Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the problem

Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the

problem

Americans know that there is "a problem". They see their country

crumbling before their eyes. They see their children sent to foreign

lands to fight and die, for no legitimate reason (no injured American

or his property as the basis for the invasion - no Congressional

Declaration of War). They see their standard of living tank (what one

receives in exchange for one's labor). They see their current monies

(Federal Reserve Notes) fall in relation with other currencies. They

see that their dependence upon petroleum holds them hostage to the

whims of less than stable suppliers abroad. They are burdened with

ever mounting taxes, while "public servants" vote themselves a life of

luxury, benefits, prerogatives, and a retirement package that is a

(expletive deleted) slap in the face of every hardworking American who

is destined for poverty.

Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

It's one word - usury.

(Oh Yeah?)

In case you are unaware, ALL major religions denounce usury. And, no,

usury is not "excessive interest". Usury is the fee denominated in

money for the use of money (or extension of credit). Any interest is

usury.

Mathematically speaking, usury is impossible to pay in a finite money

token system (like America's "lawful money" - gold and silver coin).

The exponential equation for calculating interest GUARANTEES that at

some finite increment of time, the aggregate (whole sum) of

outstanding debt (principle and interest) will exceed the total amount

of money in existence. In short, there will be a proportion of debtors

who will default simply because the money does not exist with which to

pay the usurer. And they suffer loss of pledged property as the usurer

gleefully collects. Yet they will blame themselves for their misery,

not realizing that the game was rigged, and the usurer always wins.

Key facts:

Coinage Act of 1792, et seq, defines a unit dollar as a silver coin

with no less than 3/4 troy ounce of pure silver and other alloys. And

a one ounce GOLD COIN is equivalent to 20 unit (silver) dollars.

LAWFUL MONEY - "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the

United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the

United States..."

Title 12 United States Code, Sec. 152.

Title 31 of the U.S. code, a silver dollar complies with the original

Coinage Act.

31 USC Sec. 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins

(e)(1) ...weight 31.103 grams;

(e)(4) have inscriptions ... 1 Oz. Fine Silver ... One Dollar

(This complies with the U.S.Constitution, Art 1, Sec 8, & Sec 10)

Fort Knox: The United States Bullion Depository holds about 5,037.5

tons (4,570 metric tonnes) of gold bullion (147.3 million ounces).

That translates into $ 2,946,000,000 U.S. dollars (gold).

(Don't confuse the current market price for gold, since the price is

actually denominated in Federal Reserve Notes - not real dollars.)

TITLE 12,CHAPTER 3,SUBCHAPTER XII,sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks;

nature of obligation; redemption

" Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of

making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve

agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are

authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States

and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal

reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They

shall be redeemed in LAWFUL MONEY on demand at the Treasury Department

of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia,

or at any Federal Reserve bank."

National Debt:

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 29 Nov 2007 at 11:11:18 PM GMT is: $

9,132,290,557,763.61

U.S. gold holdings (almost 3 billions) are insufficient to "pay off

the debt" over 9.1 trillions.

And, no, you can't pay off the debt with a debt. A Federal Reserve

Note is an obligation of the U.S. to pay dollars (gold) on demand

(Title 12 United States Code Section 411). But in 1933, Congress

repudiated their promise to pay on those notes. They have no par value

(i.e., worthless).

The "law" (Federal Reserve Act of 1913) created this "interest"

contract that holds us hostage. When Congress declared bankruptcy in

1933 (See Bank Holiday of 1933 and House Joint Resolution 192, June

1933), they declared that they would no longer redeem their notes with

lawful money. But the creditor wasn't stupid. Congress became trustees

of their own bankruptcy. (Oh my, the foxes are guarding the chicken

house!).

And in that spirit of fiduciary responsibility they passed the

"Federal Insurance Contribution Act" (aka Social Security Act) of

1935.

Every American who joined up, became a "human resource" pledged as

collateral on that unpayable national debt.

(You did know that there is law compelling participation. It's 100%

voluntary. If it was mandatory, it would be involuntary servitude and

thus unconstitutional.)

Now, the creditor was happy. The worthless notes were "legal tender"

upon all those millions of "contributors" (equally liable to pay the

debt notes), and government could take a skim with which to enrich the

creditor and themselves.

Ask RON PAUL or any other candidate for high office for his

willingness to tell the creditor to take a hike...

From what my sources say, RP said that it would be UNFAIR TO THE

CREDITOR.

(What do you call an impossible contract? FAIR PLAY!?)

An obligation to pay 9.1 trillions in gold dollars computes to roughly

455,000,000,000 ounces.

At current mining rates (and if the gold exists), it would only take

870,000 years to mine enough ore IF the debt was frozen right now.

(No, the world wide above ground stock of gold, if stolen by the U.S.

government, would still be insufficient to pay the debt)

It's obvious that going back to "gold money" is impossible.

Even if the national debt was wiped off the books, the amount of

U.S.gold at Fort Knox divided percapita is only $9.82 constitutional

dollars.

I don't know about you, but that is insufficient to operate a national

economy. Would that percapita share be a year's salary? A work year of

2080 hours would mean that an "honest hourly wage" would be 0.0046

dollars (4.6 mils or less than a half cent).

What would we use for "small change"? Certificates for molecules of

gold?

And you can bet that "billionaires and millionaires" would take the

lion's share of that gold money for themselves.

It would appear that ignorance of law, economics, physics and history

trump even apathy as the greatest challenge to resolving America's

problems.

As long as we consent to the abomination of usury, we are doomed.

(Warning - the following solution does not require any action on the

part of the government)

You can:

1. Cancel all contracts for usury (close all interest bearing bank

accounts, sell off all stocks)

2. Cancel participation in national socialism (aka Social Security)

3. Sit back and watch the U.S. Congress squirm, impotent to "command"

us; watch the Federal Reserve note sink into oblivion; but whatever

you do - watch out!

And to REALLY hack off the "system"

4. Acquire a domicile (legal and permanent home)

5. Revert back to American national status. (Cease being a "U.S.

citizen / resident residing at a residence")

(As an American national, free inhabitant, domiciled upon private

property within the boundaries of the U.S.A., one ceases to be a

person liable... for just about everything. An inhabitant is a non-

resident, thus all laws obligating "residents" no longer apply. SS-5

form for a SocSec account is limited to U.S. citizens and U.S.

residents. American nationals and inhabitants cannot apply nor

participate. )

Now you see why no candidate is a solution when they're part of the

underlying problem.

-- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -

Footnotes:

Ezekiel 18:13 KJV defines usury as a capital offense.

"Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then

live? he shall not live: he hath done all these

abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him."

He (the usurer) shall surely die - his blood be upon his own hands...

thus no blame to his killer.

Is this why the U.S. government "trusts in God" when it kills American

usurers with impunity?

Aristotle (384-322 BC) formulated the classical view against usury.

