Wednesday, October 3, 2012
NATO backs Turkey in emergency summit on Syrian ‘threat’
NATO in an emergency meeting on Wednesday backed Turkey in its military response to Syrian cross border shelling that killed five Turkish nationals and called on Syria to abide by international law.
NATO ambassadors met under the alliance’s article 4, for consultations when a member state feels its territorial integrity is under threat.
“The Alliance continues to stand by Turkey and demands the immediate cessation of such aggressive acts against an Ally and urges the Syrian regime to end flagrant violations of international law,” a statement said after the meeting was called at Ankara’s request.
Turkey on Wednesday bombed Syrian targets in response to Syrian mortar shelling, the prime minister’s office said.
“Our armed forces in the border region immediately retaliated against this heinous attack... by shelling the targets spotted by radar,” Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s office said in a statement.
Syria said it is looking into the origin of the deadly attacks.
“The concerned parties are currently studying the origin of the fire against Turkey,” Information Omran Zoabi said.
said in a statement reported by state television.
“Syria offers it sincere condolences to the families of the victims and to our friends the Turkish people,” he added.
The United States condemned the “depraved” Syrian shelling and said it was monitoring the tense situation closely.
“This is yet another example of the depraved behavior of the Syrian regime, and why it must go,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said.
“We regret the loss of life in Turkey, a strong ally, and continue to monitor the situation closely.”
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced American outrage at Syria’s shelling of Turkish territories and described the situation as “very dangerous.”
“We are outraged that the Syrians have been shooting across the border. We are very regretful about the loss of life on the Turkish side,” Clinton told reporters after Syrian shells hit the Turkish town of Akcakale.
She added it was a “very, very dangerous” situation, and would be talking later with Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu about “what the best way forward would be.”
“This also comes down to a regime that is causing untold suffering to its own people solely driven by their desire to stay in power,” Clinton said after talks in the State Department with Kazakh Foreign Minister Yerlan Idrisov.
The United States has long insisted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad should step down and end a 19-month rebellion that has claimed some 30,000 lives.
Damascus is “aided and abetted by nations like Iran that are standing firmly by the Assad regime regardless of the loss of life, the damage that is happening both inside Syria and now increasingly across Syria’s borders with their neighbors,” Clinton added.
All “responsible nations need to band together” to persuade the Assad regime to agree to a ceasefire and begin a political transition, she said.
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said earlier that the cross-border shelling was a clear violation of Turkey’s sovereignty.
Al Arabiaya News
Vatican tells UN we need World Government
The Vatican’s Chief Foreign-Policy official, Archbishop Dominque Mamberti ,tells the UN General Assembly that the world has lost confidence in the moral principals that sustain the organization.
UNITED NATIONS: The Vatican appointed archbishop Dominque Mambertiexpressing disappointment there is no world government yet.
The archbishop states that international problems and the economic fears is due to “a profound anthropological crisis—that is, a loss of a common understanding of what is truly human.” The Vatican official explained that “only an international community firmly anchored in authentic values consistent with human dignity can produce viable solutions to new types of conflicts.”
Referring to terrorism, Mamberti said there needed to be a consensus of mortality as an antidote to “new types of conflicts initiated by transnational groups that spread a pseudo-religious ideology of contempt for human rights and civil peace.” He said that the problem is shown “most flagrantly by current developments in the Middle East, and in particular in Syria.”
The archbishop praised the UN’s work for world peace but felt the structure was lacking, stating the organization “deprived of the force of unity and persuasive power that it could legitimately have” because of the lack of a clear international accord on basic moral principles, such as those that were set forth earlier in fundamental international agreements on human rights.
“How is it,” the archbishop questioned, “that in spite of universal acceptance of the UN charter and fundamental treaties, we cannot establish a real and equitable system of world government?”
Mamberti also mentioned the disparity between the rich and the poor and that “world wide action” is needed to quell the global financial crisis.
My Comment:
Anyone with eyes to see, can see the woman riding the beast. The Vatican is demanding quick action by the UN to bring in world government and a world currency.
It is clear the Vatican is getting impatient by basically asking “Now that you have world wide approval from the nations and everything is in place, why don’t we have world government yet?!”
The Vatican notes, that they will approve of this new world order as long as all of her doctrines and dogmas are accepted into the world religion to come with it.
After the murder of the USA ambassadors, Catholic Bishop Giovanni Martinelli, the apostolic vicar of Tripoli, told Vatican Insider that Western countries should have the “courage” to ban “all blasphemous projects” and establish “a policy that is respectful of religion.”
This is the beginning of the world religion that will be implemented into the fast approaching world government. No one will be able to insult Islam or Catholicism or other world religions. Freedom of speech will be quelled because the true Gospel will be called hate speech.
The underground church will again resurface as we will join our brothers and sisters who worship in secret in many places around the world.
Revelation 17:1-2
One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters. With her the kings of the earth committed adultery, and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”
News that Matters
Gunmen target Christian students in Nigeria
Gunmen have massacred at least 26 people in a student housing area in north-east Nigeria, calling victims out by name before killing them.
Residents of Mubi, in Adamawa state, say they heard gunfire for about two hours during the night.
Men reportedly moved from house to house, shooting people. Others had their throats slit.
Eyewitnesses say bodies were left in lines in front of the homes.
Police spokesman Mohammed Ibrahim says the attackers knew their victims and called them out by name in an off-campus area near a polytechnic school where students live.
He put the death toll at 25, including 19 students from the polytechnic, three students from a health technology school, two security guards and a retired soldier.
"We strongly suspect an inside operation," he said.
Adamawa state, like much of the north, been targeted by Islamist insurgents.
Last month, the Nigerian military carried out an operation in Mubi and arrested dozens of people with suspected links to the Islamist militant group popularly known as Boko Haram.
Boko Haram, which usually targets politicians or security forces, has also attacked students in the past and has cells in Adamawa.
Some officials however suggest the massacre may have been linked to a recent student election.
There were suggestions of ethnic tensions between the mainly Muslim Hausas and predominately Christian Igbos involved in the vote.
Violence has erupted between student gangs in the past in Nigeria, but it is not known to have previously led to a massacre on such a scale.
A spokesman for the National Emergency Management Agency said reports indicated some of the victims were candidates in the polls.
"The crisis in Mubi is suspected to have been fuelled by campus politics after an election at the Federal Polytechnic," the agency's Yushau Shuaib said.
Mubi is not far from the city of Maiduguri in neighbouring Borno state, which is considered the base of the Islamist group that is blamed for killing more than 1,400 people in northern and central Nigeria since 2010.
The town has seen previous such violence, including in January, when gunmen opened fire on Christian Igbos at a house as they mourned the death of a friend killed in a shooting the night before.
ABC
More Al Qaeda pre-US election attacks forecast
Just five weeks before America’s presidential election, US intelligence reports signs that al Qaeda leader Ayman Zuwahiri is preparing a string of terrorist attacks as the sequel to the murders of US ambassador Chris Stevens and three other US officials in Benghazi on Sept. 11, according to evidence collected across Asia, Africa and the Middle East.
His twin goals are to influence the poll’s results and to build up his reputation as a master of spectacular terrorist operations. Eager to impress Al Qaeda’s franchise chiefs, Zuwahiri is reported to be celebrating his “Benghazi feat” – his first as Al Qaeda leader - and boasting of the harm to the Obama campaign caused by his administration’s stammering denials that it was an act of terror. The new terrorist chief claims his tactics had an instant, devastating impact on Washington and they were therefore superior to those of his predecessor, Osama bin Laden.
The Al Qaeda leader is now seen - not only by US intelligence experts, but by most experts in the West, the Middle East and Israel - to be impatient to capitalize on this success and so dramatically expose to the Muslim world America’s perceived weakness and his own worth as commander of the jihadist movement.
His planning for a new offensive has taken advantage of the Arab Spring upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa and turned them around to strike at the heart of the Obama administration’s Middle East policy objectives. The Arab revolutions have let Islamist extremist and fundamentalist Salafi groups off the leash in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, while Lebanon Jordan, Iraq and Syria teeter on the brink of chaos. The extremists now enjoy free rein to organize for political action while also gaining access to vast stocks of modern arms.
In the view of Western counterterrorism experts, Salafi groups have long maintained clandestine relations with al Qaeda, especially Ayman Zuwahiri, who joined al Qaeda in the first place as head of the violent Egyptian Islamic Jihad and stayed in close touch with its secret cells.
Al Qaeda planning also took advantage of the US counterterrorism focus in the last couple of years on the Arabian Peninsula franchise (AQAP) based in Yemen. Less US attention was devoted to the Islamist extremism simmering in North African and other Middle East arenas. It was there that Zuwahiri went to work to fashion new terrorist networks alongside Al Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM) from the Salafi groups now rampant across a broad geographical area encompassing Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Mali and thrusting into the Middle East through Egyptian Sinai.
