Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ron Paul. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 28, 2022

The FBI - Inexcusable , Unconstitutional Law Breaking American STASI

I've been for a very long time trying to inform my audience of the obvious. From the Federal Bureau of Investigation to the Department of Homeland Security, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, to the Bureau of Land Management, we have allowed slowly year after year, tragedy after tragedy, the excuse of increased needed security to be used to justify the erosion of rights and our freedom. This is Ron Pauls take on it. I agree with him.
RTR Truth Media
Posted by on No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Monday, May 28, 2018

Honoring Some Vets on Memorial Day - Maj Gen Smedley Butler and Ron Paul Who Warned 9/11 Would Happen and Showed How US Foreign Policy was Neither Left or Right - Just Wrong





As the days and years move on, and Memorial day is upon us, I find it a needed service to illustrate how history continues to show how right Ron Paul has been over matters of foreign as well as domestic policy. I believe America seriously lost what could have been it's last chance at sanity when it failed to put him in the White House. So today I honor this military man and one other. Maj. Gen. Butler.



The Pittsburgh-born doctor who initially focused on monetary policy – the reason, in fact, for his first run for Congress – became more and more staunchly opposed to aggressive wars during his more than two decades in the House of Representatives. From his yes vote for the impeachment of Bill Clinton over bombing of Iraq, not adultery, to his rants against the war-on-terror during the 2008 and 2012 GOP debate season, Paul become less and less coy about his dislike of what he calls American empire over the years.
It is not, nor has it ever been in the interests of our National Security to destabilize foreign nations. That has been the goal of globalist international bankers and war profiteers as well as huge multinational corporations that work along side and often times are directly owned by those same bankers. When will America wake up and shake off the fog of the left right paradigm of Hegelian Dialectics that is being employed to confound, confuse divide and cause partisan ideological positions that if truly seen through clear eyes achieves only an insane and irrational agenda? How many times does Ron Paul need to be proven correct before Americans will see the truth?


 A few quotes from Ron Paul in the article - Ron Paul on Swords into Plowshares
"When I had my Rally for the Republic during the ‘08 campaign in Minneapolis, I admitted I’m the “Universal Soldier.” I didn’t resist. It’s sort of a sad song…. As important as the song is, I’d like to refute the fact that people can’t wake up and resist. Most of the time, the people get tired of the wars. At the beginning, it’s all hype, and oh, excitement, and patriotism and all this kind of stuff…. If you look back at before they went into even the Persian Gulf War – any Iraq war – polling shows that people say no, we don’t need that. We don’t need that. And then when they can build up the hatred – direct the hatred towards an individual like Saddam Hussein or the Ayatollah, people do respond because they are bombarded with this war propaganda that gets people to change their minds and join in. Until the war – they get tired of the war, too many people get hurt, and right now we’re paying for the war….The Founders tried their best to say that presidents can’t take us to war, but that didn’t work! They still take us!… And so I think that if you can’t find the right people, and the constitution doesn’t restrain them, the only thing left is for the “Universal Soldier” to say ‘why am I doing this?’ This is a tough sell because they’re 18 years old! I was older than 18! I didn’t do much resisting. But I think it’s going to take something like that if people want to eventually stop these wars."
And
There is a difference between our criticism of government policy versus criticizing the American spirit, the work ethic, and the greatness of America and the liberties that we have in spite of all the problems we have. When I travel around the world, I’m pretty glad to get back home. But things aren’t getting better, things are getting worse. It’s my love for America that makes me want to prevent it from deteriorating into some form of horrible dictatorship. And when you look at what our government is doing to us, it’s a serious problem. I think America has been an exceptional nation, and has done many great things, the people are great. But right now, the American exceptionalism of us thinking that we are the champions of liberty, and we promote democracy…. and we go around the world saying “you do it our way, or we’ll kill you.” That’s government at its worst. 

I will always oppose radical extreme ideologies that cause their indoctrinated to believe that they are above or supreme over another, or that give them the right to defy moral standards we expect of others. And I will also reject the governments that use these ideologically mind melted people to achieve their agendas, arm them, support them, while claiming moral superiority. True American exceptionalism can only be achieved if we live as an example to the rest of the world showing what not to do, not justifying a do as I say not as I do or we will kill you foreign policy. If we truly want to Make America Great Again, we need to return to the limited Republic form of government that was created to restrain government on the behest of freedom. I love America. And I have love for our Vets who joined for all the right reasons in their hearts, but who as
Kissinger said -
“Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”
I do not agree with Kissinger that military men are dumb, or stupid animals, but are among those who have been greatly deceived, as the majority of the American public as to the true purpose that they absolutely are mostly used.


