closing time. I then bought the book and went home where I read almost all night. For the next twenty-five years I traveled throughout the United States, Europe and the Middle East following one lead after another to determine if the incredible words of the professor were really true. While serving as the Editor of a scholarly journal on international affairs, Director of the Center for Global Studies and foreign policy advisor for a key U. S. Senator in Washington, D. C., I conducted over 1000 interviews with influential world leaders, government officials, military generals, intelligence officers, scholars and businessmen, including corporate CEOs and prominent international bankers and investment bankers. I went through over 25,000 books and over 50,000 documents. I learned for myself that the professor was telling the truth.

There really is a “world system of financial control in private hands” that is “able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world.” I call this system the World Trade Federation. It is an ultra-secret group of the most powerful men on the earth. They now control every major international institution, every major multinational and transnational corporation both public and private, every major domestic and international banking institution, every central bank, every nation-state on earth, the natural resources on every continent and the people around the world through complicated inter-locking networks that resemble giant spider webs. This group is comprised of the leading family dynasties of the Canada, United States, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Russia and China. This self-perpetuating group has developed an elaborate system of control that enables them to manipulate government leaders, consumers and people throughout the world. They are in the last stages of developing a World Empire that will rival the ancient Roman Empire. Continue reading

The History of Money and Power

The history of mankind is really the history of power.  The unspoken part of this fact is that money and wealth (not the same things) are prime components of power.  Physical power is an important component, but knowledge and wisdom are equally important components.  Numerical superiority of a civilization or culture is a part of the physical component, but persons require sustenance, and so land, resources and production of food and goods (types of wealth) is needed to maintain numbers.  There must also be some mechanism of governments that administer, legislate and adjudicate among the people.

So the important components of national power are 1) Land; 2) Resources; 3) People; 4)Wealth (tangible and intangible): goods, services, products, produce, knowledge, ideas, inventions, industry, cultural, moral, ethical and religious strengths;  5) Governmental Organization: Physical structures of governance in local, regional, state, national and international tiers of legislative, judicial and executive (administrative) authority.

One might well ask, “What about the power of money?”  Doesn’t that fit in somewhere?   And that is what this essay will attempt to clarify.

“And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.” – Lord Acton

Lord Acton accurately defined the situation that few men today can fathom, yet ignore at their great peril.  The aristocratic, top-down private control of money must eventually clash with the ideals of political and social democracy.

Money is a rather nebulous and ill-defined substance in our world.  It has been kept that way deliberately by those who have traditionally wielded power, in order to perpetuate and extend their power, and deny real power to the people, or commonweal.

Money is a social or commercial convenience tool that temporarily serves as a substitute for wealth, in order to transfer wealth (goods, services, land, resources, labor) between citizens or corporate entities, such as cities and states.   Money is not wealth itself, although commodities that are used as money have commercial value, and are therefore forms of wealth.  We must repeat, money and wealth are not the same things, and those who pretend they are do so for purposes of personal gain and profit.  Bernie Madoff showed us how profitable monetary deception can be, and he was small potatoes if measured by the current poney powers.

Money is also not Capital, although the terms have been used interchangeably by people who should know better, and probably often do.  Economic terms are deliberately obscured, as noted economist John Kenneth Galbraith once noted:

“The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.

Sovereignty, and who has it, is the issue here.  Yet the word has almost been lost from popular dialogue, so vague has its meaning become in the minds of most citizens.  Sovereignty means the right or power of choice, or ultimacy of free-will choice.   Either men are free to choose for themselves, or someone else (a state, patriarch, or tyrant) will choose for them.

The entire human saga has been one to liberate man from some form of political or economic slavery or exploitation by other individuals or groups.  Had it not been for the age old campaign to keep people ignorant on the subject of money, our US Constitution might have been sufficient in its checks and balances on power to insure that the battle for real self-rule or self-governance might have been won.  It was indeed a partial victory, but the great unsettled question was that of money.  Who should issue, regulate and control the volume and value of the money was left largely unsettled.

It is true that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution reserves the right to issue (coin) money to congress, but it left many crucial issues undefined or unresolved.  Thus the first great divisive power struggle was over money, and the establishment of a private banking monopoly in the form of The First Bank of the United States.

Thus the views of Alexander Hamilton, who led the efforts to establish the bank, and Thomas Jefferson, who opposed it, became the nucleus for the two-party political system in the USA.  The Hamiltonian Federalists favored the private banking monopoly and eventually evolved into today’s Republican Party, while the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans opposed the bankers and a strong central government, and evolved into the Democratic Party of today. Continue reading