America is therefore confronted with a broad new al Qaeda front, armed with scanty intelligence. Worst of all, Washington can’t trust the new regimes and local military and intelligence organizations, thrown into power in the post-“Arab revolt” countries, for cooperation in fighting terror.
Instead of confrontation, the Obama administration has opted for retreat.
DEBKAfile’s exclusive sources report that an administration team has hurriedly put together a list of 20 endangered countries where US diplomatic, military and economic may be targeted for al Qaeda attack.
The list is prioritized according to the level of risk and US security capability for protection.
The highest-risk locations have been quietly evacuated – either to the US or West European countries - leaving only a skeleton staff behind for emergencies. A senior American source told DEBKAfle Tuesday that Tunisia, Libya, Mali, Nigeria and Egypt have been virtually denuded of a US presence.
Middle East intelligence observers have told DEBKAfile that they don’t recall US diplomatic military and intelligence personnel, businessmen and technical staff with their families being withdrawn from the region on this scale or at comparable speed.
President Obama made American retreat his order of the day after refusing to heed calls for a US military operation against AQIM and its head, Abdelmalek Droukdel. It was Droukdel, according to accumulating intelligence who, acting on behalf of Zuwahiri, orchestrated the Libyan Ansar al-Shariah militia’s murderous attack on the US Benghazi consulate.
The Washington Post reported Tuesday, Oct. 1, that Obama also decided against a punitive attack against al Qaeda’s stronghold in Mali.
DEBKAfile
Do Western Central Banks Have Any Gold Left???
Somewhere deep in the bowels of the world’s Western central banks lie vaults holding gargantuan piles of physical gold bars… or at least that’s what they all claim. The gold bars are part of their respective foreign currency reserves, which include all the usual fiat currencies like the dollar, the pound, the yen and the euro.
Collectively, the governments/central banks of the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, Switzerland, Eurozone and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) are believed to hold an impressive 23,349 tonnes of gold in their respective reserves, representing more than $1.3 trillion at today’s gold price. Beyond the suggested tonnage, however, very little is actually known about the gold that makes up this massive stockpile.
Western central banks disclose next to nothing about where it’s stored, in what form, or how much of the gold reserves are utilized for other purposes. We are assured that it’s all there, of course, but little effort has ever been made by the central banks to provide any details beyond the arbitrary references in their various financial reserve reports.
Twelve years ago, few would have cared what central banks did with their gold. Gold had suffered a twenty year bear cycle and didn’t engender much excitement at $255 per ounce. It made perfect sense for Western governments to lend out (or in the case of Canada – outright sell) their gold reserves in order to generate some interest income from their holdings. And that’s exactly what many central banks did from the late 1980’s through to the late 2000’s. The times have changed however, and today it absolutely does matter what they’re doing with their reserves, and where the reserves are actually held. Why? Because the countries in question are now all grossly over-indebted and printing their respective currencies with reckless abandon. It would be reassuring to know that they still have some of the ‘barbarous relic’ kicking around, collecting dust, just in case their experiment with collusive monetary accommodation doesn’t work out as planned.
You may be interested to know that central bank gold sales were actually the crux of the original investment thesis that first got us interested in the gold space back in 2000. We were introduced to it through the work of Frank Veneroso, who published an outstanding report on the gold market in 1998 aptly titled, “The 1998 Gold Book Annual”. In it, Mr. Veneroso inferred that central bank gold sales had artificially suppressed the full extent of gold demand to the tune of approximately 1,600 tonnes per year (in an approximately 4,000 tonne market of annual supply). Of the 35,000 tonnes that the central banks were officially stated to own at the time, Mr. Veneroso estimated that they were already down to 18,000 tonnes of actual physical. Once the central banks ran out of gold to sell, he surmised, the gold market would be poised for a powerful bull market… and he turned out to be completely right – although central banks did continue to be net sellers of gold for many years to come.
As the gold bull market developed throughout the 2000’s, central banks didn’t become net buyers of physical gold until 2009, which coincided with gold’s final break-out above US$1,000 per ounce. The entirety of this buying was performed by central banks in the non-Western world, however, by countries like Russia, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and the Philippines… and they have continued buying gold ever since. According to Thomson Reuters GFMS, a precious metals research agency, non-Western central banks purchased 457 tonnes of gold in 2011, and are expected to purchase another 493 tonnes of gold this year as they expand their reserves.1
Our estimates suggest they will likely purchase even more than that.2 The Western central banks, meanwhile, have essentially remained silent on the topic of gold, and have not publicly disclosed any sales or purchases of gold at all over the past three years. Although there is a “Central Bank Gold Agreement” currently in place that covers the gold sales of the Eurosystem central banks, Sweden and Switzerland, there has been no mention of gold sales by the very entities that are purported to own the largest stockpiles of the precious metal.3 The silence is telling.
Over the past several years, we’ve collected data on physical demand for gold as it has developed over time. The consistent annual growth in demand for physical gold bullion has increasingly puzzled us with regard to supply. Global annual gold mine supply ex Russia and China (who do not export domestic production) is actually lower than it was in year 2000, and ever since the IMF announced the completion of its sale of 403 tonnes of gold in December 2010, there hasn’t been any large, publicly-disclosed seller of physical gold in the market for almost two years.4 Given the significant increase in physical demand that we’ve seen over the past decade, particularly from buyers in Asia, it suffices to say that we cannot identify where all the gold is coming from to supply it… but it has to be coming from somewhere.
To give you a sense of how much the demand for physical gold has increased over the past decade, we’ve listed a select number of physical gold buyers and calculated their net change in annual demand in tonnes from 2000 to 2012 (see Chart A).
CHART A
Numbers quoted in metric tonnes.
† Source: CBGA1, CBGA2, CBGA3, International Monetary Fund Statistics, Sprott Estimates.
†† Source: Royal Canadian Mint and United States Mint.
††† Includes closed-end funds such as Sprott Physical Gold Trust and Central Fund of Canada.
^ Source: World Gold Council, Sprott Estimates.
^^ Source: World Gold Council, Sprott Estimates.
^^^ Refers to annualized increase over the past eight years.
Numbers quoted in metric tonnes.
† Source: CBGA1, CBGA2, CBGA3, International Monetary Fund Statistics, Sprott Estimates.
†† Source: Royal Canadian Mint and United States Mint.
††† Includes closed-end funds such as Sprott Physical Gold Trust and Central Fund of Canada.
^ Source: World Gold Council, Sprott Estimates.
^^ Source: World Gold Council, Sprott Estimates.
^^^ Refers to annualized increase over the past eight years.
As can be seen, the mere combination of only five separate sources of demand results in a 2,268 tonne net change in physical demand for gold over the past twelve years – meaning that there is roughly 2,268 tonnes of new annual demand today that didn’t exist 12 years ago. According to the CPM Group, one of the main purveyors of gold statistics, the total annual gold supply is estimated to be roughly 3,700 tonnes of gold this year. Of that, the World Gold Council estimates that only 2,687 tonnes are expected to come from actual mine production, while the rest is attributed to recycled scrap gold, mainly from old jewelry.5 (See footnote 5). The reporting agencies have a tendency to insist that total physical demand perfectly matches physical supply every year, and use the “Net Private Investment” as a plug to shore up the difference between the demand they attribute to industry, jewelry and ‘official transactions’ by central banks versus their annual supply estimate (which is relatively verifiable). Their “Net Private Investment” figures are implied, however, and do not measure the actual investment demand purchases that take place every year. If more accurate data was ever incorporated into their market summary for demand, it would reveal a huge discrepancy, with the demand side vastly exceeding their estimation of annual supply. In fact, we know it would exceed it based purely on China’s Hong Kong gold imports, which are now up to 458 tonnes year-to-date as of July, representing a 367% increase over its purchases during the same period last year. If the imports continue at their current rate, China will reach 785 tonnes of gold imports by year-end. That’s 785 tonnes in a market that’s only expected to produce roughly 2,700 tonnes of mine supply, and that’s just one buyer.
Then there are all the private buyers whose purchases go unreported and unacknowledged, like that of Greenlight Capital, the hedge fund managed by David Einhorn, that is reported to have purchased $500 million worth of physical gold starting in 2009. Or the $1 billion of physical gold purchased by the University of Texas Investment Management Co. in April 2011… or the myriad of other private investors (like Saudi Sheiks, Russian billionaires, this writer, probably many of our readers, etc.) who have purchased physical gold for their accounts over the past decade. None of these private purchases are ever considered in the research agencies’ summaries for investment demand, and yet these are real purchases of physical gold, not ETF’s or gold ‘certificates’. They require real, physical gold bars to be delivered to the buyer. So once we acknowledge how big the discrepancy is between the actual true level of physical gold demand versus the annual “supply”, the obvious questions present themselves: who are the sellers delivering the gold to match the enormous increase in physical demand? What entities are releasing physical gold onto the market without reporting it? Where is all the gold coming from?
