Independent media, news reporting, analysis, opinion, forensic historical research presentations. From a Libertarian to Anarcho-Libertarian Anti-Federalist perspective.
It’s really bad enough this journalist that has been not only censored for “not spreading medical mis/disinformation”, but it is his second fraudulent punitive strike based on a false allegation which is in reality the “actual” disinformation, and in fact defamation as such accusations damage ones credibility. The video, to make matters worse were of an official Texas State government session and state senator arguing a few points that sounded seriously alarming. So to be cautious, the journalist in question uploaded the video to “unlisted” so he and his associates could vet 1st the veracity of the video - was it actually the Texas state Senate, which was yes. Then, was the information contained correct? And if it wasn’t a report would have to be done on that. It was an incomplete production in the middle of the process - not a complete and public video. The purpose of doing it this way is that it can be shared with the team of journalists that comprise this website and channels staff, as well they are not rich and this specific journalist was the victim of a burglary and identity theft and lost all his computers so had only the YouTube account to save content he was working on.
YouTubes claim of “spreading” anything is false, yet the account still remains struck as the news cycle ticks on and as they are prevented from preparing for the next radio show.
All of this after some time ago received a defamatory strike accusing he and the channel of cyber bullying and hate speech, which has foundations in a foreign political ideological belief not shared by the journalist or any of his staff that has its foundations in Marxist ideology, as opposed to the traditional American tenet of freedom of speech with Supreme Court decisions that only limit said speech based on threatening or statements that would be considered to cause alarm which could very likely be construed as causing or having the likely potential to cause severe distress .
The interview was of a man that was currently being sued and therefore being accused himself of such a claim. The man in question was Wolfgang Halbig who has just recently been arrested in possession of the ID of one of the Sandy Hook parents Leonard Pozner, a man he stands accused of harassing. Here is where that turns defamatory toward the journalist in question. The interview conducted with Mr. Halbig has no content of stalking, bullying, hate speech, and in fact was an interview to try and ascertain where the lawsuit stood (it’s current disposition) and other maters unrelated to the Sandy Hook shooting or to any specific individual or claim regarding veracity of officially reported events. In other words YouTube chose to do to this journalist what in a sense they had already convicted Halbig of regardless of the content of the interview. It is the absolute worst form of hypocrisy and should see YouTube rightfully sued. It is one thing to try and tear down long standing American tenets like an individual’s right to free speech, especially hated, despised or maddening speech, as fluffy unicorns and rainbows and honey do not require such protection. And sometimes the most long held beliefs are disproven by a dedicated minority. Sometimes even of one. I can’t help but think of that picture of Hitler giving a speech and the one man in the audience with a scowl on his face and arms crossed in obvious disapproval. Today that man would likely be the target of aYouTubes overbearing defamatory process that quietly harms people in reality, not with mere words but direct and deliberate actions. How long will it be until these people realize that this does nothing for the cause of peace nor does it prevent harm from occurring at all. In fact, it causes feelings of severe anxiety, stress, anger, and righteous indignation and the latter of those emotions can be the most deadly, because there is nothing more dangerous than someone who knows that they have been wrongly accused and damaged and who are only given a joke of a process to remedy the damage.
That journalist I have referred to in this article is myself. And I for one have had ENOUGH!
We at RTR have been as best we can reviewing the following content and reviewing opposing material related to it. We have found the doctor’s assertions are relevant, hold substantive value to public safety and have found no legitimate equally as comprehensive opposing investigation as to the date of publishing this article. It was said this method Dr. Kory suggests was tested and failed. It did not include the requisite additional step.
See here - What Detractors Missed who Attempted to Discredit COVID Treatment
The below video was installed properly and fails to work on majority browsers. Leaving here for tech team to check -
Pierre Kory, M.D., Associate Professor of Medicine at St. Luke's Aurora Medical Center, delivers passionate testimony during the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on "Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution, Part II."
Watch more: Dr. Pierre Kory talks after emotional Senate hearing on COVID-19:
Americans seem all too oblivious, especially those kept by the cult of statism and the two party “left - right paradigm. When in FACT, anyone who has at any point been on one of those two “allegedly” home teams, are simply at this point deluding themselves. It is no secret that I share Conservative values. But I stop short at protecting Donald “Red Flag” Trump who said as serious as a heart attack that he thought that taking the guns first, worrying about due process second.