Aristotle understood that money is sterile; it doesn't beget more

money the way cows beget more cows. He knew that "Money exists not by

nature but by law":

"The most hated sort (of wealth getting) and with the greatest reason,

is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself and not from the

natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange

but not to increase at interest. And this term interest (tokos), which

means the birth of money from money is applied to the breeding of

money because the offspring resembles the parent.

Wherefore of all modes of getting wealth, this is the most

unnatural." (1258b POLITICS)

And he especially disliked usurers:

"...those who ply sordid trades, pimps and all such people, and those

who lend small sums at high rates. For all these take more than they

ought, and from the wrong sources. What is common to them is a sordid

love of gain..." (1122a, ETHICS)

In plain English - money is an abstraction, a medium of exchange and

an accounting symbol for REAL goods and services. Money, itself,

cannot have intrinsic value, lest mathematical chaos will erupt. Nor

can usury be tolerated in a finite money token system.

- - -

"INHABITANT -One who resides actually and permanently in a given

place, and has his domicile there."

- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.782

"DOMICILE - A person's legal home. That place where a man has his

true, fixed, and permanent home and principal establishment, and to

which whenever he is absent he has the intention of returning."

- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.484

"RESIDENCE - Place where one actually lives ... Residence implies

something more than physical presence and something less than

domicile. The terms 'resident' and 'residence' have no precise legal

meaning... [One can have many residences but only one domicile]

- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1308, 1309

A resident with a (legal) residence is an assertion that one has NO

DOMICILE (no legal home). In contrast, an inhabitant has a legal and

permanent home. Coincidentally, no state requires non-resident

inhabitants to get permission (license) to drive, own a car, a dog,

build a house, enter occupations or any other rights of free men. In

fact, if you carefully examine their law, the inhabitant is rarely

mentioned since he is not subject to nor object of their authority.

The bottom line - no government that prospers at our ignorance will

admit that they have misled us for generations.

But you can prove it to yourself - go to any county courthouse law

library and look up the definitions and decisions related to the

following terms:

You will not find many references in statutes, if any, dealing with

the following terms:

[] American national (nationality is a characteristic of BIRTH and

PARENTAGE)

[] Free inhabitant

[] Domicile

[] Natural and personal liberty

[] Common law, rules of (see 7th amendment)

[] Private property (owned absolutely by an individual)

Instead, you will find numerous references to those persons liable,

subject to or object of their power:

>< U.S. citizens

>< U.S. residents

>< Legal residences

>< Estate (real and personal property held with qualified ownership)

>< Civil rights (Civil liberties)

>< Political liberties (Voting and holding office)

>< Civil law, based on strict rules and regulations

In

news:e41d1ebf-a379-40ff-bc82-2f9200749186@t47g2000hsc.googlegroups.com

jetgraphics <jetgraphics@gmail.com> wrote:

> Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

>

> It's one word - usury.

So, you expect to use someone else's money (in the form of a loan) at no

cost to you?

> In case you are unaware, ALL major religions denounce usury.

Which is a pretty good clue that it's really a good idea.

--

Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

jetgraphics wrote:

>

> In case you are unaware, ALL major religions denounce usury.

In fact, Islam forbids the charging of ANY interest on a loan. That's

one reason why capitalism never got much of a foothold in the Muslim world.

--

Steven L.

Email: sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

On Nov 29, 7:21 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> Innews:e41d1ebf-a379-40ff-bc82-2f9200749186@t47g2000hsc.googlegroups.com

>

> jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

>

> > It's one word - usury.

>

> So, you expect to use someone else's money (in the form of a loan) at no

> cost to you?

>

> > In case you are unaware, ALL major religions denounce usury.

>

> Which is a pretty good clue that it's really a good idea.

>

> --

> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN b...@iphouse.com

See how usurers deceive us?

They encourage us to think that lending money at interest is "good",

despite all evidence to the contrary.

It's simple mathematics.

The exponential equation for calculating interest, no matter what that

interest rate is, has a finite time increment when the total aggregate

debt will EXCEED the total amount of money in existence. In America's

case, it only took 20 years (1913-1933) to bankrupt the United States

government.

If you think that tricking people into impossible contracts is "good",

then it makes sense why you'd poke fun at religions that denounce

usury.

On Nov 29, 7:28 pm, "Steven L." <sdlit...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> jetgraphics wrote:

>

> > In case you are unaware, ALL major religions denounce usury.

>

> In fact, Islam forbids the charging of ANY interest on a loan. That's

> one reason why capitalism never got much of a foothold in the Muslim world.

>

> --

> Steven L.

> Email: sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net

> Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

Interesting footnote, of all Christian sects, the longest hold out

against usury was the Roman Catholic Church. They ended their ban on

usury in 1918. All the other Protestant sects capitulated far sooner -

some as early as the 15th century.

In news:543592aa-eee2-4ba6-affa-1134b7028c95@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

jetgraphics <jetgraphics@gmail.com> wrote:

> See how usurers deceive us?

> They encourage us to think that lending money at interest is "good",

> despite all evidence to the contrary.

Simple fix for you:

Don't borrow money.

--

Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

jetgraphics wrote:

> Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of

> the problem

>

Long post and addresses many, many issues. Before you go identifying

Ron Paul as part of the problem, check his Congressional voting

record. He has consistently voted against the cancerous monstrosity

we call government. He is one of the very few that think the

Constitution is not a quaint document.

The problem is the massively corrupt mono-party political apparatus

that parades as a two-party system. The problem is the national

security state created with the stroke of a pen in 1947 (National

Security Act of 1947). The problem is a mainstream media that has

utterly failed to perform their watchdog function. The problem is

the fact the system has been bought and paid for by corporate money

and foreign PAC's. Ron Paul is NOT part of those problems.

On Nov 29, 7:36 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> Innews:543592aa-eee2-4ba6-affa-1134b7028c95@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

>

> jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > See how usurers deceive us?

> > They encourage us to think that lending money at interest is "good",

> > despite all evidence to the contrary.

>

> Simple fix for you:

>

> Don't borrow money.

>

> --

> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN b...@iphouse.com

But how do you deal with the "national debt" ?

Your per capita share of this debt is $30,073.20.

(in "real money" - not FRNs)

Technically, a "contributor" is equally liable for the WHOLE

obligation, so under FICA, you're in hock for 9.1 trillions.

Of course, if you are not a participant you are not a "person liable".

:-)

On Nov 29, 8:39 pm, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> jetgraphics wrote:

> > Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of

> > the problem

>

> Long post and addresses many, many issues. Before you go identifying

> Ron Paul as part of the problem, check his Congressional voting

> record. He has consistently voted against the cancerous monstrosity

> we call government. He is one of the very few that think the

> Constitution is not a quaint document.

JG: Really? Show one case where he voted against socialism (social

security) or any other of the ten planks of the communist manifesto.

Has he ever offered a bill to repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913?

Or FICA? Has he (or any other congresscritter) challenged the utter

insanity of a 9 trillion national debt (denominated in REAL MONEY -

gold coin)? Has any Congress challenged the perpetual "temporary"

State of Emergency, first declared in 1933, and renewed by each

sitting president?

