Palash Twitter: Fwd: [bangla-vision] who is anti-usury? Beware the phony monetary reformers who seem to be but are not. Fw: Includes Verne Warwick's book "Clear Money" [1 Attachment]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:08 AM
Subject: [bangla-vision] who is anti-usury? Beware the phony monetary reformers who seem to be but are not. Fw: Includes Verne Warwick's book "Clear Money" [1 Attachment]
To:

[Attachment(s) from Dick Eastman included below]

From Dick Eastman

A warning to people about monetary reformers

At the moment of our triumph crashing through the gatekeepers with the Our Money anti-Usury idea -- the enemy has changed his tactic. Now we are flooded with planted agents -- their old spys in the ranks of monetary reformers -- who also work as gatekeepers -- we now see these people jumping in with a number of phony ideas -- just like the no-planes-hit-the-wtc people appeared to discredit the citizen investigators who many times over proved from the evidence that 9-11 was a false-flag operation. I know their tactics well and I see them in play here. Our victory will be robbed from us by Geraldine Perry and Albert Obstad and many others.

I have discovered that, like the Kennedy assassination, the Social Credit movement also has its operatives who defend it against Usury. However I know the true social crediters (Wallace Klinck, Verne Warwick, Eric Encina, Jim Innes and some others -- this is MY list) and I know the monetary reformers outside the social credit sphere (although now merging with it) whom I fully I trust -- first and foremost Anthony Migchels and - with near but not absolute certainty -- Hellen Brown, Richard Richard Cook. Most of the others are of unknown status.

The indicators of a infiltration by the enemy are sudden organization and money for the lesser plans, the plans that seem to miss the main point but make a lot of vague claims about being the solution.

I wish to share a book that has just been sent to me by one of the great monetary reformers of the Kitson-Douglas school -- or maybe it is the Kitson school but Douglas himself pulled his punches in attacking usury -- as when he went before the banking commission and was interviewed by Keynes -- he did not say -- as I have said that the real thing behind the "A + B" problem is usury -- INTEREST IS "B" HAS BEEN MY MESSAGE and now I find that Vern Warwick has beaten me to that discovery by decades (and by seven years in print).

Here is his letter to me -- which I fully endorse. I have read large portions of "Clear Money" (attached) and I can now say that I take my Douglas through Warwick.

Have I betrayed Christ to follow Judas or have I heard the still small voice in the message of true prophet of the Way?

The world is going to be flooded with prophets of monetary reform. Klink and Warwick and young Migchels are going to be buried under the loud and well-oiled machines.

Be discerning.

Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington

From: Verne Warwick

To: Dick Eastman

Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 3:18 PM

Subject: Re: Verne whathappened to "Clear Money" idea -- we need it now

Dick;

Please find attached a copy of the book, "Clear Money" which I wrote in 2003 and have now circulated in many different countries of the world. The book illustrates graphically, mathematically and logically that, once one understands how Money works, ALL taxation is unnecessary!

Unfortunately, through all of the research I have done on Social Credit as espoused by C.H. Douglas and his adherents, not only does his philosophy not decry the insidious imposition of Usury on the creation of Money, ab initio, but he actually sees no problem with it!

His ardent followers (with whom I have been familiar for decades and whose writings I have studied from the beginning of my discovery of "The Money Trick") have assiduously rejected the obvious difficulties associated with this fundamental "flaw" (it is intentional) and attempt to obscure the issue by the sleight of hand of "The A+B Theorem", wherein symptoms of this fundamental flaw are dealt with in an oblique manner such that one's attention is misdirected towards the results of having failed to eliminate the imposition of Usury upon the People's own Credit by those who have contributed nothing more than the mere book-keeping of the myriad transactions conducted by The People!

It is for this reason, and for the stipulation of the "Compensated Price" that I had to part company with much of the philosophy and policies of Social Credit. If you like socialism under the past several presidents of the US and those strictures emanating from the recent regimes in Canada ....you will absolutely love the bureaucracy that is mandatory to administrate "The Compensated Price"!

All that being said, with all of the books, tracts and internet writings I have studied, nowhere do I see others take to the logical conclusion the full understanding of Money such that, not only do We the People earn a Dividend, but also refrain from ever paying another tax...of any kind! Please let someone who espouses "just a little usury" on the creation of Money at its source describe how that could happen under their system!