WHAT?
Then add to that already Constitution Violating, no but wait....
... Constitution MURDERING Political Parasites, yes, I do believe that to be most appropriate !
who tell all of the people who have already been fed mental subversion infection in a serious crap pie
we sure have been served...
If this presentation is indicative of the future we find ourselves in a fusion between the Movie Idiocracy and George Orewell’s 1984
From the Bolsheviks to the NASDAP National Socialists to modern day America a sort of hybrid of the both in the form of Communitarianism. Keeping people confused and their minds controlled the state rolls on. In fact in many cases actually sanctions the normalization of the obscene, the promotion of the vile as choice the same thing they use to call the homicide of the unborn... choice.
May the Almighty give us a chance to
Resurrect the Republic - Moral Natural Law
No Standing Armies but a Navy that can protect the many sovereign independent nation states entered into a Union Compact, not a country. The United States INC. in modern times bears no resemblance to the code of honor or pursuit of freedom. Freedom from the destruction of the spirit of mankind that subverts entire generations.
In a post shared by RTR Truth media contributor Kellie Ann Sonnier we see the collectivist agenda to destroy the nuclear family on behalf of the state exposed #CPS #ChildTrafficking #Collectivism
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt joins Tom Lacovara-Stewart on Resurrect the Republic Radio Show. Charlotte was born in Brooklyn, New York on October 26, 1930. She graduated from Dana Hall Preparatory School in Wellesley, Mass., and Katharine Gibbs Business School in New York City. Iserbyt’s father and grandfather were Yale University graduates and members of The Order of Skull and Bones, a secret society at Yale University. [1][2] She married Jan Iserbyt of Belgium in 1964 (deceased 2009) and has two sons, Robert Lieven Iserbyt (1966) and Samuel Thomson Iserbyt (1968).
Iserbyt is an American freelance writer who served as the Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first term of U.S. President Ronald Reagan. Iserbyt also served as a social worker with the American Red Cross during the Korean War (stationed at SAC airbases on Guam and in Japan), in the U.S. Dept. of State (Middle Eastern and Soviet Union Affairs), and as Admin. Asst. to Ambassadors Philip Crowe, Republic of South Africa (1959) and to Douglas MacArthur II in Belgium (1961-1963). She and her husband, Jan, lived in Grenada, West Indies from 1968-1974 where Jan operated a yacht charter business. Upon returning to the United States in 1974, Iserbyt served as an elected school board member in Camden, Maine 1976-1979. Iserbyt also founded the Maine Conservative Union, an affiliate of the national American Conservative Union, and Guardians of Education for Maine.
The "Club of Rome" the Committee of 300 and the global socialist takeover of the United States and of the world. That is the goal of the Progressive Democrat and Republicans - two wings of the same bird. If you lean toward Conservatism as I do, you will find that 85% of what Republicans do you may agree and support, while the complains are fewer than the positives, what you will find is that the goals of the both that remain the same are more or less obscured by the division created by the opposites in both parties, both of which have been thoroughly infiltrated by these Collectivists. People like Ron Paul were exceptions to this elite standard. Just as an example, Dr. Paul was a true Conservative. No Wars, true equality of opportunity, a sound currency based on gold and silver, the complete respect of natural inherent and unalienable rights. That is why the establishment left and right opposed him so harshly.
The Club of Rome Presented by Michael Black - A highly respectable presentation....
The following are a series of links and much content that supports the content of the videos presented above. Many Collectivists on both the faux right as well as the radical left have denounced much of this under the famously concocted term of "Conspiracy Theory". Allow me to shed some light upon this term with the following presentation -
Find out why the cover-up of U.N. architect's betrayal continues
WASHINGTON – Former U.S. State Department official Alger Hiss was the darling of the Franklin Roosevelt Democrats and the architect of the United Nations.
That he was also a Soviet spy remains one of the most well-guarded secrets of the 20th century.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/finally-the-truth-about-soviet-spy-alger-hiss/#L78Fkrp6zYPC2goB.99
But a new book, “Alger Hiss: Why He Chose Treason,” shatters the veil of secrecy so well maintained by “progressives” in the Democratic Party and a complicit media establishment.