TR Lacovara-Stewart


War Is A Racket USMC Maj.Gen. Smedley Butler - Corbett Report



As bad as FDR was for America, it would have been treason to overthrow him with a military coup. The left right paradigm was truly at work there too. If Congress had been dedicated to the American people and not bought off by the Federal Reserve banksters, we could have easily resurrected the ideals of the American Republic. Maj.General Butler understood this. In fact, not a standing army, which we were warned about, and the founders tried to prevent in theory, but the American people should have long ago cleaned house.

Related links:

"War Is A Racket" - Digital Book - https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.pdf

"War Is A Racket" - Text - https://archive.org/stream/WarIsARacket/WarIsARacket_djvu.txt

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2014/august/06/bill-clinton-s-body-snatchers-the-truth-about-the-humanitarian-war-on-yugoslavia/


Posted by on No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

BLACKSTONE INTEL REPORT - THE BLEEPING NXIUM CONNECTION - LETTER to JFK on DIMONA - RON PAUL LIBERTY REPORT




Resurrect The Republic LINKS
Tom Lacovara-Stewart / Lorri Anderson

RTR Truth Media - Dtube


Blackstone Intelligence Report -   The Bleeping NXIVM Connection

 Image result for blackstone intelligence rtr truth media

In this presentation, you will be introduced to the major players in the NXIVM sex cult operated by Keith Raniere, A.K.A. "Vanguard", Allison Mack, Nancy Salzman and the Bronfman sisters.  



Related articles to the Blackstone Intel Report - 













--------------------------------------------------------------
USS Liberty Memorial Planned for Visible Site Near Jerusalem - American Free Press




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

Ron Paul Liberty Report on Embassy in Jerusalem and Gaza Violence Blow-back

As President Trump’s daughter and son-in-law were celebrating the US embassy’s move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, dozens of Palestinian protesters were being shot dead in Gaza protesting the move. Supporters of the embassy move say it will bring a new era of peace to the longstanding conflict between Israel and Palestine, but it’s hard to see their rosy predictions coming to pass. In fact, yesterday’s violence seems to be a classic case of blowback from a wrong-headed US foreign policy move.

--------------------------------------------------------------
SPLC CHALLENGED  by CHRISTIAN MINISTRY


American Free Press
Published on Jan 30, 2018

Christian ministry taking a stand against hatemongers The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), one of the legal arms of the cultural Marxist gangsters running rough - shod over this once-great nation’s traditions and institutions, is being called on the carpet. No, not by any governmental agency or regulatory body, but by a conservative, Christian ministry, which is demanding answers as to why the SPLC believes it has the right to classify the Christian charity as a “hate group.”


WARNING the following link is a PROGRESSIVE SOURCE

Other related articles:






Amazon Smile Program states from its site: 
Amazon Smile is a website operated by Amazon with the same products, prices, and shopping features as Amazon.com. The difference is that when you shop on Amazon Smile, the #AmazonSmile Foundation will donate 0.5% of the purchase price of eligible products to the charitable organization of your choice. - so it would appear as an open commercial state and federal gvt. lic. entity, discrimination based on political or religious ideology would not be allowed......

Posted by on No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Monday, December 4, 2017

THOSE WHO CONTROL the MONEY CONTROL the WORLD - END the FED





The Creature from Jekyll Island G. Edward Griffin talked about his book, The Creature from Jekyll Island, which is a history of the creation of the Federal Reserve System. He was interviewed while attending FreedomFest, the libertarian conference held July 11-14, 2012, in Bally’s Las Vegas Hotel and Casino.  To see that video please click -  HERE


 https://www.c-span.org/video/?307278-10/the-creature-jekyll-island 





For a better understanding of fractional reserve banking let us look to the Mises Institute:

Fractional-Reserve Banking and Money Creation

TAGS Money and Banking
06/16/2017
According to traditional economics textbooks, the current monetary system amplifies initial monetary injections of money. The popular story goes as follows: if the central bank injects $1 billion into the economy, and banks have to hold 10% in reserve against their deposits, this will allow the first bank to lend 90% of this $1 billion. The $900 million in turn will end up with the second bank, which will lend 90% of the $900 million. The $810 million will end up with a third bank, which in turn will lend out 90% of $810 million, and so on.
Consequently the initial injection of $1 billion will become $10 billion, i.e., money supply will expand by a multiple of 10. Note that in this example the central bank has actively initiated monetary pumping of $1 billion, which in turn banks have expanded to $10 billion.
But in a world where central banks don't target money supply but rather set targets for the overnight interest rate (e.g. the federal funds rate in the United States and the call rate in Japan) does this continue to make sense? Additionally, in some economies like Australia banks are not even compelled to hold reserves against their deposits. Surely then the entire multiplier model in the economics textbooks must be suspect.
Indeed, economists from the post-Keynesian school of economics (PK) have expressed doubt about the validity of the popular framework.
It is argued that the key source of money expansion is the demand for loans together with the willingness of banks to lend.
The supply of loans, in this way of thinking, is never independent of demand — banks supply loans only because someone is willing to borrow bank money by issuing an IOU to a bank.
Accordingly, the driving force of bank credit expansion and thus money supply expansion is the increase in the demand for loans and neither the money multiplier nor the central bank. Bank lending is not constrained here by reserves that are injected by the central bank, but by the demand for loans.
Is this objection valid?