There is only one possible candidate: the Western central banks. It may very well be that a large portion of physical gold currently flowing to new buyers is actually coming from the Western central banks themselves. They are the only holders of physical gold who are capable of supplying gold in a quantity and manner that cannot be readily tracked. They are also the very entities whose actions have driven investors back into gold in the first place. Gold is, after all, a hedge against their collective irresponsibility – and they have showcased their capacity in that regard quite enthusiastically over the past decade, especially since 2008.
If the Western central banks are indeed leasing out their physical reserves, they would not actually have to disclose the specific amounts of gold that leave their respective vaults. According to a document on the European Central Bank’s (ECB) website regarding the statistical treatment of the Eurosystem’s International Reserves, current reporting guidelines do not require central banks to differentiate between gold owned outright versus gold lent out or swapped with another party. The document states that, “reversible transactions in gold do not have any effect on the level of monetary gold regardless of the type of transaction (i.e. gold swaps, repos, deposits or loans), in line with the recommendations contained in the IMF guidelines.”6 (Emphasis theirs). Under current reporting guidelines, therefore, central banks are permitted to continue carrying the entry of physical gold on their balance sheet even if they’ve swapped it or lent it out entirely. You can see this in the way Western central banks refer to their gold reserves. The UK Government, for example, refers to its gold allocation as, “Gold (incl. gold swapped or on loan)”. That’s the verbatim phrase they use in their official statement. Same goes for the US Treasury and the ECB, which report their gold holdings as “Gold (including gold deposits and, if appropriate, gold swapped)” and “Gold (including gold deposits and gold swapped)”, respectively (see Chart B). Unfortunately, that’s as far as their description goes, as each institution does not break down what percentage of their stated gold reserves are held in physical, versus what percentage has been loaned out or swapped for something else. The fact that they do not differentiate between the two is astounding, (Ed. As is the “including gold deposits” verbiage that they use – what else is “gold” supposed to refer to?) but at the same time not at all surprising. It would not lend much credence to central bank credibility if they admitted they were leasing their gold reserves to ‘bullion bank’ intermediaries who were then turning around and selling their gold to China, for example. But the numbers strongly suggest that that is exactly what has happened. The central banks’ gold is likely gone, and the bullion banks that sold it have no realistic chance of getting it back.
CHART B
US Debt Soars To $16,159,487,013,300.35, +$93 Billion
September 30 was the last day of Fiscal 2012 for the US which explains why despite the barrage of debt issuance in the past month, the year closed with total debt of just $16.066 trillion, a modest increase of just $50 billion in the month. Luckily, moments ago we got the first DTS of the new fiscal year, which eliminated any residual confusion we had. As of the first day of FY 2013, total US debt soared by $93 billion overnight, and is now a record $16,159,487,013,300.35. One can see why Tim Geithner wants to push all the debt under the coach for as long as possible (and the scariest thing is that the actual increase in Treasury cash was a mere $11 billion). But wait, there's more. As a reminder, final Q2 US GDP was recently revised lower by $20 billion, which if we extrapolate into Q3 (leading to a nominal GDP print of $15.71 trillion), means that as of today, total US Federal debt to GDP is 103%. And rising about 1.5% per month.
Dragon Flood Freedom of Speech
Joseph Herrin (9-29-2012)
America has been heralded as a land where her citizens are free to speak their minds without fear of repression. This perception is more myth than reality. Understanding that the United States was formed as a Luciferian nation, the perceptive will consider that Satan is not a champion of human freedom. Although both he and his disciples masquerade as messengers of truth and righteousness, Yahshua revealed the truth of Satan’s nature when He declared that he “comes only to kill, steal, and destroy.” If you get in the way of Satan’s agenda, all the vaunted freedoms of those societies he rules will flee away.
This has been true from the very beginning of America as a nation. The men who were proponents of rebellion against England were very intolerant of those colonists who were loyal to the King. The men who were in favor of rebellion never obtained a majority in the colonies, but they were able to carry forth their revolution by intimidating and silencing all opposition. Those loyal to the King of England, or neutral in their politics, had many valid reasons for not supporting the rebellion. The American Revolution, far from being a war against the British, was also a war against a large number of colonists from the thirteen states. John Adams stated in a letter to Thomas McKean that the Patriots had to struggle against approximately one third of the population. This by no means meant that two thirds were in favor of revolution, for a significant percentage of the population remained neutral.
In any struggle between men, it is common for the group in power to seek to silence the opposition. Free speech in times of conflict is very rare. The sinful nature of man does not overflow with patience and tolerance. Rather, it exhibits a tendency to violence and suppression of any dissenting opinions, no matter how legitimate or sincere the arguments.
The Patriots employed violent means to silence those among their fellow citizens who objected to their aims. Many who were loyal to the King were tarred and feathered. Others had their homes and businesses set on fire. Such tactics were commonplace during the years of the Revolution, and were quite effective. Loyalists ended up fleeing their homes, and relocating to lands under British control and protection. In areas under rebel control, Loyalists were subject to confiscation of property. Opposition press was silenced by threat of violence so that the only viewpoint being set forth among the people was that in favor of armed revolt.
In practice, freedom of speech was only available to those who agreed with the aims of the rebels in those territories which they held. Some may think that this situation changed once the war was ended and the American government was formed. After all, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution secures for all Americans the right to freely speak their minds. The Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, and states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In practice, however, this Constitutional right has always had limits placed upon it, and has frequently been suspended. Just seven years after passage of the First Amendment, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts.
In 1798, Congress, which contained several of the ratifiers of the First Amendment at the time, adopted the Alien and Sedition Acts. The laws prohibited the publication of "false, scandalous, and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame ... or to bring them ... into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them ... hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States."
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States]
In 1798 war between America and France was looming, and members of Congress sought to silence those who wrote anything in defense of France, or critical of the policy of the United States. About 25 people were arrested under the Sedition Act, and ten of them convicted. One who was convicted was a grandson of Benjamin Franklin. Like his grandfather, Bache was a newspaper editor, overseeing a publication called the Aurora. In April 1798, Benjamin Franklin Bache was arrested when he referred to the president as "old, querulous, bald, blind, crippled, toothless Adams."
The Sedition Act of July 14, 1798 included the following words:
That if any person shall write, print, utter, or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against the United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.
This law proved highly unpopular with the people. Thomas Jefferson was an outspoken critic of the Alien and Sedition Acts. In an upswelling of popular opposition to these acts, Thomas Jefferson was elected as President in 1800. Jefferson opposed the law on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, and upon his election he freed those who had been imprisoned for violations of this law.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental problem, serving as a great obstacle to any minority group of elite men who would seek to rule over a people. An aristocracy has always found free speech to be a bane to their continued rule. As I have been researching various sources for this series of writings I have paid much attention to a man by the name of Edward Bernays. Bernays was doubly a nephew of Sigmund Freud.
Edward Bernays - 1891-1995
Bernays is often called the father of public relations. Bernays preferred the word “propaganda,” but it had developed a negative stigma. Edward Bernays came from a wealthy family that had about a dozen servants. He was a member of an aristocratic elite. Bernays gave much thought to the means by which an aristocracy might maintain power in a democratic environment. He was unabashed in his advocacy of the elite using propaganda to control the masses through acts and words of deception. In his book titled Propaganda, published in 1928, Bernays wrote:
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which democratic society is organized...
Whatever attitude one chooses toward this condition, it remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons - a trifling fraction... who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.
It is not usually realized how necessary these invisible governors are to the orderly functioning of our group life. In theory, every citizen may vote for whom he pleases...
In theory, every citizen makes up his own mind on public questions and matters of private conduct. In practice, if all men had to study for themselves the abstruse economic, political, and ethical data involved in every question, they would find it impossible to come to a conclusion about anything. We have voluntarily agreed to let an invisible government sift the data and high-spot the outstanding issue so that our field of choice is narrowed to practical proportions. From our leaders and the media they use to reach the public, we accept the evidence and the demarcation of issues bearing upon public question...
Bernays was very much in agreement with Manly Hall’s premise that the ideal government was one of philosopher kings, a group of elite men who had the wisdom and understanding to govern. Just one page over from where the preceding quote was taken, Bernays states the following.
It might be better to have, instead of propaganda and special pleading, committees of wise men who would choose our rulers, dictate our conduct, private and public, and decide upon the best types of clothes for us to wear and the best kinds of food for us to eat. But we have chosen the opposite method, that of open competition.