It all began unraveling in 1948, when Hiss was accused of being a Soviet spy. Because the statute of limitations on espionage had run out, he was convicted only of perjury. Decades later – after the Hiss trial had been long forgotten by most – archival evidence surfaced confirming the accusations: a public servant with access to classified documents had indeed passed crucial information to the Soviets for more than a decade.
Yet many on the American Left still consider Hiss an iconic figure – an innocent victim accused of unsubstantiated crimes. They prefer to focus on the collectivist ideals Hiss stood for, rather than confront the reality of a man who systematically and methodically betrayed his country.
Founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist, Aurelio Peccei, the Club of Rome is a global think tank that deals with a variety of international political issues. Originally, the Club of Rome had defined the three major concepts that have formed the Club’s thinking ever since: a global perspective, the long term, and the cluster of intertwined problems they called “the problematique”.
Some would say they specialize in “crisis creation,” using the Hegelian Dialectic to accomplish their goals.
According to its website, the Club of Rome is composed of “scientists, economists, businessmen, international high civil servants, heads of state and former heads of state from all five continents who are convinced that the future of humankind is not determined once and for all and that each human being can contribute to the improvement of our societies.”
The Club of Rome is perhaps at the apex of the New World Order pyramid, a Neo-Malthusian organization with interlocking membership with European power elite groups such as the Committee of 300 (a secret society founded by the British aristocracy in 1727) and the Bilderberg Group.
Thomas Robert Malthus argued that population was held within resource limits by two types of checks: positive ones, which raised the death rate, and preventative ones, which lowered the birth rate. The positive checks included hunger, disease and war; the preventative checks, abortion, birth control, prostitution, homosexuality, postponement of marriage, and celibacy.
The Club of Rome’s members, including Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and Mikhail Gorbachev, believe humanity requires “a common motivation, namely a common adversary” in order to realize their world government.
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” – Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, 1991
World Depopulation
To facilitate the management of the New World Order agenda calls for the elimination of most of the worlds population through war, disease, abortion and famine. According to the Club of Rome’s publications, the common enemy of humanity is man. One of the major goals of the Club of Rome is to reduce the world’s population by 2 billion people through war, famine, disease and any other means necessary.
This video highlights the connection between the environmental movement and those who are striving to bring about a new system of control to the world.
Not only did the Club of Rome’s 1972 report, “Limits to Growth” call for a reduced level of consumption of resources, it also argued that humankind needs to re-evaluate its exploitative attitude towards humans and the earth itself. The failure to give more foreign aid is indicative of the increased selfishness of rich countries. Meanwhile, the world’s richest 20 per cent of the population consume 86 per cent of its goods and services, over half its energy and nearly half its meat and fish.
In the Club of Rome book, The First Global Revolution, the group called for a “limit to growth” approach to solve the world’s problems, in fact a problem the global elite has with humanity. “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill,” the book states. “All these dangers are caused by human intervention,” and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or… one invented for the purpose.” In the process of struggling against this implacable enemy, democracy “will be made to seem responsible for the lagging economy, the scarcity and uncertainties. The very concept of democracy could then be brought into question and allow for the seizure of power.”
One World Government
Richard Haass, the current president of the Council on Foreign Relations, expanded on this topic in his article, State sovereignty must be altered in globalized era. According to Haass, a system of world government must be created and sovereignty eliminated in order to fight global warming and terrorism, both invented as the Club of Rome suggested. “Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change,” writes Haass. “The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalization, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.”
In 1976, the United States Association of the Club of Rome (USACOR) was formed for the purpose of gradually shutting down the U.S. economy.
Since then, working in concert with their international counterparts, they have been pushing the junk science of climate change, fueled a global financial crisis triggered by the mortgage crisis in America resulting in $Trillions being transferred to globalist banks from countries around the world on the brink of default, and enciting revolutions throughout the Middle East that are spreading to the Western world. Our global rulers are systematically taking down the global economy in order to impose what Haass describes as “an international system of either world government or anarchy.”
The Club of Rome, headed by Maurice Strong, is THE group that takes the issue of global warming (whether real or imagined) as an excuse to institute a one world government, or new world order. Glenn Beck and guest discuss this in preparation for upcoming guest Lord Christopher Monckton.