In a word - NO.

> The problem is the massively corrupt mono-party political apparatus

> that parades as a two-party system. The problem is the national

> security state created with the stroke of a pen in 1947 (National

> Security Act of 1947). The problem is a mainstream media that has

> utterly failed to perform their watchdog function. The problem is

> the fact the system has been bought and paid for by corporate money

> and foreign PAC's. Ron Paul is NOT part of those problems.

JG: It is often portrayed thusly in the mass media.

But by patient research into law, one can find that Enemy #1 is

looking back at us in the mirror.

Usurers could not prosper without our cooperation.

Congress could not wield the monstrous power of its funny munny budget

without the millions of voluntary socialists. (Now you know why they

act so impotent about "illegal immigrants" and their push to grant

amnesty. They want more "human resources" to bolster their bank

accounts.)

Remember, the Congress has the delegated power to COIN money (buy

bullion, stamp coin) or BORROW on the credit of the U.S.

Every Federal Reserve note is a debt.

And it was repudiated in 1933.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_certificate

" According to the U.S. treasury, 'The notes have no value for

themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they

are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods

and services in the economy.' "

Curiously, few understand how their worthless notes became backed by

YOU and YOUR property.

Congress has been writing I.O.U.s pledging YOU and YOUR property as

collateral.

Congressman Ron Paul and his cohorts have been silent on how that

grand theft has been legally accomplished.

You can imagine the dismay when the creditor calls his debt "due on

demand" and forecloses upon "all the goods and services" in the

economy. How far off is that day? Some think it has already come and

passed, as evidenced by the proliferation of police, rent-a-cops, and

private armies for individual security. We're being conditioned for

the Police State that will fully implement the "Emergency Orders"

already on the books.

The biggest organized crime syndicate is Congress, and it doesn't

tolerate competition.

:-)

(Naw, that's not accurate. Congress never, ever passed a law that

impaired the private property rights of the American nationals,

domiciled as free inhabitants, within the boundaries of the U.S.A. In

fact, they expressly passed laws to protect American sovereigns.)

FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT OF 1976

jetgraphics wrote:

>

> JG: Really? Show one case where he voted against socialism (social

> security) or any other of the ten planks of the communist manifesto.

> Has he ever offered a bill to repeal the Federal Reserve Act of

> 1913? Or FICA? Has he (or any other congresscritter) challenged the

> utter insanity of a 9 trillion national debt (denominated in REAL

> MONEY - gold coin)? Has any Congress challenged the perpetual

> "temporary" State of Emergency, first declared in 1933, and renewed

> by each sitting president?

> In a word - NO.

>

>

He's not perfect. But if we intend to address our system breakdown

without revolution, we have to peel back the minor cancers before we

can address the major cancers.

Ron Paul is that one viable hope of working within the system.

On Nov 29, 9:59 pm, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> He's not perfect. But if we intend to address our system breakdown

> without revolution, we have to peel back the minor cancers before we

> can address the major cancers.

>

> Ron Paul is that one viable hope of working within the system.

JG: That sounds reasonable on the surface. Perhaps it would be better

to use the analogy of a sinking ship.

Those who run the ship are telling us that if we "participate", the

ship won't sink. The crew are told, that if more get aboard, the ship

won't sink.

However, the wise man would leave the ship and head for dry land.

The "Ship of State" is the Socialist state, sinking under the twin

weights of usury and socialism.

The "dry land" is the law of the land, based upon justice, reason and

common sense.

Remember, the Declaration of Independence asserts that governments are

created to (a) secure rights to life, liberty and private property,

and (b) govern those who consent.

As one pundit remarked, If voting changed anything, voting would be

outlawed.

What makes the political process inert?

SOCIALISM - A political and economic theory advocating collective

ownership of the means of production and control of distribution. It

is based upon the belief that all, while contributing to the good of

the community, are equally entitled to the care and protection which

the community can provide.

COMMUNISM - the ownership of property, or means of production,

distribution and supply, by the whole of a classless society, with

wealth shared on the principle of 'to each according to his need',

each yielding fully 'according to his ability'.

Neither Socialism, nor Communism tolerate individual ownership of

private property.

From the Communist manifesto:

"In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the

single sentence: Abolition of private property."

Since 1935, Americans have not owned private property.

That claim is supported by the following definition:

PRIVATE PROPERTY - As protected from being taken for public uses, is

such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he

has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed

and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to

another, such as houses, lands, and chattels.

- - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217

CAPITALISM - An economic system in which the means of production,

distribution and exchange are privately owned and operated for private

profit.

Combining the two, we get Capitalism is an economic system in which

the means of production, distribution and exchange are absolutely

owned by individuals who enjoy the fruits thereof.

As the fifth amendment promises, private property shall not be taken

for public use without just compensation.

Now, in case you are unaware, real estate and private property are

mutually exclusive because of ownership type.

Consider that if the State takes real estate for non payment of taxes,

it does not offer just compensation. The recent Supreme Court case

dealing with condemnation of real estate that was transferred to

another private party was upheld as constitutional because it wasn't a

taking of private property.

In all the State constitutions I've read, they only delegate the power

to tax real estate. They never mention taxing private property.

If you were misled to believe that "all land" is real estate, consider

the following.

LAND. ... The land is one thing, and the estate in land is another

thing, for an estate in land is a time in land or land for a time.

- - -Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.877

OWNERSHIP - "... Ownership of property is either absolute or

qualified. The ownership of property is absolute when a single person

has the absolute dominion over it... The ownership is qualified when

it is shared with one or more persons, when the time of enjoyment is

deferred or limited, or when the use is restricted."

- - -Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p. 1106

ESTATE - The degree, quantity, nature and extent of interest which a

person has in real and personal property. An estate in lands,

tenements, and hereditaments signifies such interest as the tenant has

therein."

Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.547

INTEREST - ...More particularly it means a right to have the advantage

of accruing from anything ; any right in the nature of property, but

LESS THAN TITLE.

Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.812

TITLE - "The formal right of ownership of property..."

Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1485

Real estate / Real property refers to "lands, tenements,

heriditaments" a person or tenant has NO formal right of ownership of

property - only the advantages from it.

PROPERTY TAX - "An ad valorem tax, usually levied by a city or county,

on the value of real or personal property that the taxpayer owns on a

specified date."

Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1218

Now you can see why Americans no longer own private property. If they

are paying a "property tax" on real property / real estate, it's not

private property.

Yet the governments repeatedly promise to respect "private property

rights" while misleading folks to assume that their land, houses and

chattels are estate.

Can any politician correct the problem when ignorant Americans

mindlessly register their property as "estate"?

Or is it that as duly enrolled socialists, they are barred from

absolutely owning anything, including themselves?