[Source: Ibid]
Perhaps you are appalled, as I am, at the hubris of such statements. Bernays is not being insincere. He is setting forth what he believes to be a reasonable conclusion. Edward Bernays believed that the mass of men would be better off to have an elite group of “wise men” to dictate their conduct, both private and public. Bernays would certainly have considered himself to be among that cabal of wise men. He believed that he understood the group mind, as well as the dangers of granting the rabble any power to direct societal and world events.
I have come to understand that this is actually the mindset of a global elite who exist at this time, wealthy men and women of privilege who control world commerce, finance, and politics, and constitute an unseen government that guides the affairs of nations. These people sincerely believe that they are divinely appointed, and uniquely qualified, to make decisions for all of mankind.
It has always been necessary for a ruling elite to control public opinion. Bernays in the book Propaganda states:
Governments, whether they are monarchical, constitutional, democratic or communist, depend upon acquiescent public opinion for the success of their efforts and, in fact, government is government only by virtue of public acquiescence.
The Bible reveals that Satan and his disciples are intrinsically violent. He comes to “kill, steal, and destroy.” What the men of the American revolution could not achieve with guns and bullets, they accomplished by confiscating (stealing) the possessions of those opposed to them, or destroying their possessions and livelihood as they did in burning many homes and businesses to the ground. The Boston Tea Party was but the initial act of theft and destruction in the campaign to create a new Luciferian nation.
The Bible also describes Satan as “the great deceiver who deceives the whole world.” What we have experienced, particularly since the advent of radio and television, is a change in practice. Satan and his disciples must still control public opinion, but rather than do it through violent suppression, confiscation of goods, imprisonment, and even killing, they have pursued a policy of cunning deception poured out as a flood through the various media. Media ownership has been concentrated into the hands of a small group of corporations who inundate the population with a cunningly designed world view.
These two principle methods, violence and deception, have been utilized throughout America’s history to guide and direct the populace to perform the will of an elite. Freemasonry is itself a deceptive organization. The men of the Blue Lodges, those at the lower levels, are intentionally misled as to the true meaning of the various Masonic symbols and rites. Understanding that America was birthed by men under this Luciferian influence, would they reasonably have created a government that operates by a different principle? Is it not logical to conclude that deception would be an integral part of the government’s policy even as it is the policy of Freemasonry?
The historical evidence that free speech and thought has never actually been an aim of the government is overwhelming. I will cite a few pertinent examples. The actions of Congress to control the press through the Sedition Act of 1798 were mild when compared to the policy carried out by the administration of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
A tremendous mythology has grown up around Lincoln. However, like so many other figures from American history, the true tale of this man’s character, motives, and actions has been deftly manipulated to serve the ends of those who find value in doing so. Even as public school students are not taught about the role Freemasonry played in the American Revolution, so too are a great many very important facts relating to the Lincoln Presidency passed over.
Abraham Lincoln was a shrewd politician. He understood the power of the press. During the Civil War he stated, “no man, whether he be private citizen or president of the United States, can successfully carry on a controversy with a great newspaper, and escape destruction, unless he owns a newspaper equally great, with a circulation in the same neighborhood.”
The largest ethnic group in America are Germans. There are approximately fifty million Americans of at least partial German ancestry in the United States today. This equates to 17% of the U.S. population. Lincoln came from the American Midwest where there was a particularly large concentration of Americans of German ancestry. At the time Lincoln was running for President it is estimated that there were 700,000 Germans living in the United States. Perceiving the need to influence the opinion of this large segment of the population, Lincoln purchased the German language newspaper Illinois Staatsanzeiger, press and all, in May of 1859. Lincoln manifested an awareness of the power of the press that was remarkable. He was not the backwood’s rail splitter that he is often characterized to be. He was a cunning trial lawyer who understood the nature of the political system.
Lincoln enlisted the aid of newspaper editors across the country to get his speeches, biography, and portrait published. There were some truly deceptive maneuvers used by Lincoln’s campaign managers to obtain the Republican nomination. Two men working for the Lincoln campaign, Ward Hill Lamon and Jesse Fell, ordered a local printer to create a large number of extra tickets for the Republican Convention. They distributed these counterfeit tickets among Lincoln’s supporters and told them to arrive early at the convention. When many of William H. Seward’s (the leading candidate’s) supporters arrived with legitimate tickets, they were turned away because the hall was already full.
With Lincoln’s perception of the power of the press, it is little wonder that after being elected he carried out a systematic attack on the opposition press. The actual events of this attack on the free press, and other unconstitutional acts of the Lincoln administration, are detailed in the book Lincoln’s Wrath: Fierce Mobs, Brilliant Scoundrels and a President’s Mission to Destroy the Press by Jeffrey Manber and Neil Dahlstrom. The New York Herald on August 28, 1861 gave an accounting of the opposition newspapers that had experienced the consequences of being on the wrong side of the government’s policy.
Northern Papers destroyed by mob
Jeffersonian, West Chester, PA
Sentinel, Easton, PA
Farmer, Bridgeport, CT
Democrat, Canton, OH
Standard, Concord, NH
Democrat, Bangor, ME
Clinton Journal, KS
Northern secession papers suppressed by civil authority
Catholic Herald, Philadelphia, PA
Christian Observer, Philadelphia, PA
Northern secession papers died
Herald, Leavenworth, NJ
American, Trenton, NJ
Northern secession papers denied transportation in the mails
Journal of Commerce, NY
News, NY
Day Book, NY
Freeman’s Journal, NY
Secession papers changed to union
Eagle, Brooklyn, NY
Republican, St. Louis, MO
Democrat, Haverhill, MA
[End Quote]
Things were just getting started when this list was published in August 1861. So dependent upon the nation’s newspapers was the new administration, to gain and maintain public support for the war, that within the first month of Lincoln’s inauguration at least twenty newspaper editors had received appointments in the government.
The ministers to Rome, Portugal, Turkey, commissioner of patents, and at least eight postmaster positions were awarded as favors upon newspaper editors. Murat Halstead of the Cincinnati Gazette printed all of the names and their positions, what he called a “disgrace to journalism.”
[Source: Lincoln’s Wrath, Manber and Dahlstrom]
Violent and coercive measures similar to that witnessed during the American Revolution were once again employed during the Civil War to silence all dissent. The Civil War was never clearly demarcated between North and South as some have supposed. There were many people living in northern states who were not in favor of armed warfare against their brothers in the Southern states. Most newspapers at the time were aligned with political parties. Lincoln was a Republican, and most Republican publications did well during the Civil War years. However, the Democratic papers which were most prone to criticize Lincoln’s policies, suffered greatly.
The Jeffersonian was a newspaper in West Chester, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia, owned and run by a man named John Hodgson. In the bookLincoln’s Wrath, the authors give a detailed account of Hodgson’s conflict with the Lincoln administration, the threats he received, and the resulting mob violence when he continued to publish articles critical of the government’s policies.
Guided by the moonlit sky, the lawless group of conspirators finally closed in on their destination: the small, two-story office building at 12 South High Street, the home of the prospering West Chester Jeffersonian...
Nearly as the courthouse clock struck midnight, according to newspaper accounts in West Chester and Philadelphia after the fact, the unidentified mob crashed through the front door of the building proudly owned by the Hodgson family and swarmed into the brick office building of West Chester’s only remaining Democratic newspaper. Quietly, and with little attention, the men quickly and systematically destroyed the press equipment and anything else they stumbled upon. They callously overturned office furniture - chairs, tables, and desks - and smashed the small wood and metal type blocks. So intent were the men on putting the newspaper out of circulation that they made the effort to destroy even the huge cylinder printing press, the paper’s very lifeblood. It is not easy to destroy a solid cast-iron press in the thick of night; whomever these men were, we can say they were strong and determined to shut down Hodgson for good.
They quickly climbed the narrow steps in the rear of the building, destroying the paper’s most vital business records as if dumping the foul-smelling refuse of a chamber pot into the alley below. Subscription lists were ripped into pieces and thrown through the shattered front window, the bundles catching on the jagged shards of glass that jutted from the wooden frame...
Such destruction is not a Christian act. It is Satan who comes to “kill, steal and destroy.” It says something about the nature of a government that will sanction such actions. No effort was ever made to rein in the mobs who repeated this scene across the Northern states. The government turned a blind eye, giving tacit approval to the silencing of all opposition voices.
The government’s involvement was not merely one of failing to act to protect the rights and property of its citizens. In the same month of April 1861 Lincoln suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The writ of habeas corpus guarantees the right of a citizen to be charged with a specific crime if arrested, a basic constitutional guarantee...
The chief justice of the Supreme Court, appalled at the extreme use of executive power, soon weighed in on the question. On May 27, 1861, eighty-four-year-old Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled that military arrest... violated the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus... Taney... wrote that the president “cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, nor authorize any military officer to do so. Only Congress has that power...”
But Lincoln would not be pressured by the Chief Justice, and he ignored the ruling.
[Source: Ibid]
This was followed later that summer with one of many confiscation acts written by Congress and signed into law by Lincoln.