I am presently working to incorporate the wonderful benefits of Community Currencies (CC) into a format that would not only act as a temporary Solution to our present dilemma, but also towards an integration into a truly "national" currency", and inserting this addendum into the book that I have attached for you. In that 2003 book, "Clear Money", I traced the Problem to its source and offered The Solution, based upon only describing how a National Currency could work. I have since realized in working with, or studying the writings of, the likes of Margrit Kennedy (of Germany); Thomas Greco (of Arizona, and recently, the world, having been prolific in his writings on Money and especially CC's); Heloisa Primavera (of Argentina, at whose universities I spoke in 2004 on the UMS and its Solution); and others who are practitioners of the CC; that the CC can be realized as a full Solution to our woes, and not just a temporary fix.

Thank you for asking for the update herein. I hope it helps in furthering an understanding of where we need to go when we are required to be "The Phoenix" from a destroyed civilization....coming soon to a theatre near you!
Fond Regards
Verne Warwick

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com> wrote:

Verne,

Can you send me anything -- article or link -- explaining the UMS and your analysis that yields a market system where taxes are not necessary to support government and the services it properly should supply.

I ran across this letter which I remembered -- but then nothing came of it.

Are you ready for another go at getting this idea before the public?

----- Original Message -----

From: Verne Warwick

To: Dick Eastman

Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 2:42 PM

Subject: Re: Dick Eastman: "Kimosabe"

Dick;

With all due respect, my experience in posting directly to "groups" has not been positive.

Especially at present, I am pressed for time daily, and cannot take periods for rebuttal and chat beyond that to which I am presently committed. (In addition to performing research on two books in the hopper, I am working on a screenplay with a movie producer that will delineate that which I wrote in 2003 in my book "Clear Money", showing mathematically, graphically and logically that all taxation is unnecessary. The present UMS [Usury monetary System] is at the root of over 95% of our problems: therein I define The Problem, taking the reader to logical conclusions as to what has to be The Solution) .Additionally, I am dealing with over 100+ emails per day. (I am sure that you are in no different "straits" from me!

Only if acceptable to you, I'd appreciate sending (anonymously, unless otherwise noted) any worthy posts to you, answering any questions about my own writings from readers who are truly searching for clarification on the issues raised.

Please let me know if this is suitable. Again, I do not want that to sound "elitist" or exclusionary, but I do not, at this point, want to repeat the frustrating multiple communications which were less than productive for me/us in the past.

Looking forward to more of your postings and to perhaps meeting you in the not too distant future (We are not that far apart: you are in Yakima, and we are 5 minutes north of the Idaho border in SE-BC).

Regards to you, Dick;

Verne

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com> wrote:

Verne,

I would be honored if you would subscribe to my yahoogroup frameup -- posting your output there.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/frameup/

frameup-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

In a hurry. Have to rake leaves before it gets dark.

In friendship,

Dick Eastman

----- Original Message -----

From: Verne Warwick

To: Dick Eastman

Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 4:03 PM

Subject: Re: Dick Eastman: "Kimosabe"

Thank you, Dick. You are now on the list.

I, too, look forward to getting anything from you of which you feel has value....obviously including your own writing.

Best regards

Verne

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com> wrote:

Dear Verne,

I would very much like to receive your articles on Canadian and US politics.

Glad we are on the same team.

In friendship,

Dick Eastman

----- Original Message -----

From: Verne Warwick

To: Dick Eastman

Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:29 PM

Subject: Re: Dick Eastman: "Kimosabe"

Thank you for this, Dick.

I have read many of your essays and appreciate your efforts to awaken our people.

I am doing something similar and probably have a smaller list than those to whom you write.

However, just as I welcome info from different sources around the world on a daily basis, I am wondering if you would like to receive the occasional post that I send to people in Canada, the US and the world?

Looking forward to hearing from you, one way or the other, I send

Best Regards

Verne Warwick

On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Dick Eastman <oldickeastman@q.com> wrote:

Progressive Nationalist Populist Brotherhood of American Citizen Peacemakers of All Races and Creeds -- This is our Common Ground!!!