On Nov 29, 4:16 pm, jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the

> problem

>

> Americans know that there is "a problem". They see their country

> crumbling before their eyes. They see their children sent to foreign

> lands to fight and die, for no legitimate reason (no injured American

> or his property as the basis for the invasion - no Congressional

> Declaration of War). They see their standard of living tank (what one

> receives in exchange for one's labor). They see their current monies

> (Federal Reserve Notes) fall in relation with other currencies. They

> see that their dependence upon petroleum holds them hostage to the

> whims of less than stable suppliers abroad. They are burdened with

> ever mounting taxes, while "public servants" vote themselves a life of

> luxury, benefits, prerogatives, and a retirement package that is a

> (expletive deleted) slap in the face of every hardworking American who

> is destined for poverty.

>

> Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

>

> It's one word - usury.

You are clueless and ignorant.

If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> On Nov 29, 4:16 pm, jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

> > Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the

> > problem

>

> > Americans know that there is "a problem". They see their country

> > crumbling before their eyes. They see their children sent to foreign

> > lands to fight and die, for no legitimate reason (no injured American

> > or his property as the basis for the invasion - no Congressional

> > Declaration of War). They see their standard of living tank (what one

> > receives in exchange for one's labor). They see their current monies

> > (Federal Reserve Notes) fall in relation with other currencies. They

> > see that their dependence upon petroleum holds them hostage to the

> > whims of less than stable suppliers abroad. They are burdened with

> > ever mounting taxes, while "public servants" vote themselves a life of

> > luxury, benefits, prerogatives, and a retirement package that is a

> > (expletive deleted) slap in the face of every hardworking American who

> > is destined for poverty.

>

> > Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

>

> > It's one word - usury.

>

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

JG: Can you produce any facts that support your conclusions?

Are you disputing the law, as enacted?

Did you bother to read Title 12 USC Sec 411?

In it, it plainly states that Federal Reserve notes are obligations of

the U.S. government to pay lawful money on demand.

Lawful money is defined as silver and gold coin.

Since 1933, the government has repudiated that obligation to pay

lawful money.

Ergo, the Federal Reserve notes are worthless, no par value.

There is no such thing as a "sound currency" when it is borrowed into

existence, at usury.

In fact, paper money is either a certificate (of deposit of real

money) or a note (a promise to pay real money in the future).

Neither is "backed".

If you believe that paper currency is backed, you are mistaken.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve without first abolishing the debt is

nugatory.

Abolishing the debt and the usury behind it will accomplish half the

job.

But Ron Paul has never, ever espoused abolishing the national debt,

nor injuring the interests of the creditor.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

Furthermore, Ron Paul has never, ever expressed abolishing the Social

Security Act of 1935. Without that act, Congress would lose 95% of its

power.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

From RP's website:

"(He) introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219) to

ensure that money paid into the system is only used for Social

Security."

Ron Paul hasn't read the law.

According to the Congressional Research Service, entitlements are not

a property right, but a "gift" from Congress. Congress is under no

contractual obligation to pay benefits. And all contributions are

merely more revenue. And not one dollar has ever been paid into Social

Security by the millions of contributors. Because a dollar, by law, is

either a gold or silver coin. A worthless note denominated as a dollar

is not a dollar, no more than a picture of an elephant IS an elephant.

From RP's website:

"... the Federal Reserve, our central bank, fosters runaway debt by

increasing the money supply -- making each dollar in your pocket worth

less."

Obviously, he doesn't read the law, either. The runaway debt is

necessary for new money to exist. No new Federal Reserve note can be

printed unless CONGRESS (Ron Paul, et al) increases the debt. In fact,

without RED INK, the paper money supply would lag behind the economy.

Not that I support debt-credit paper instruments. But unless you KNOW

something about America's constitutional money system, your objections

are groundless.

As stated earlier, based on the amount of gold in the depository at

Fort Knox, there's not enough to run a national economy.

In short, we can't continue with debt money borrowed at usury, we

can't go back to "hard money" (gold and silver coin), and there's no

solution within the definition of the Art.1, Sec. 8 or Sec. 10 of the

U.S. Constitution. Nor can there be any solution when usury dominates

the monetary systems of the world.

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> On Nov 29, 4:16 pm, jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

> > Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the

> > problem

>

> > Americans know that there is "a problem". They see their country

> > crumbling before their eyes. They see their children sent to foreign

> > lands to fight and die, for no legitimate reason (no injured American

> > or his property as the basis for the invasion - no Congressional

> > Declaration of War). They see their standard of living tank (what one

> > receives in exchange for one's labor). They see their current monies

> > (Federal Reserve Notes) fall in relation with other currencies. They

> > see that their dependence upon petroleum holds them hostage to the

> > whims of less than stable suppliers abroad. They are burdened with

> > ever mounting taxes, while "public servants" vote themselves a life of

> > luxury, benefits, prerogatives, and a retirement package that is a

> > (expletive deleted) slap in the face of every hardworking American who

> > is destined for poverty.

>

> > Of course, no candidate DARES utter the basis for America's dilemma...

>

> > It's one word - usury.

>

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

JG: Can you produce any facts that support your conclusions?

Are you disputing the law, as enacted?

Did you bother to read Title 12 USC Sec 411?

In it, it plainly states that Federal Reserve notes are obligations of

the U.S. government to pay lawful money on demand.

Lawful money is defined as silver and gold coin.

Since 1933, the government has repudiated that obligation to pay

lawful money.

Ergo, the Federal Reserve notes are worthless, no par value.

There is no such thing as a "sound currency" when it is borrowed into

existence, at usury.

In fact, paper money is either a certificate (of deposit of real

money) or a note (a promise to pay real money in the future).

Neither is "backed".

If you believe that paper currency is backed, you are mistaken.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve without first abolishing the debt is

nugatory.

Abolishing the debt and the usury behind it will accomplish half the

job.

But Ron Paul has never, ever espoused abolishing the national debt,

nor injuring the interests of the creditor.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

Furthermore, Ron Paul has never, ever expressed abolishing the Social

Security Act of 1935. Without that act, Congress would lose 95% of its

power.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it.

From RP's website:

"(He) introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219) to

ensure that money paid into the system is only used for Social

Security."

Ron Paul hasn't read the law.

According to the Congressional Research Service, entitlements are not

a property right, but a "gift" from Congress. Congress is under no

contractual obligation to pay benefits. And all contributions are

merely more revenue. And not one dollar has ever been paid into Social

Security by the millions of contributors. Because a dollar, by law, is

either a gold or silver coin. A worthless note denominated as a dollar

is not a dollar, no more than a picture of an elephant IS an elephant.

From RP's website:

"... the Federal Reserve, our central bank, fosters runaway debt by

increasing the money supply -- making each dollar in your pocket worth

less."

Obviously, he doesn't read the law, either. The runaway debt is

necessary for new money to exist. No new Federal Reserve note can be

printed unless CONGRESS (Ron Paul, et al) increases the debt. In fact,

without RED INK, the paper money supply would lag behind the economy.

Not that I support debt-credit paper instruments. But unless you KNOW

something about America's constitutional money system, your objections

are groundless.

As stated earlier, based on the amount of gold in the depository at

Fort Knox, there's not enough to run a national economy.