On August 6, 1861, President Lincoln signed S. 25, “An Act to Confiscate Property Used for Insurrectionary Purposes...”
Any persons engaged in supporting “the present or any future insurrection” by aiding and abetting the enemy in any form shall be open to the seizure of property used for that aim.
What it meant was that any Southern supporter in the North could face the loss of their property if it was used to help the Confederacy... Union Democrats feared that the administration would consider an anti-Lincoln newspaper to be a tool against the Union and hence, it could be confiscated. And not just the newspaper but the type, the press, the office, and all associated with it.
[Source: Ibid]
These were not idle worries. “Two days after the passage of the Confiscation Act, soldiers of the First New Hampshire sacked the Democratic Standard in Concord, Maine.” Then the courts got involved, signaling their agreement with the President and the Congress.
On August 15, 1861, a week after the signing of the Confiscation Act... the administration’s battle against the antiwar newspapers broadened to include the courts. A grand jury was convened in New York... to determine the legality of indicting Northern newspapers that openly opposed the war...
Each paper identified was now a target and was publicly warned to change their editorial tone or face the consequences... The government quickly used the event to begin seizing the newspapers named, and stopped their shipment through the mail.
On August 22, the newspapers named by the grand jury were suspended from the mail per order of the New York postmaster. As the papers arrived in Northern cities that day by train, the United States marshal for the Eastern District seized all copies. The legal justification was the War Department’s General Order No. 67, which ordered that all correspondence and communications, verbal or written, that put the “public safety” at risk, should be confiscated. The punishment for creating such correspondence and communications, according to the order, was death.
[Source: Ibid]
Not So Free Speech
Following the ransacking of Hodgson’s newspaper, he continued to write articles that he sent out for publication in other newspapers. That the mob violence done to his business was approved by the Lincoln administration was further evidenced when not many days later his building and all that was in it was seized by two United State’s marshal’s deputies.
They handed William a document. In part, it called for the deputies to “take, hold, and keep possession of the building, as well as all property of every kind whatsoever, used in and about the publication of said newspaper...”
The document handed to them revealed the takeover of the building and the suppression of the newspaper were being taken “upon the authority of the president of the United States.”
[Source: Ibid]
A wave of arrests now swept the nation as the Lincoln administration sought to silence all dissent. Especially targeted were any Americans who had the power to sway public opinion. These men were arrested, held without charges, and were granted no opportunity to defend themselves in court.
There was a structure in the harbor of Baltimore that brought to life the fears of the antiwar editors. Though conceived as a fort, it was transformed in the opening days of the Civil War into a prison - a place to house the men who opposed Lincoln and his war.
Rarely in American history have there been prisons like Fort McHenry in Baltimore and Fort Monroe in New York and a dozen more scattered through the Union. Through their gates passed the entire spectrum of American society of the 1860s, apparently united only in their ability to sway the voters to turn against the conduct of the war.
“Among the prisoners may be found representatives of every grade of society,” wrote the author of the 1863 pamphlet Bastilles of the North. “Governors of state, foreign ministers, members of Congress and of different state legislatures, mayors, police commissioners... doctors, civil, naval, and military... mechanics (especially machinists and inventors, whom the government regards as a dangerous class); editors of newspapers, religious and political...”
Those taken to prison were all the living embodiment of the power of the Confiscation Act. As explained by one prisoner, these men were referred to as “prisoners of state, a term happily hitherto unknown on this side of the Atlantic, the sound of which instinctively carries us to Italy and Austria, or the blackest period in the history of France...”
Overall, it is estimated that more than twelve thousand arrests of noncombatant citizens were made during the Civil War.
[Source: Ibid]
People of God, although this series main focus is to expose the level of deception that most Christians are operating under, and I have been focusing on some of the actual events of history to reveal how a false historical view of America as a Christian nation has been foisted upon the people and the notion that the United States was founded by fundamentalist Christians is untenable, I would digress a moment to share something I believe is immediately pertinent.
Much has been made of the similarities between Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln. Both men were politicians from Illinois. Both had very short, and unremarkable experience in the Illinois State legislature before being elected President of the United States. Neither man would have been elected apart from the collusion of the media of their day. Barack Obama took his oath of office as President of the United States with his hand upon the same Bible used by Abraham Lincoln.
Barack Obama - Lincoln’s Bible
The parallels have continued since Barack Obama has been in office. Even as Lincoln vastly expanded the executive powers of the President, so too has Obama. In recent months Barack Obama has signed into Law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, and the National Defense Resources Preparedness Act. This latter Act in particular bears very real similarities to the Confiscation Act signed by Lincoln. Congresswoman Kay Granger from Texas sent out a letter to her constituents to alert them.
Dear Friend,
With all that is going in Washington these days some things don’t make the news the way they should. (This is evidence of media control.) Fourteen days ago President Obama issued an Executive Order that you should know about. This order gives an unprecedented level of authority to the President and the federal government to take over all the fundamental parts of our economy - in the name of national security - in times of national emergency.
This means all of our water resources, construction services and materials (steel, concrete, etc.), our civil transportation system, food and health resources, our energy supplies including oil and natural gas – even farm equipment – can be taken over by the President and his cabinet secretaries. The Government can also draft U.S. citizens into the military and force U.S. citizens to fulfill "labor requirements" for the purposes of "national defense." There is not even any Congressional oversight, only briefings are required.
[Source: http://kaygranger.house.gov/weekly-enewsletter-executive-order-you-should-know-about]
Additionally, even as the Republicans took over both houses of C0ngress when Lincoln was elected, the Democrats took over both houses when Obama was swept into office. The 111th Congress began its session concurrently with Obama’s term as President. One of their first acts was to establish national detention centers on military bases all across the nation. The legislation can be read at the government’s website.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.645:
This is a remarkable similarity to what I have just shared about Fort McHenry, Fort Monroe, and a dozen other similar detention centers established by the Lincoln administration. These former military bases were converted to be used as prison camps for prisoners of state. In these camps men were held without charge, and without trial, simply because the government perceived them as a threat to their policies.
Such preparations are not being made by the Obama administration and the Congress for no purpose. The Spirit has been testifying that a time of great political, economic, and civil unrest is coming to the nation. We will see in coming days that the ability to communicate any opposition perspective will be tightly suppressed. Already the government has enacted laws by which it might take control of the Internet in a time of national crisis. The mainstream media is owned by the elite, unseen, invisible government that is the true power. Free speech will be as repressed as it was in the days of Lincoln, and all it will take is one trigger event.
In Lincoln’s day that event was the capture of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor by the Confederate States. This led to an immediate suspension of Constitutional rights, and the enactment of draconian measures such as the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and the passage of the Confiscation Act.
We should not think that such oppression is new to this nation. Twelve thousand people were arrested and imprisoned during the Civil War by the Union, citizens of their own Northern states, simply for disagreeing with the government’s policies. The coming days will be different only in scope. There will be far more arrested, imprisoned, and held without charge or legal recourse.
The parallels we are seeing at this time to what occurred under the Lincoln administration are not coincidental. Our Father would have His sons and daughters to make Him their refuge. It is a time to walk closely to the Father, to be surrendered to the direction of the Spirit. He will guide His elect through the perilous days ahead.
Much more could be shared about the need of an elite group to control the public opinion, and the methods they employ, and more is forthcoming. Yet, to keep this post from being excessive in length I will conclude this chapter here.
America has been heralded as a land where her citizens are free to speak their minds without fear of repression. This perception is more myth than reality. Understanding that the United States was formed as a Luciferian nation, the perceptive will consider that Satan is not a champion of human freedom. Although both he and his disciples masquerade as messengers of truth and righteousness, Yahshua revealed the truth of Satan’s nature when He declared that he “comes only to kill, steal, and destroy.” If you get in the way of Satan’s agenda, all the vaunted freedoms of those societies he rules will flee away.
This has been true from the very beginning of America as a nation. The men who were proponents of rebellion against England were very intolerant of those colonists who were loyal to the King. The men who were in favor of rebellion never obtained a majority in the colonies, but they were able to carry forth their revolution by intimidating and silencing all opposition. Those loyal to the King of England, or neutral in their politics, had many valid reasons for not supporting the rebellion. The American Revolution, far from being a war against the British, was also a war against a large number of colonists from the thirteen states. John Adams stated in a letter to Thomas McKean that the Patriots had to struggle against approximately one third of the population. This by no means meant that two thirds were in favor of revolution, for a significant percentage of the population remained neutral.
In any struggle between men, it is common for the group in power to seek to silence the opposition. Free speech in times of conflict is very rare. The sinful nature of man does not overflow with patience and tolerance. Rather, it exhibits a tendency to violence and suppression of any dissenting opinions, no matter how legitimate or sincere the arguments.