What follows is not the message I intended to send you when I prepared this page to carry it on Tuesday. I had been writing notes of what I wanted to tell you over the weekend -- and then -- at my wifes insistence, cleared off all the clutter on my side of the bed -- books and papers -- and then on Friday when I was ready to sit down and write it all up -- I could not find it -- not even in the garbage bin. My mind is old and tired -- I don't remember my insights that come to me, usually in the morning -- I wake up with them -- and if I don't get them down on paper never recur to me. (Apparently I am an optimist only in my dreams -- where I have on occasion talked with the Long Ranger -- inspiring the format for the letter I anticipated writing yesterday afternoon.)

So today you get all cold analysis and some history -- hopefully you can take the info and meet up with Kimosabe and Tonto in your own creative unconcscious. (By the way I have voted absentee ballot for Charles Baldwin for president. He follows closest the Lone Ranger code -- reproduced below. I hope you will not fall for the mutual-scare two-party vote-the-lesser-evil-because-none-of-the-goods-have-a-chance scam system of controlling you.   Nader and Barr are false-opposition frauds -- I know they foolish as to really believe the snake-oil remedies they are recommending.) At any rate, as I write this I hope those good ideas will come back to me.

It's not that someone is out to enslave you. You have already been enslaved.  A syndicate of international financiers and national dictators have already taken over the world and consolidate their power over it. Now having taken over they are in the process of looting everyone. Their power over us is complete to the point where they no longer have to be convincing in their deceptions. They impose their government on us, the charade of a democratic system need no longer be convincing -- no one has the intelligence or power or organization or leadership to do anything about it, all of the components making such resistance possible have been carefully dismantled.

Am I right?

Let me check.

In 2001 I got out the men and motives behind the proven fact that bombs went off in North Tower before the explosion. I showed that a remote-controlled airliner had already been crashed (EgyptAir Flight 990 on Oct 31, 1999 carrying Egypt's top military minds.) In 2002 I pointed to the multiple lines of conclusive evidence that the Pentagon was not struck by American Airlines Flight 77, but that the jetliner people saw approach flew over the crash point just as a bombs and air to ground missiles struck the building killing the Pentagon's accountants and destroying their records. I said multiple conclusive evidence and that is what I mean -- and the so-called counter evidence was all exposed. And the public was not able to hear any of this evidence. The trained teams of opinion managers on the internet, with hecklers and false opposition (i.e., operatives putting our ridiculous theories to put alongside the real evidence solving the crime so that the public, too confused and ignorant and busy in a world gone crazy to sift for the truth would not be able to discriminate truth from falsehood and so would merely be stuck in the suspicion phase without ever coming to a conclusion and a course of action). Your slavery is already complete. Skinner rightly said that a people that would allow itself to have electrodes planted in their brains to control them would not need electrodes in their brains to control them because control would already be total to accomplish fact.

The same is true when I exposed the two-loop economy and how the middle class is pillaged by it.

The same is true when I exposed the fact of militarized clandestine weather modification behind the great weather disasters since the early 1990's. The facts were amply demonstrated, the science, the fact that the specialized systems are in place, the fact that weather warfare has been discussed by Secretary of Defense, that we develop it because others have developed it. The fact that the laying of heat-reflective cloud cover to steer weather systems by altering air pressure in different regions was visible to everyone in the chemtrails that criss-cross the sky. And I exposed it -- yet you did nothing -- except watch as the hecklers and phony theory people once again worked me over.