Led by Progressives in the U.S. Congress, they have been able to pass a cap-and-trade system that will result in the largest transfer of wealth in U.S. history with relatively little opposition. In recent years, with the help of the corporate media, they have cranked up the propaganda about climate change and will eventually impose punitive carbon taxes on the American people, a scheme that may eventually lead to the near complete reversal of hundreds of years of technological progress and man’s return to the stone age.
“Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” — Barack Obama, January 17, 2008, San Francisco Chronicle
The Committee of 300
“There is no need to use ‘they’ or ‘the enemy’ except as shorthand. We know who ‘they,’ the enemy, is. The Committee of 300 with its Eastern Liberal Establishment ‘aristocracy,’ its banks, insurance companies, giant corporations, foundations, communications networks, presided over by a hierarchy of conspirators – this is the enemy.” – John Coleman, “Conspirators Hierarchy”
This Committee of 300 is modeled after the British East India Company’s Council of 300, founded by the British aristocracy in 1727. Most of its immense wealth arose out of the opium trade with China. This group is responsible for the phony drug wars here in the U.S. with the agenda of getting us to give away our constitutional rights. Asset forfeiture is a prime example, where huge assets can be seized without trial and no proof of guilt needed.
“Three hundred men, all of whom know one another, direct the economic destiny of Europe and choose their successors from among themselves.” -Walter Rathenau of General Electric, 1909
Some notable members of the Committee of 300 include: The British royal family, Dutch royal family, House of Hapsburg, House of Orange, Duke of Alba, Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh, Lord Carrington, Lord Halifax, Lord Alfred Milner, John Jacob and Waldorf of the Astor Illuminati bloodline, Winston Churchill, Cecil Rhodes, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Juliana, Queen Beatrix, Queen Magreta, King Haakon of Norway, Colonel Mandel House, Aldous Huxley, John Forbes, Averill Harriman, William and McGeorge Bundy, George Bush, Prescott Bush, Henry Kissinger, J.P. Morgan, Maurice Strong, David Rockefeller, David and Evelyn Rothschild, Paul, Max and Felix Warburg, Ormsby and Al Gore, Bertrand Russell, Sir Earnest and Harry of the Oppenheimer Illuminati bloodline, Warren Buffet, Giuseppe Mazzini, Sir William Hesse, George Schultz, H.G. Wells, and Ted Turner.
The Committee of 300 looks to social convulsions on a global scale, followed by depressions, as a softening-up technique for bigger things to come, as its principal method of creating masses of people all over the world who will become its “welfare” recipients of the future.
Global Warming was just one issue The Club of Rome (TCOR) targeted in its campaign to reduce world population. In 1993 the Club’s co-founder, Alexander King with Bertrand Schneider wrote The First Global Revolution stating,
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
Lenin restructured Russian society by starving millions of Kulaks. It would seem that the Club of Rome wish to achieve something similar using phony Global Warming scare. Wasting vast sums of money trying to cure a non existent problem to impoverish current human society. From the utter destruction to establish a super socialist society.
They believe all these problems are created by humans but exacerbated by a growing population using technology. “Changed attitudes and behavior”basically means what it has meant from the time Thomas Malthus raised the idea the world was overpopulated. He believed charity and laws to help the poor were a major cause of the problem and it was necessary to reduce population through rules and regulations. TCOR ideas all ended up in the political activities of the Rio 1992 conference organized by Maurice Strong (a TCOR member) under the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
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
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 :
Founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist, Aurelio Peccei, the Club of Rome is a global think tank that deals with a variety of international political issues. Originally, the Club of Rome had defined the three major concepts that have formed the Club’s thinking ever since: a global perspective, the long term, and the cluster of intertwined problems they called “the problematique”.
Thomas Robert Malthus
In the Club of Rome book, The First Global Revolution, the group called for a “limit to growth” approach to solve the world’s problems, in fact a problem the global elite has with humanity. “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill,” the book states. “All these dangers are caused by human intervention,” and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”![413Ai6gFA0L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_[1]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_u18fEJCILun8smKW5a-2xdh5wJxxor13UfnBQLolkmEnrsP9qrsWk7HGoGyJkC0URCoBjVHMcSLogcEVKr5y8zsG6nMEC0XB0k3e7ZEqI51cuckO907U7BF4JTKl6qIvkLoMMzfukhmZ3SPELMDoQCewbrsm4vW-Wf2UfZZeHZmg=s0-d)
| 
| 
| 
| 