The Patriots employed violent means to silence those among their fellow citizens who objected to their aims. Many who were loyal to the King were tarred and feathered. Others had their homes and businesses set on fire. Such tactics were commonplace during the years of the Revolution, and were quite effective. Loyalists ended up fleeing their homes, and relocating to lands under British control and protection. In areas under rebel control, Loyalists were subject to confiscation of property. Opposition press was silenced by threat of violence so that the only viewpoint being set forth among the people was that in favor of armed revolt.
In practice, freedom of speech was only available to those who agreed with the aims of the rebels in those territories which they held. Some may think that this situation changed once the war was ended and the American government was formed. After all, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution secures for all Americans the right to freely speak their minds. The Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, and states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In practice, however, this Constitutional right has always had limits placed upon it, and has frequently been suspended. Just seven years after passage of the First Amendment, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts.
In 1798, Congress, which contained several of the ratifiers of the First Amendment at the time, adopted the Alien and Sedition Acts. The laws prohibited the publication of "false, scandalous, and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame ... or to bring them ... into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them ... hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States."
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States]
In 1798 war between America and France was looming, and members of Congress sought to silence those who wrote anything in defense of France, or critical of the policy of the United States. About 25 people were arrested under the Sedition Act, and ten of them convicted. One who was convicted was a grandson of Benjamin Franklin. Like his grandfather, Bache was a newspaper editor, overseeing a publication called the Aurora. In April 1798, Benjamin Franklin Bache was arrested when he referred to the president as "old, querulous, bald, blind, crippled, toothless Adams."
The Sedition Act of July 14, 1798 included the following words:
That if any person shall write, print, utter, or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against the United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.
This law proved highly unpopular with the people. Thomas Jefferson was an outspoken critic of the Alien and Sedition Acts. In an upswelling of popular opposition to these acts, Thomas Jefferson was elected as President in 1800. Jefferson opposed the law on the grounds that it was unconstitutional, and upon his election he freed those who had been imprisoned for violations of this law.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental problem, serving as a great obstacle to any minority group of elite men who would seek to rule over a people. An aristocracy has always found free speech to be a bane to their continued rule. As I have been researching various sources for this series of writings I have paid much attention to a man by the name of Edward Bernays. Bernays was doubly a nephew of Sigmund Freud.
Edward Bernays - 1891-1995
Bernays is often called the father of public relations. Bernays preferred the word “propaganda,” but it had developed a negative stigma. Edward Bernays came from a wealthy family that had about a dozen servants. He was a member of an aristocratic elite. Bernays gave much thought to the means by which an aristocracy might maintain power in a democratic environment. He was unabashed in his advocacy of the elite using propaganda to control the masses through acts and words of deception. In his book titled Propaganda, published in 1928, Bernays wrote:
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which democratic society is organized...
Whatever attitude one chooses toward this condition, it remains a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons - a trifling fraction... who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who harness old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world.
It is not usually realized how necessary these invisible governors are to the orderly functioning of our group life. In theory, every citizen may vote for whom he pleases...
In theory, every citizen makes up his own mind on public questions and matters of private conduct. In practice, if all men had to study for themselves the abstruse economic, political, and ethical data involved in every question, they would find it impossible to come to a conclusion about anything. We have voluntarily agreed to let an invisible government sift the data and high-spot the outstanding issue so that our field of choice is narrowed to practical proportions. From our leaders and the media they use to reach the public, we accept the evidence and the demarcation of issues bearing upon public question...
Bernays was very much in agreement with Manly Hall’s premise that the ideal government was one of philosopher kings, a group of elite men who had the wisdom and understanding to govern. Just one page over from where the preceding quote was taken, Bernays states the following.
It might be better to have, instead of propaganda and special pleading, committees of wise men who would choose our rulers, dictate our conduct, private and public, and decide upon the best types of clothes for us to wear and the best kinds of food for us to eat. But we have chosen the opposite method, that of open competition.
[Source: Ibid]
Perhaps you are appalled, as I am, at the hubris of such statements. Bernays is not being insincere. He is setting forth what he believes to be a reasonable conclusion. Edward Bernays believed that the mass of men would be better off to have an elite group of “wise men” to dictate their conduct, both private and public. Bernays would certainly have considered himself to be among that cabal of wise men. He believed that he understood the group mind, as well as the dangers of granting the rabble any power to direct societal and world events.
I have come to understand that this is actually the mindset of a global elite who exist at this time, wealthy men and women of privilege who control world commerce, finance, and politics, and constitute an unseen government that guides the affairs of nations. These people sincerely believe that they are divinely appointed, and uniquely qualified, to make decisions for all of mankind.
It has always been necessary for a ruling elite to control public opinion. Bernays in the book Propaganda states:
Governments, whether they are monarchical, constitutional, democratic or communist, depend upon acquiescent public opinion for the success of their efforts and, in fact, government is government only by virtue of public acquiescence.
The Bible reveals that Satan and his disciples are intrinsically violent. He comes to “kill, steal, and destroy.” What the men of the American revolution could not achieve with guns and bullets, they accomplished by confiscating (stealing) the possessions of those opposed to them, or destroying their possessions and livelihood as they did in burning many homes and businesses to the ground. The Boston Tea Party was but the initial act of theft and destruction in the campaign to create a new Luciferian nation.
The Bible also describes Satan as “the great deceiver who deceives the whole world.” What we have experienced, particularly since the advent of radio and television, is a change in practice. Satan and his disciples must still control public opinion, but rather than do it through violent suppression, confiscation of goods, imprisonment, and even killing, they have pursued a policy of cunning deception poured out as a flood through the various media. Media ownership has been concentrated into the hands of a small group of corporations who inundate the population with a cunningly designed world view.
These two principle methods, violence and deception, have been utilized throughout America’s history to guide and direct the populace to perform the will of an elite. Freemasonry is itself a deceptive organization. The men of the Blue Lodges, those at the lower levels, are intentionally misled as to the true meaning of the various Masonic symbols and rites. Understanding that America was birthed by men under this Luciferian influence, would they reasonably have created a government that operates by a different principle? Is it not logical to conclude that deception would be an integral part of the government’s policy even as it is the policy of Freemasonry?
The historical evidence that free speech and thought has never actually been an aim of the government is overwhelming. I will cite a few pertinent examples. The actions of Congress to control the press through the Sedition Act of 1798 were mild when compared to the policy carried out by the administration of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
A tremendous mythology has grown up around Lincoln. However, like so many other figures from American history, the true tale of this man’s character, motives, and actions has been deftly manipulated to serve the ends of those who find value in doing so. Even as public school students are not taught about the role Freemasonry played in the American Revolution, so too are a great many very important facts relating to the Lincoln Presidency passed over.
Abraham Lincoln was a shrewd politician. He understood the power of the press. During the Civil War he stated, “no man, whether he be private citizen or president of the United States, can successfully carry on a controversy with a great newspaper, and escape destruction, unless he owns a newspaper equally great, with a circulation in the same neighborhood.”
The largest ethnic group in America are Germans. There are approximately fifty million Americans of at least partial German ancestry in the United States today. This equates to 17% of the U.S. population. Lincoln came from the American Midwest where there was a particularly large concentration of Americans of German ancestry. At the time Lincoln was running for President it is estimated that there were 700,000 Germans living in the United States. Perceiving the need to influence the opinion of this large segment of the population, Lincoln purchased the German language newspaper Illinois Staatsanzeiger, press and all, in May of 1859. Lincoln manifested an awareness of the power of the press that was remarkable. He was not the backwood’s rail splitter that he is often characterized to be. He was a cunning trial lawyer who understood the nature of the political system.
Lincoln enlisted the aid of newspaper editors across the country to get his speeches, biography, and portrait published. There were some truly deceptive maneuvers used by Lincoln’s campaign managers to obtain the Republican nomination. Two men working for the Lincoln campaign, Ward Hill Lamon and Jesse Fell, ordered a local printer to create a large number of extra tickets for the Republican Convention. They distributed these counterfeit tickets among Lincoln’s supporters and told them to arrive early at the convention. When many of William H. Seward’s (the leading candidate’s) supporters arrived with legitimate tickets, they were turned away because the hall was already full.
With Lincoln’s perception of the power of the press, it is little wonder that after being elected he carried out a systematic attack on the opposition press. The actual events of this attack on the free press, and other unconstitutional acts of the Lincoln administration, are detailed in the book Lincoln’s Wrath: Fierce Mobs, Brilliant Scoundrels and a President’s Mission to Destroy the Press by Jeffrey Manber and Neil Dahlstrom. The New York Herald on August 28, 1861 gave an accounting of the opposition newspapers that had experienced the consequences of being on the wrong side of the government’s policy.