In short, we can't continue with debt money borrowed at usury, we

can't go back to "hard money" (gold and silver coin), and there's no

solution within the definition of the Art.1, Sec. 8 or Sec. 10 of the

U.S. Constitution. Nor can there be any solution when usury dominates

the monetary systems of the world.

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

TITLE 12,CHAPTER 3,SUBCHAPTER XII,sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks;

nature of obligation; redemption

" Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making

advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents

as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The

said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be

receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks

and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be

redeemed in LAWFUL MONEY on demand at the Treasury Department of the

United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at

any Federal Reserve bank."

LAWFUL MONEY - "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the

United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the

United States..."

Title 12 United States Code, Sec. 152.

"Dollars, or units; each to be of the value of a Spanish milled as the

same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one

grains and four-sixteenths parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred

and sixteen grains of standard, silver."

--- Sec. 9, Coinage Act of 1792, January 1792

According to Title 31 of the U.S. code, a silver dollar complies with

the original Coinage Act.

31 USC Sec. 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins

(e)(1) ...weight 31.103 grams;

(e)(4) have inscriptions ... 1 Oz. Fine Silver ... One Dollar

"Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection

thereto."

MacLeod v. Hoover (1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305

Article 1, Section 8. U.S. Constitution.

The Congress shall have Power

....To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

....To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and

fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Article 1, Section 10. U.S. Constitution No State shall

.... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and

silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any ... Law impairing

the Obligation of Contracts, ...

[Note: Congress has no power to create money. It can 'coin' money -

stamp bullion into coin. If it had the power to create money, it

wouldn't need the power to borrow it. If you have not paid nor been

paid with lawful money, you have participated in a fraud if you

treated Federal Reserve Notes as 'dollars'.]

Bank holiday of 1933. Presidential Proclamation No.2039, issued March

6, 1933, and No. 2040, issued March 9, 1933, temporarily suspended

banking transactions by member banks of the Federal Reserve System.

Normal banking functions were resumed on March 13, subject to certain

restrictions. The first proclamation, it was held, had no authority in

law until the passage on March 9, 1933, of the ratifying act (12

U.S.C.A. Sec. 95b). The present law forbids member banks of the

Federal Reserve System to transact banking business, except under

regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, during an emergency

proclaimed by the President.

12 U.S.C.A. Sec. 95.

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 146

According to page 494 of the U.S. Government Manual, 1993/1994

edition:

"In addition , the Secretary (of Treasury) has many responsibilities

as chief financial officer of the Government. The Secretary serves as

Chairman pro tempore of the Economic Policy council and as U.S.

Governor of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank

for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development

Bank, and the African Development Bank."

Title 22 USC Sec. 286a Appointments

(a) Governors and executive directors; term of office

The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall

appoint a governor of the (International Monetary) Fund who shall also

serve as a governor of the (World) Bank, and an executive director of

the (International Monetary) Fund and an executive director of the

Bank. ...

(d) Compensation for services

(1) No person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other

compensation from the United States for services as a Governor,

executive director, councilor, alternate, or associate.

(2) The United States executive director of the Fund shall not be

compensated by the Fund at a rate in excess of the rate ...

[Note: The Secretary of Treasury may be an appointee of the President,

but he SHALL NOT BE PAID BY THE U.S. Government. His regulations are

in force and effect during this "State of Emergency" originally

declared in 1933. And which department does the "Secret Service"

belong to?]

Does that satisfy your thirst for facts?

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

TITLE 12,CHAPTER 3,SUBCHAPTER XII,sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks;

nature of obligation; redemption

" Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making

advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents

as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The

said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be

receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks

and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be

redeemed in LAWFUL MONEY on demand at the Treasury Department of the

United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at

any Federal Reserve bank."

LAWFUL MONEY - "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the

United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the

United States..."

Title 12 United States Code, Sec. 152.

"Dollars, or units; each to be of the value of a Spanish milled as the

same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one

grains and four-sixteenths parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred

and sixteen grains of standard, silver."

--- Sec. 9, Coinage Act of 1792, January 1792

According to Title 31 of the U.S. code, a silver dollar complies with

the original Coinage Act.

31 USC Sec. 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins

(e)(1) ...weight 31.103 grams;

(e)(4) have inscriptions ... 1 Oz. Fine Silver ... One Dollar

"Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection

thereto."

MacLeod v. Hoover (1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305

Article 1, Section 8. U.S. Constitution.

The Congress shall have Power

....To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

....To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and

fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Article 1, Section 10. U.S. Constitution No State shall

.... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and

silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any ... Law impairing

the Obligation of Contracts, ...

[Note: Congress has no power to create money. It can 'coin' money -

stamp bullion into coin. If it had the power to create money, it

wouldn't need the power to borrow it. If you have not paid nor been

paid with lawful money, you have participated in a fraud if you

treated Federal Reserve Notes as 'dollars'.]

Bank holiday of 1933. Presidential Proclamation No.2039, issued March

6, 1933, and No. 2040, issued March 9, 1933, temporarily suspended

banking transactions by member banks of the Federal Reserve System.

Normal banking functions were resumed on March 13, subject to certain

restrictions. The first proclamation, it was held, had no authority in

law until the passage on March 9, 1933, of the ratifying act (12

U.S.C.A. Sec. 95b). The present law forbids member banks of the

Federal Reserve System to transact banking business, except under

regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, during an emergency

proclaimed by the President.

12 U.S.C.A. Sec. 95.

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 146

According to page 494 of the U.S. Government Manual, 1993/1994

edition:

"In addition , the Secretary (of Treasury) has many responsibilities

as chief financial officer of the Government. The Secretary serves as

Chairman pro tempore of the Economic Policy council and as U.S.

Governor of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank

for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development

Bank, and the African Development Bank."

Title 22 USC Sec. 286a Appointments

(a) Governors and executive directors; term of office

The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall

appoint a governor of the (International Monetary) Fund who shall also

serve as a governor of the (World) Bank, and an executive director of

the (International Monetary) Fund and an executive director of the

Bank. ...

(d) Compensation for services

(1) No person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other

compensation from the United States for services as a Governor,

executive director, councilor, alternate, or associate.

(2) The United States executive director of the Fund shall not be

compensated by the Fund at a rate in excess of the rate ...

[Note: The Secretary of Treasury may be an appointee of the President,

but he SHALL NOT BE PAID BY THE U.S. Government. His regulations are

in force and effect during this "State of Emergency" originally

declared in 1933. And which department does the "Secret Service"

belong to?]

Does that satisfy your thirst for facts?

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

TITLE 12,CHAPTER 3,SUBCHAPTER XII,sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks;

nature of obligation; redemption

" Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making

advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents

as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The

said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be

receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks

and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be

redeemed in LAWFUL MONEY on demand at the Treasury Department of the

United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at

any Federal Reserve bank."

LAWFUL MONEY - "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the

United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the

United States..."

Title 12 United States Code, Sec. 152.

"Dollars, or units; each to be of the value of a Spanish milled as the

same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one

grains and four-sixteenths parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred

and sixteen grains of standard, silver."