Fractional-Reserve Banking and Creation of Money

Let us say that an increase in the demand for loans has taken place. How is a bank going to accommodate this increased demand? One way is by borrowing in financial markets or by raising equity funds. Another way of funding this increase is by using part of deposited money.
Note that banks are legally permitted to use some of the money that is placed in demand deposits. Banks treat this type of money as if it were lent to them.
For instance, if John places $100 in demand deposit he doesn't relinquish his claim over the deposited $100. He has an unlimited claim against his $100. This demand deposit should be properly regarded as not different from money in a safe deposit box. Hence, when a bank uses the deposited money as if it were lent to him the bank generates another claim on this deposited money.
Let us say that a bank lends $50 to Mike. By lending Mike $50, the bank creates a deposit for $50 that Mike can now use.
This in turn means that John will continue to have a claim against $100 while Mike will have a claim against $50. This type of lending is what fractional reserve banking is all about. The bank has $100 in cash against claims, or deposits, of $150. The bank therefore holds 66.7% reserves against demand deposits. The bank has created $50 out of "thin air" since the $50 is not supported by any genuine money.
A case could be made, however, that people who place their money in demand deposits do not mind banks using their money. Notwithstanding all this, as long as people trade, there will always be a demand for money, which will be held either in cash or in bank demand deposits.
Consequently, regardless of people's attitudes, once banks use deposited money, an expansion of money that is not backed by ‘real’ money is set in motion.
Although the law allows this type of practice, from an economic point of view it produces a similar outcome to that achieved by the counterfeiter. It results in money out of "thin air" which leads to consumption that is not supported by production i.e. the dilution of the pool of real wealth.
On this Mises wrote,
It is usual to reckon the acceptance of a deposit which can be drawn upon at any time by means of notes or checks as a type of credit transaction and juristically this view is, of course, justified; but economically, the case is not one of a credit transaction ... A depositor of a sum of money who acquires in exchange for it a claim convertible into money at any time which will perform exactly the same service for him as the sum it refers to, has exchanged no present good for a future good. The claim that he has acquired by his deposit is also a present good for him. The depositing of money in no way means that he has renounced immediate disposal over the utility that it commands.1
Similarly, Rothbard argued,
In this sense, a demand deposit, while legally designated as credit, is actually a present good — a warehouse claim to a present good that is similar to a bailment transaction, in which the warehouse pledges to redeem the ticket at any time on demand.2

Why the Existence of a Central Bank Permits Fractional-Reserve Banking

Let us say that for whatever reason banks are experiencing an increase in the demand for loans. Also, let us assume that the supply of loanable funds is unchanged. According to PK, banks will facilitate this increase. The demand-deposit accounts of the new borrowers will now increase.
Obviously the new deposits are likely to be employed in various transactions. After some time elapses, banks will be required to clear their checks and this is where problems might occur.
Some banks will find that to clear checks they are forced either to sell assets or to borrow the money from other banks (remember the pool of loanable funds stays unchanged).
Obviously, all this will put an upward pressure on money market interest rates and in turn on the entire interest-rate structure. To prevent banks bankruptcy the central bank will be forced to pump money e.g. through open market purchases of securities. Once the central bank starts pumping money it in fact gives the green light to the money multiplier process (the creation of credit out of "thin air"). So the conceptual outcome as depicted by the multiplier model remains intact here. The only difference is that banks initiate the lending process, which is then accommodated by the central bank.
If the multiplier process requires the support of the central bank then one can infer that, in a free market without the central bank, the likelihood of such a process emerging is not very high.
In a free market, if a particular bank tries to expand credit without backup from a genuine lender — i.e., by practicing fractional-reserve banking — it runs the risk of not being able to honor its checks, which raises the risk of bankruptcy.
  • 1. Ludwig von Mises 1980, The Theory of Money and Credit. Indianopolis, Ind: Libery Classics( pp300-01).
  • 2.Murray N. Rothbard 1978, Austrian definitions of the supply of money, in New Directions in Austrian Economics p 148.
For more we at RTR highly recommend you go and frequent the site : 
Posted by on No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)