Northern Papers destroyed by mob
Jeffersonian, West Chester, PA
Sentinel, Easton, PA
Farmer, Bridgeport, CT
Democrat, Canton, OH
Standard, Concord, NH
Democrat, Bangor, ME
Clinton Journal, KS
Northern secession papers suppressed by civil authority
Catholic Herald, Philadelphia, PA
Christian Observer, Philadelphia, PA
Northern secession papers died
Herald, Leavenworth, NJ
American, Trenton, NJ
Northern secession papers denied transportation in the mails
Journal of Commerce, NY
News, NY
Day Book, NY
Freeman’s Journal, NY
Secession papers changed to union
Eagle, Brooklyn, NY
Republican, St. Louis, MO
Democrat, Haverhill, MA
[End Quote]
Things were just getting started when this list was published in August 1861. So dependent upon the nation’s newspapers was the new administration, to gain and maintain public support for the war, that within the first month of Lincoln’s inauguration at least twenty newspaper editors had received appointments in the government.
The ministers to Rome, Portugal, Turkey, commissioner of patents, and at least eight postmaster positions were awarded as favors upon newspaper editors. Murat Halstead of the Cincinnati Gazette printed all of the names and their positions, what he called a “disgrace to journalism.”
[Source: Lincoln’s Wrath, Manber and Dahlstrom]
Violent and coercive measures similar to that witnessed during the American Revolution were once again employed during the Civil War to silence all dissent. The Civil War was never clearly demarcated between North and South as some have supposed. There were many people living in northern states who were not in favor of armed warfare against their brothers in the Southern states. Most newspapers at the time were aligned with political parties. Lincoln was a Republican, and most Republican publications did well during the Civil War years. However, the Democratic papers which were most prone to criticize Lincoln’s policies, suffered greatly.
The Jeffersonian was a newspaper in West Chester, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia, owned and run by a man named John Hodgson. In the bookLincoln’s Wrath, the authors give a detailed account of Hodgson’s conflict with the Lincoln administration, the threats he received, and the resulting mob violence when he continued to publish articles critical of the government’s policies.
Guided by the moonlit sky, the lawless group of conspirators finally closed in on their destination: the small, two-story office building at 12 South High Street, the home of the prospering West Chester Jeffersonian...
Nearly as the courthouse clock struck midnight, according to newspaper accounts in West Chester and Philadelphia after the fact, the unidentified mob crashed through the front door of the building proudly owned by the Hodgson family and swarmed into the brick office building of West Chester’s only remaining Democratic newspaper. Quietly, and with little attention, the men quickly and systematically destroyed the press equipment and anything else they stumbled upon. They callously overturned office furniture - chairs, tables, and desks - and smashed the small wood and metal type blocks. So intent were the men on putting the newspaper out of circulation that they made the effort to destroy even the huge cylinder printing press, the paper’s very lifeblood. It is not easy to destroy a solid cast-iron press in the thick of night; whomever these men were, we can say they were strong and determined to shut down Hodgson for good.
They quickly climbed the narrow steps in the rear of the building, destroying the paper’s most vital business records as if dumping the foul-smelling refuse of a chamber pot into the alley below. Subscription lists were ripped into pieces and thrown through the shattered front window, the bundles catching on the jagged shards of glass that jutted from the wooden frame...
Such destruction is not a Christian act. It is Satan who comes to “kill, steal and destroy.” It says something about the nature of a government that will sanction such actions. No effort was ever made to rein in the mobs who repeated this scene across the Northern states. The government turned a blind eye, giving tacit approval to the silencing of all opposition voices.
The government’s involvement was not merely one of failing to act to protect the rights and property of its citizens. In the same month of April 1861 Lincoln suspended the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The writ of habeas corpus guarantees the right of a citizen to be charged with a specific crime if arrested, a basic constitutional guarantee...
The chief justice of the Supreme Court, appalled at the extreme use of executive power, soon weighed in on the question. On May 27, 1861, eighty-four-year-old Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled that military arrest... violated the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus... Taney... wrote that the president “cannot suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, nor authorize any military officer to do so. Only Congress has that power...”
But Lincoln would not be pressured by the Chief Justice, and he ignored the ruling.
[Source: Ibid]
This was followed later that summer with one of many confiscation acts written by Congress and signed into law by Lincoln.
On August 6, 1861, President Lincoln signed S. 25, “An Act to Confiscate Property Used for Insurrectionary Purposes...”
Any persons engaged in supporting “the present or any future insurrection” by aiding and abetting the enemy in any form shall be open to the seizure of property used for that aim.
What it meant was that any Southern supporter in the North could face the loss of their property if it was used to help the Confederacy... Union Democrats feared that the administration would consider an anti-Lincoln newspaper to be a tool against the Union and hence, it could be confiscated. And not just the newspaper but the type, the press, the office, and all associated with it.
[Source: Ibid]
These were not idle worries. “Two days after the passage of the Confiscation Act, soldiers of the First New Hampshire sacked the Democratic Standard in Concord, Maine.” Then the courts got involved, signaling their agreement with the President and the Congress.
On August 15, 1861, a week after the signing of the Confiscation Act... the administration’s battle against the antiwar newspapers broadened to include the courts. A grand jury was convened in New York... to determine the legality of indicting Northern newspapers that openly opposed the war...
Each paper identified was now a target and was publicly warned to change their editorial tone or face the consequences... The government quickly used the event to begin seizing the newspapers named, and stopped their shipment through the mail.
On August 22, the newspapers named by the grand jury were suspended from the mail per order of the New York postmaster. As the papers arrived in Northern cities that day by train, the United States marshal for the Eastern District seized all copies. The legal justification was the War Department’s General Order No. 67, which ordered that all correspondence and communications, verbal or written, that put the “public safety” at risk, should be confiscated. The punishment for creating such correspondence and communications, according to the order, was death.
[Source: Ibid]
Not So Free Speech
Following the ransacking of Hodgson’s newspaper, he continued to write articles that he sent out for publication in other newspapers. That the mob violence done to his business was approved by the Lincoln administration was further evidenced when not many days later his building and all that was in it was seized by two United State’s marshal’s deputies.
They handed William a document. In part, it called for the deputies to “take, hold, and keep possession of the building, as well as all property of every kind whatsoever, used in and about the publication of said newspaper...”
The document handed to them revealed the takeover of the building and the suppression of the newspaper were being taken “upon the authority of the president of the United States.”
[Source: Ibid]
A wave of arrests now swept the nation as the Lincoln administration sought to silence all dissent. Especially targeted were any Americans who had the power to sway public opinion. These men were arrested, held without charges, and were granted no opportunity to defend themselves in court.
There was a structure in the harbor of Baltimore that brought to life the fears of the antiwar editors. Though conceived as a fort, it was transformed in the opening days of the Civil War into a prison - a place to house the men who opposed Lincoln and his war.
Rarely in American history have there been prisons like Fort McHenry in Baltimore and Fort Monroe in New York and a dozen more scattered through the Union. Through their gates passed the entire spectrum of American society of the 1860s, apparently united only in their ability to sway the voters to turn against the conduct of the war.
“Among the prisoners may be found representatives of every grade of society,” wrote the author of the 1863 pamphlet Bastilles of the North. “Governors of state, foreign ministers, members of Congress and of different state legislatures, mayors, police commissioners... doctors, civil, naval, and military... mechanics (especially machinists and inventors, whom the government regards as a dangerous class); editors of newspapers, religious and political...”
Those taken to prison were all the living embodiment of the power of the Confiscation Act. As explained by one prisoner, these men were referred to as “prisoners of state, a term happily hitherto unknown on this side of the Atlantic, the sound of which instinctively carries us to Italy and Austria, or the blackest period in the history of France...”
Overall, it is estimated that more than twelve thousand arrests of noncombatant citizens were made during the Civil War.
[Source: Ibid]
People of God, although this series main focus is to expose the level of deception that most Christians are operating under, and I have been focusing on some of the actual events of history to reveal how a false historical view of America as a Christian nation has been foisted upon the people and the notion that the United States was founded by fundamentalist Christians is untenable, I would digress a moment to share something I believe is immediately pertinent.
Much has been made of the similarities between Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln. Both men were politicians from Illinois. Both had very short, and unremarkable experience in the Illinois State legislature before being elected President of the United States. Neither man would have been elected apart from the collusion of the media of their day. Barack Obama took his oath of office as President of the United States with his hand upon the same Bible used by Abraham Lincoln.
Barack Obama - Lincoln’s Bible
The parallels have continued since Barack Obama has been in office. Even as Lincoln vastly expanded the executive powers of the President, so too has Obama. In recent months Barack Obama has signed into Law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, and the National Defense Resources Preparedness Act. This latter Act in particular bears very real similarities to the Confiscation Act signed by Lincoln. Congresswoman Kay Granger from Texas sent out a letter to her constituents to alert them.