--- Sec. 9, Coinage Act of 1792, January 1792

According to Title 31 of the U.S. code, a silver dollar complies with

the original Coinage Act.

31 USC Sec. 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins

(e)(1) ...weight 31.103 grams;

(e)(4) have inscriptions ... 1 Oz. Fine Silver ... One Dollar

"Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection

thereto."

MacLeod v. Hoover (1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305

Article 1, Section 8. U.S. Constitution.

The Congress shall have Power

....To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

....To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and

fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Article 1, Section 10. U.S. Constitution No State shall

.... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and

silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any ... Law impairing

the Obligation of Contracts, ...

[Note: Congress has no power to create money. It can 'coin' money -

stamp bullion into coin. If it had the power to create money, it

wouldn't need the power to borrow it. If you have not paid nor been

paid with lawful money, you have participated in a fraud if you

treated Federal Reserve Notes as 'dollars'.]

Bank holiday of 1933. Presidential Proclamation No.2039, issued March

6, 1933, and No. 2040, issued March 9, 1933, temporarily suspended

banking transactions by member banks of the Federal Reserve System.

Normal banking functions were resumed on March 13, subject to certain

restrictions. The first proclamation, it was held, had no authority in

law until the passage on March 9, 1933, of the ratifying act (12

U.S.C.A. Sec. 95b). The present law forbids member banks of the

Federal Reserve System to transact banking business, except under

regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, during an emergency

proclaimed by the President.

12 U.S.C.A. Sec. 95.

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 146

According to page 494 of the U.S. Government Manual, 1993/1994

edition:

"In addition , the Secretary (of Treasury) has many responsibilities

as chief financial officer of the Government. The Secretary serves as

Chairman pro tempore of the Economic Policy council and as U.S.

Governor of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank

for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development

Bank, and the African Development Bank."

Title 22 USC Sec. 286a Appointments

(a) Governors and executive directors; term of office

The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall

appoint a governor of the (International Monetary) Fund who shall also

serve as a governor of the (World) Bank, and an executive director of

the (International Monetary) Fund and an executive director of the

Bank. ...

(d) Compensation for services

(1) No person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other

compensation from the United States for services as a Governor,

executive director, councilor, alternate, or associate.

(2) The United States executive director of the Fund shall not be

compensated by the Fund at a rate in excess of the rate ...

[Note: The Secretary of Treasury may be an appointee of the President,

but he SHALL NOT BE PAID BY THE U.S. Government. His regulations are

in force and effect during this "State of Emergency" originally

declared in 1933. And which department does the "Secret Service"

belong to?]

Does that satisfy your thirst for facts?

On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

> You are clueless and ignorant.

> If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

> plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

>

> Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

TITLE 12,CHAPTER 3,SUBCHAPTER XII,sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks;

nature of obligation; redemption

" Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making

advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents

as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The

said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be

receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks

and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be

redeemed in LAWFUL MONEY on demand at the Treasury Department of the

United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at

any Federal Reserve bank."

LAWFUL MONEY - "The terms 'lawful money' and 'lawful money of the

United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the

United States..."

Title 12 United States Code, Sec. 152.

"Dollars, or units; each to be of the value of a Spanish milled as the

same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one

grains and four-sixteenths parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred

and sixteen grains of standard, silver."

--- Sec. 9, Coinage Act of 1792, January 1792

According to Title 31 of the U.S. code, a silver dollar complies with

the original Coinage Act.

31 USC Sec. 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins

(e)(1) ...weight 31.103 grams;

(e)(4) have inscriptions ... 1 Oz. Fine Silver ... One Dollar

"Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection

thereto."

MacLeod v. Hoover (1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305

Article 1, Section 8. U.S. Constitution.

The Congress shall have Power

....To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

....To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and

fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Article 1, Section 10. U.S. Constitution No State shall

.... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and

silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any ... Law impairing

the Obligation of Contracts, ...

[Note: Congress has no power to create money. It can 'coin' money -

stamp bullion into coin. If it had the power to create money, it

wouldn't need the power to borrow it. If you have not paid nor been

paid with lawful money, you have participated in a fraud if you

treated Federal Reserve Notes as 'dollars'.]

Bank holiday of 1933. Presidential Proclamation No.2039, issued March

6, 1933, and No. 2040, issued March 9, 1933, temporarily suspended

banking transactions by member banks of the Federal Reserve System.

Normal banking functions were resumed on March 13, subject to certain

restrictions. The first proclamation, it was held, had no authority in

law until the passage on March 9, 1933, of the ratifying act (12

U.S.C.A. Sec. 95b). The present law forbids member banks of the

Federal Reserve System to transact banking business, except under

regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, during an emergency

proclaimed by the President.

12 U.S.C.A. Sec. 95.

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 146

According to page 494 of the U.S. Government Manual, 1993/1994

edition:

"In addition , the Secretary (of Treasury) has many responsibilities

as chief financial officer of the Government. The Secretary serves as

Chairman pro tempore of the Economic Policy council and as U.S.

Governor of the International Monetary Fund, the International Bank

for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development

Bank, and the African Development Bank."

Title 22 USC Sec. 286a Appointments

(a) Governors and executive directors; term of office

The President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall

appoint a governor of the (International Monetary) Fund who shall also

serve as a governor of the (World) Bank, and an executive director of

the (International Monetary) Fund and an executive director of the

Bank. ...

(d) Compensation for services

(1) No person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other

compensation from the United States for services as a Governor,

executive director, councilor, alternate, or associate.

(2) The United States executive director of the Fund shall not be

compensated by the Fund at a rate in excess of the rate ...

[Note: The Secretary of Treasury may be an appointee of the President,

but he SHALL NOT BE PAID BY THE U.S. Government. His regulations are

in force and effect during this "State of Emergency" originally

declared in 1933. And which department does the "Secret Service"

belong to?]

Does that satisfy your thirst for facts?

On Nov 30, 12:55 am, jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 29, 11:33 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote:

You are clueless and ignorant.

If any candidate espouses the notion of a sound currency - minus the

plutocratic machinations of the fed reserve it IS Ron Paul.

Get yer facts straight before you yap again.

"jetgraphics" <jetgraphics@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:e41d1ebf-a379-40ff-bc82-2f9200749186@t47g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> Candidate / Congressman Ron Paul is no solution when he's part of the

> problem

He sure seems to have a lot of you folks running scared.

--

If there was supposed to be a separation of church

and state in the US Constitution, why did the founders

put the words "in the year of our Lord" in it?

From the Federalist Papers:

The second method will be exemplified in the federal

republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it

will be derived from and dependent on the society,

the society itself will be broken into so many parts,

interests and classes of citizens, that the rights of

individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger

from interested combinations of the majority.

In a free government the security for civil rights must

be the same as that for RELIGIOUS RIGHTS.

It consists in the one case in the multiplicity of interests,

and in the other in the multiplicity of SECTS. The degree

of security in both cases will depend on the number of

interests and SECTS

JC

"jetgraphics" <jetgraphics@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:5c7a4856-d815-4c9f-9871-70bd1bb33489@t47g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Nov 29, 7:36 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:

>> Innews:543592aa-eee2-4ba6-affa-1134b7028c95@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

>>

>> jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> > See how usurers deceive us?

>> > They encourage us to think that lending money at interest is "good",

>> > despite all evidence to the contrary.

>>

>> Simple fix for you:

>>

>> Don't borrow money.

>>

>> --

>> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN b...@iphouse.com

>

> But how do you deal with the "national debt" ?

Simple. You learn the IRS code and you arrange your affairs so that other

people have to worry about it. Isn't that what you pay government for? When

you pay someone to do a job, why should you continue to worry about it? If

you don't like the job they're doing, fire them. But the American people are

too stupid and too apathetic to do that, aren't they?

--

If there was supposed to be a separation of church

and state in the US Constitution, why did the founders

put the words "in the year of our Lord" in it?

From the Federalist Papers:

The second method will be exemplified in the federal

republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it

will be derived from and dependent on the society,

the society itself will be broken into so many parts,

interests and classes of citizens, that the rights of

individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger

from interested combinations of the majority.

In a free government the security for civil rights must

be the same as that for RELIGIOUS RIGHTS.

It consists in the one case in the multiplicity of interests,

and in the other in the multiplicity of SECTS. The degree

of security in both cases will depend on the number of

interests and SECTS

JC

On 29 nov, 22:36, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> Innews:543592aa-eee2-4ba6-affa-1134b7028c95@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

>

> jetgraphics <jetgraph...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > See how usurers deceive us?

> > They encourage us to think that lending money at interest is "good",

> > despite all evidence to the contrary.

>

> Simple fix for you:

>

> Don't borrow money.

>

> --

> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN b...@iphouse.com

Lacking the intelligence you clearly lack, you fail to acknowledge

that even if one does not borrow money, one is still indentured to the

time-value of money which is

part and parcel of the usery system.

They tried to ban the jews in england from introducing usury in the

Magna Carta. Look up Magna Carta and the Jews.

They tried to ban the jews all over Europe from their usury and

conspiracy too indenture non-jews in jew controlled and owned monetary

system.

Thats why all the jews in Europe were forced into ghettoes and banned

from participating in commerce and governments. This was not due to

one empire, this was consistent across all of Europe. One of

Napoleon's gravest mistakes was to liberate the jews across Europe as

he conquered each state. Napoleon was being ultruistic. He believed

that the jews could be trusted again to assimilate rather than

conspire as they always did. Napoleon and every other leader to follow

him have turned out to be wrong everytime.

In order to destroy the jewish cult cabal and this perpetual problem,

the jews must be pitied. They must be made to be ashamed of

considering themselves jews such that they will abandon the

association and assimilate with the rest of humanity.

It is not the individual jew's fault or make-up but his indoctrination

from birth which makes him behave in this way. The jews must be once

again demoralised and laughed at for their pathetic and miserable

inhumanities.

That is the final solution. It is the only solution. Israel must be

dismantled and wiped off the map of history.

On Nov 30, 3:43 pm, Midex <jbmccr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> even if one does not borrow money, one is still indentured to the

> time-value of money which is

> part and parcel of the usery system.

>

> They tried to ban the jews in england from introducing usury in the

> Magna Carta. Look up Magna Carta and the Jews.

JG: Usurers are not limited to any ethnic or religious group. All

religions denounced usury. However, at this time, only Islam

categorically forbids usury. This may be one of the reasons why the

"free world" (enslaved to usurers) wage war on Islamic governments.

Which poses the question - what do you think would happen if the U.S.

government (or its people) repudiated usury?

Would the usury dominated world turn upon the U.S.A.?

We don't need usury for prosperity

Prosperity is not generated by a large supply of money tokens.

Prosperity is generated by the creation, exchange and transportation

of surplus usable goods and services. Money is merely a medium of

exchange to facilitate the trade of that surplus. America has been

gutted because people have forgotten that wealth is the result of

production, not manipulation of money tokens via usury. Instead of

mighty factories and skilled workforce gainfully employed, we have

plutocrats filling their pockets via every scheme and scam under the

sun; usury, limited liability, bribery, corruption, gambling, and

other abominations notwithstanding.

Alternately, there are reforms that would eliminate the power of

usurers.

1. Eliminate scarce money tokens.

2. Promote the private promissory note money system.

3. Do not protect usurers nor enforce their contracts in courts of

law.

Scarcity of money drives demand for credit, which enriches usurers.

Bankers fear free and unlimited money creation. In the 1870s, the U.S.

silver output threatened the international bankers so much, that they

had their puppet Congress demonetize silver despite the constitutional

requirement for silver coin.

(See "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_1873

The consequence was an economic mess that lead up to the scam of an

"elastic currency" via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

Private promissory notes (not unlike coupons) if circulated as tender,

would relieve the scarce money token issue that plagues many

communities. Since they are not borrowed into existence, they do not

enrich usurers. In fact, the fine print on many coupons recite "cash

value 1/20 of a cent" to discourage the idea that they can circulate

with the face value of the item in question. Many communities have

created alternative money token systems independent of usury.

(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_hours)

The basic idea is that only producers of goods and services should

have the authority to create the medium of exchange necessary for

trade. Consumers / parasites like government or usurers should never,

ever have the power to create money tokens. (Technically speaking, the

U.S. Congress has no power to "create" money. It is delegated the

power to COIN money, stamped from bullion. There is no power to create

bullion.)

Banning contracts for usury from enforcement in courts of law, and not

protecting usurers who were injured by their victims would go a long

way to curing the problem. Since usurers are felons under a death

sentence (see Ezekiel 18:13 KJV), it is an axiom of law that felons

are responsible for injuries they suffer in the course of their

criminal activity. Unfortunately, the U.S. Constitution enshrined

usury, via the bankruptcy protection power. Remember, though states

are barred from impairing the obligations of contracts, the bankruptcy

protection IS a violation of a contract. There is no moral imperative

to deny a legitimate creditor his due. But thanks to usury, and the

mathematical certainty that a proportion of debtors would fail due to

the lack of money, the bankruptcy protection was a "safety valve".

Thus no victim of usury would feel that his only recourse was to

summarily execute the usurers who plagued him. This fact illustrates

that the U.S. Constitution had nothing to do with God or morality.

Anyone assuming that it was a divinely inspired document is woefully

misled. Jesus never preached, "Bless those who screw their

creditor..."

When Ron Paul advocates the repeal of the Federal Reserve Act,

abolishes the fraudulent national debt, and repeals national socialism

(Social Security Act), then he's a solution and not part of the

problem.

On Nov 30, 3:43 pm, Midex <jbmccr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> even if one does not borrow money, one is still indentured to the

> time-value of money which is

> part and parcel of the usery system.

>

> They tried to ban the jews in england from introducing usury in the

> Magna Carta. Look up Magna Carta and the Jews.