Dear Friend,
With all that is going in Washington these days some things don’t make the news the way they should. (This is evidence of media control.) Fourteen days ago President Obama issued an Executive Order that you should know about. This order gives an unprecedented level of authority to the President and the federal government to take over all the fundamental parts of our economy - in the name of national security - in times of national emergency.
This means all of our water resources, construction services and materials (steel, concrete, etc.), our civil transportation system, food and health resources, our energy supplies including oil and natural gas – even farm equipment – can be taken over by the President and his cabinet secretaries. The Government can also draft U.S. citizens into the military and force U.S. citizens to fulfill "labor requirements" for the purposes of "national defense." There is not even any Congressional oversight, only briefings are required.
[Source: http://kaygranger.house.gov/weekly-enewsletter-executive-order-you-should-know-about]
Additionally, even as the Republicans took over both houses of C0ngress when Lincoln was elected, the Democrats took over both houses when Obama was swept into office. The 111th Congress began its session concurrently with Obama’s term as President. One of their first acts was to establish national detention centers on military bases all across the nation. The legislation can be read at the government’s website.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.645:
This is a remarkable similarity to what I have just shared about Fort McHenry, Fort Monroe, and a dozen other similar detention centers established by the Lincoln administration. These former military bases were converted to be used as prison camps for prisoners of state. In these camps men were held without charge, and without trial, simply because the government perceived them as a threat to their policies.
Such preparations are not being made by the Obama administration and the Congress for no purpose. The Spirit has been testifying that a time of great political, economic, and civil unrest is coming to the nation. We will see in coming days that the ability to communicate any opposition perspective will be tightly suppressed. Already the government has enacted laws by which it might take control of the Internet in a time of national crisis. The mainstream media is owned by the elite, unseen, invisible government that is the true power. Free speech will be as repressed as it was in the days of Lincoln, and all it will take is one trigger event.
In Lincoln’s day that event was the capture of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor by the Confederate States. This led to an immediate suspension of Constitutional rights, and the enactment of draconian measures such as the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and the passage of the Confiscation Act.
We should not think that such oppression is new to this nation. Twelve thousand people were arrested and imprisoned during the Civil War by the Union, citizens of their own Northern states, simply for disagreeing with the government’s policies. The coming days will be different only in scope. There will be far more arrested, imprisoned, and held without charge or legal recourse.
The parallels we are seeing at this time to what occurred under the Lincoln administration are not coincidental. Our Father would have His sons and daughters to make Him their refuge. It is a time to walk closely to the Father, to be surrendered to the direction of the Spirit. He will guide His elect through the perilous days ahead.
Much more could be shared about the need of an elite group to control the public opinion, and the methods they employ, and more is forthcoming. Yet, to keep this post from being excessive in length I will conclude this chapter here.
Joseph Herrin
'To annihilate Israel we need 24 hours, an excuse'
Hojjat al-Eslam Ali Shirazi, the representative of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to the Islamic Republic’s Qods Force, said this week that Iran needed just “24 hours and an excuse” to destroy Israel.
In his first public interview in a year, reported in the Persian-language Jahan News, which is close to the regime, Shirazi said if Israel attacked Iran, the Islamic Republic would be able to turn the conflict into a war of attrition that would lead to Israel’s destruction.
“If such a war does happen, it would not be a long war, and it would benefit the entire Islamic umma [the global community of Muslims]. We have expertise in fighting wars of attrition and Israel cannot fight a war of attrition,” Shirazi said, referring to Iran’s eight-year war of attrition against Iraq.
Khamenei appointed Shirazi a year ago as his representative to the Qods Force, the highly secretive extraterritorial wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which reports directly to Khamenei.
The Qods Force, whose exact size is unknown, is responsible for IRGC operations outside Iran, including in Syria.
In August, the US Department of the Treasury identified the Qods Force as “a conduit for Iran’s material support to the Syrian General Intelligence Directorate,” and in 2011 designated Qods Force commander Maj.-Gen. Ghassem Suleimani as a terrorist for his personal support of the Syrian regime.
In his interview, Shirazi said that Israel was “close to annihilation” and wanted to attack Iran as an act of desperation.
“Are our enemies intelligent, wise or foolish? They are foolish. It’s also possible that they will do this foolish thing [and attack Iran]. Why do we sometimes say this is the strongest probability? Because today the Israelis are telling us that ‘we are not the Israel of yesterday, we are getting weaker day by day and the Islamic Republic is getting stronger day by day,’” he added.
Jerusalem Post
EUR22 Trillion Is Missing
Via Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box,
The ECB: The Missing Assets/Liabilities
“To treat your facts with imagination is one thing, but to imagine your facts is another.”
-John Burroughs
-John Burroughs
Yesterday I published the assets/liabilities of the European Central Bank as provided by them. I provided some analysis that I thought was relevant as I also asked all of you to look at the numbers yourself. To be quite open; I was stunned by the data they provided and shocked by the implications. I had not seen the data in any other source or commented about by anyone and the subject, while admittedly complex, and perhaps made more complex by design, is a huge wake-up call for anyone investing in Europe.
The ECB lists, as of the end of the 1st quarter of 2012, 16.304 trillion Euros ($ 21.032 trillion) in assets and 17.334 trillion Euros ($22.631 trillion) in liabilities.It is right there in black and white as I showed in the ECB provided data that I presented yesterday. However when you get to their consolidated balance sheet you find the numbers they bandy about in public to be a ledger of 3.240 trillion Euros ($4.00 trillion) and you catch your breath and pause. Utilizing normal American accounting practices this variance would be impossible and yet here it is; staring us all right in the face.
“Europe has put a ‘stop payment’ on our reality check!”
-The Wizard
-The Wizard
I can report that I did hear from a number of large institutions yesterday that also looked at the numbers themselves and were stunned. Conversations were held, questions were asked and I think an accurate summation of the conversations was that everyone was in some state or another of astonishment. The numbers were not my numbers after all and while many good issues were raised in terms of how to properly analyze the data that was presented there was a clear sense that we were being duped by the European Central Bank and played for suckers.
“Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it.”
-Jane Wagner
Forget that the liabilities are greater than the assets and forget that that both have increased rather appreciably in the last several years and just concentrate on the size of the numbers presented and then ask the central questions; who is responsible for these assets and liabilities and where are they counted? We know that they are not counted at the ECB as they are not a part of their consolidated balance sheet. You may ask how this is possible and I re-print, once again, the applicable note from the ECB:
“Recognition of assets and liabilitiesAn asset or liability is only recognized in the Balance Sheet when it is probable that any associated future economic benefit will flow to or from the ECB, substantially all of the associated risks and rewards have been transferred to the ECB, and the cost or value of the asset or the amount of the obligation can be measured reliably.”
So there is the rationale, like it or not, but then where are these assets/liabilities counted? We are talking about $21.032 trillion in assets here and $22.631 trillion in liabilities which are larger numbers that all of the GDP of Europe. We can surmise that the ECB does not count these loans, securitizations and collateral as they belong to a given nation or a bank guaranteed by the nation or the securitization is guaranteed by some country but the rub is the country doesn’t count them either. When a European nation reports out its debt to GDP ratio I knew that they did not count contingent liabilities and I knew that government backed bank bonds were not included and I knew that regional debt guaranteed by the government was not included but this, and the sheer size of it, had lain underneath everyone’s radar.
Think of it; twenty-two trillion dollars worth of assets and liabilities and accounted for nowhere. No need to worry anymore about Target2; a mere tuppence at one trillion dollars, a decimal point. Just exactly what these assets and liabilities might be is anyone’s guess. Just which nations generated them is also anyone’s guess as no data or explanation is provided. Just what any country’s real debt to GDP ratio might be if these assets/liabilities were included in the equation is also anyone’s guess but I think it is safe to assume that the numbers would be off the charts; far off the charts.
“Illusions commend themselves to us because they save us pain and allow us to enjoy pleasure instead. We must therefore accept it without complaint when they sometimes collide with a bit of reality against which they are dashed to pieces.”
-Sigmund Freud
-Sigmund Freud
You know, these are not blue fairies or gnomes or elves that have gone missing. These are twenty-two trillion dollars ($22 trillion) of loans and securitizations and mortgages that are found and accountable for by no one. These are real assets and real liabilities that have been turned into cash by the ECB and it causes me to wonder just how accurate the Money Supply numbers are for Europe with this amount of cash being pumped into the system. I also wonder what anyone’s real balance sheet looks like and I wonder what kinds of losses are being incurred and by whom. To be quite forthright, and in my opinion, this seems to me not just the rigging of the game or the gaming of the system but something far past that; something out beyond the realm of the credible and of real world experiences.
This is what we are investing in when we buy European bonds? This is where we are putting our client’s money? I don’t know; they may have gone mad but I have not.
Have you?
“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”
-Mahatma Gandhi
-Mahatma Gandhi
Zero Hedge
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)