JG: Usurers are not limited to any ethnic or religious group. All

religions denounced usury. However, at this time, only Islam

categorically forbids usury. This may be one of the reasons why the

"free world" (enslaved to usurers) wage war on Islamic governments.

Which poses the question - what do you think would happen if the U.S.

government (or its people) repudiated usury?

Would the usury dominated world turn upon the U.S.A.?

We don't need usury for prosperity

Prosperity is not generated by a large supply of money tokens.

Prosperity is generated by the creation, exchange and transportation

of surplus usable goods and services. Money is merely a medium of

exchange to facilitate the trade of that surplus. America has been

gutted because people have forgotten that wealth is the result of

production, not manipulation of money tokens via usury. Instead of

mighty factories and skilled workforce gainfully employed, we have

plutocrats filling their pockets via every scheme and scam under the

sun; usury, limited liability, bribery, corruption, gambling, and

other abominations notwithstanding.

Alternately, there are reforms that would eliminate the power of

usurers.

1. Eliminate scarce money tokens.

2. Promote the private promissory note money system.

3. Do not protect usurers nor enforce their contracts in courts of

law.

Scarcity of money drives demand for credit, which enriches usurers.

Bankers fear free and unlimited money creation. In the 1870s, the U.S.

silver output threatened the international bankers so much, that they

had their puppet Congress demonetize silver despite the constitutional

requirement for silver coin.

(See "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_1873

The consequence was an economic mess that lead up to the scam of an

"elastic currency" via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

Private promissory notes (not unlike coupons) if circulated as tender,

would relieve the scarce money token issue that plagues many

communities. Since they are not borrowed into existence, they do not

enrich usurers. In fact, the fine print on many coupons recite "cash

value 1/20 of a cent" to discourage the idea that they can circulate

with the face value of the item in question. Many communities have

created alternative money token systems independent of usury.

(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_hours)

The basic idea is that only producers of goods and services should

have the authority to create the medium of exchange necessary for

trade. Consumers / parasites like government or usurers should never,

ever have the power to create money tokens. (Technically speaking, the

U.S. Congress has no power to "create" money. It is delegated the

power to COIN money, stamped from bullion. There is no power to create

bullion.)

Banning contracts for usury from enforcement in courts of law, and not

protecting usurers who were injured by their victims would go a long

way to curing the problem. Since usurers are felons under a death

sentence (see Ezekiel 18:13 KJV), it is an axiom of law that felons

are responsible for injuries they suffer in the course of their

criminal activity. Unfortunately, the U.S. Constitution enshrined

usury, via the bankruptcy protection power. Remember, though states

are barred from impairing the obligations of contracts, the bankruptcy

protection IS a violation of a contract. There is no moral imperative

to deny a legitimate creditor his due. But thanks to usury, and the

mathematical certainty that a proportion of debtors would fail due to

the lack of money, the bankruptcy protection was a "safety valve".

Thus no victim of usury would feel that his only recourse was to

summarily execute the usurers who plagued him. This fact illustrates

that the U.S. Constitution had nothing to do with God or morality.

Anyone assuming that it was a divinely inspired document is woefully

misled. Jesus never preached, "Bless those who screw their

creditor..."

When Ron Paul advocates the repeal of the Federal Reserve Act,

abolishes the fraudulent national debt, and repeals national socialism

(Social Security Act), then he's a solution and not part of the

problem.

On Nov 30, 3:43 pm, Midex <jbmccr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> even if one does not borrow money, one is still indentured to the

> time-value of money which is

> part and parcel of the usery system.

>

> They tried to ban the jews in england from introducing usury in the

> Magna Carta. Look up Magna Carta and the Jews.

JG: Usurers are not limited to any ethnic or religious group. All

religions denounced usury. However, at this time, only Islam

categorically forbids usury. This may be one of the reasons why the

"free world" (enslaved to usurers) wage war on Islamic governments.

Which poses the question - what do you think would happen if the U.S.

government (or its people) repudiated usury?

Would the usury dominated world turn upon the U.S.A.?

We don't need usury for prosperity

Prosperity is not generated by a large supply of money tokens.

Prosperity is generated by the creation, exchange and transportation

of surplus usable goods and services. Money is merely a medium of

exchange to facilitate the trade of that surplus. America has been

gutted because people have forgotten that wealth is the result of

production, not manipulation of money tokens via usury. Instead of

mighty factories and skilled workforce gainfully employed, we have

plutocrats filling their pockets via every scheme and scam under the

sun; usury, limited liability, bribery, corruption, gambling, and

other abominations notwithstanding.

Alternately, there are reforms that would eliminate the power of

usurers.

1. Eliminate scarce money tokens.

2. Promote the private promissory note money system.

3. Do not protect usurers nor enforce their contracts in courts of

law.

Scarcity of money drives demand for credit, which enriches usurers.

Bankers fear free and unlimited money creation. In the 1870s, the U.S.

silver output threatened the international bankers so much, that they

had their puppet Congress demonetize silver despite the constitutional

requirement for silver coin.

(See "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_1873

The consequence was an economic mess that lead up to the scam of an

"elastic currency" via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

Private promissory notes (not unlike coupons) if circulated as tender,

would relieve the scarce money token issue that plagues many

communities. Since they are not borrowed into existence, they do not

enrich usurers. In fact, the fine print on many coupons recite "cash

value 1/20 of a cent" to discourage the idea that they can circulate

with the face value of the item in question. Many communities have

created alternative money token systems independent of usury.

(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_hours)

The basic idea is that only producers of goods and services should

have the authority to create the medium of exchange necessary for

trade. Consumers / parasites like government or usurers should never,

ever have the power to create money tokens. (Technically speaking, the

U.S. Congress has no power to "create" money. It is delegated the

power to COIN money, stamped from bullion. There is no power to create

bullion.)

Banning contracts for usury from enforcement in courts of law, and not

protecting usurers who were injured by their victims would go a long

way to curing the problem. Since usurers are felons under a death

sentence (see Ezekiel 18:13 KJV), it is an axiom of law that felons

are responsible for injuries they suffer in the course of their

criminal activity. Unfortunately, the U.S. Constitution enshrined

usury, via the bankruptcy protection power. Remember, though states

are barred from impairing the obligations of contracts, the bankruptcy

protection IS a violation of a contract. There is no moral imperative

to deny a legitimate creditor his due. But thanks to usury, and the

mathematical certainty that a proportion of debtors would fail due to

the lack of money, the bankruptcy protection was a "safety valve".

Thus no victim of usury would feel that his only recourse was to

summarily execute the usurers who plagued him. This fact illustrates

that the U.S. Constitution had nothing to do with God or morality.

Anyone assuming that it was a divinely inspired document is woefully

misled. Jesus never preached, "Bless those who screw their

creditor..."

When Ron Paul advocates the repeal of the Federal Reserve Act,

abolishes the fraudulent national debt, and repeals national socialism

(Social Security Act), then he's a solution and not part of the

problem.