So, slave, let me tell you another true story. After World War One, which was arranged by the same international banking families to effect the same outcome they are effecting today (which I have written about elsewhere) there were a lot of new technologies to be exploited. The international corporations and the Money Power which mothered them and which had grown even more powerful than they were under J.P. Morgan in the Gilded Age had their corporations open laboratories to exploit all of the new technologies. Before this few corporations had laboratories -- they merely got control of the inventions of an Edison or a Bell after the fact. But now they wanted to develop the World War One technologies so they created laboratories and they funded all of this development, not with bonds, but with issuing new stock (creating a bubble like the housing bubble recently created). Bernard Baruch who led the World War One economy and controlled most of the technology that was developed in the war was involved in this as were Percy Rockefeller and Winston Churchill were, respectively, member and servitor of this syndicate. But the financing plan did not really involve the wealth from the newly exploited technology going to the stock investors who financed the research. Even as Bernard Baruch was telling people that the stock market would continue to climb in the 1920's he and other syndicate financiers was short selling the stocks. I have already explained when interviewed by Jeff Rense on the subject of Baruch (listen to the Feb 21, 2007 broadcast here: http://www.renseradio.com/signup.htm and read the extensive fully referenced with quotations here -- how the doctor, Graysen, that kept Wilson sick and helpless during World War One, met with Baruch every week and that this Doctor introduced Wilson to the lover (and future wife who ran the White House for the invalid President) after Wilson's first wife died in the first week of World War One -- attended by Graysen -- who also was the White House physician and Baruch spy in the previous Taft administration, by the way) -- etc. and that is only a tiny part of the story of Baruch's war profiteering adventures in the 20th century! -- the footnotes provided to Mr. Rense are still available to all here: http://www.rense.com/rewer.htm

But now back to what I was saying. So the corporations funded the "Roaring 20's" exploitation of World War One methods and discoveries through stock financing rather than loans (rather than corporation bonds) -- fostering the stock market bubble so that new issues of stock could command higher and higher prices for the corporations use -- but remember the corporations are really the Money Power syndicate that controls them, that floats them, that arranges monopoly power for them. So the common citizen instead of putting his money in the locally owned single-branch bank where the bank would then lend it out to local entrepreneurs, citizens were instead putting their savings into Baruch's stock market bubble.     The idea was brilliant. Instead of having the corporations incur the debt, the corporations sold equity (stock) but in a speculative bubble, butting the debt on the stock buying public. How? By having the public buy on the margin. The bankers made very easy term call loans to any citizen who wanted to speculate. The loans to buy stock could be called at any time by the Money Power lender. Then in October 1929, Baruch and Rockefeller and the Morgan interests etc. simply called in all of the margin loans, forcing people to sell their stock to pay the loans. (By the way, did you know that the securitized housing loans for houses now foreclosing today were also largely bought on margin? Please stick with this story it is more relevant to our situation today than you could have imagined.)   So in the first of the three "black days" of the 1929 Stock Market Crash, the market, by this deliberate means of margin calls, began to tumble. People were selling in response to the calls but at prices insufficient to repay the loans being called in. The distressed selling mounted. The corporation stock that people had bought over the years in a steadily rising market were not being unloaded for figures closer and closer to nothing. The ticker tape, the world's means of keeping pace with market developments at the time, began to run two hours behind. It was at this point, as the history books tell it, that the Money Syndicate (the investment bankers) chose to "support the market" and buy up stock -- but of course "supporting the market" was not their real intention, as the ticker was behind and as they bought up the socks the citizens selling were still seeing only the ticker tape showing a tumbling market -- the "support of the market" was in fact pure predation -- ownership of all of that new expansion of corporations during those wonderful 1920's was being transferred from the citizen stock holder to the Money Power syndicate. (This is not to say that the Coolidge prosperity wasn't real -- it was real and it was very good -- but the Money Power laid a trap for capturing all of the fruits creativity and industry and hard resourceful labor for themselves by this trick. Coolidge and Mellon (his Secretary of the Treasury) and Irving Fisher -- the economist behind the Harding and Coolidge administrations were innocent off all this Money Power crime -- regardless of what mouthpiece historians like Arthur M. Schlessinger Jr. may have had to say about it.) It is simply that no one in the United States, except Henry Ford perhaps, expected a conspiracy on this scale -- especially since, then as now, the Money Power controlled most of the journals, newspapers and radio that had the eye and ear of the decision making leaders of American communities. And so the debt of the 1920's boom was all put on the small people who had enjoyed that boom and who had used their savings accumulated in that boom to give to the Money Power's corporations in new stock issues, and it all came tumbling down with those margin calls. And the grand theft -- they buying up of the stock by the Money Power syndicate as the well-behind tickers continued to show a falling market was a trick that was repeated on three "black days" -- on each day Percy Rockefeller and Baruch met with other top bankers and then the NY Stock Exchange galleries were closed and the buying up of the assets all of that investment of all those millions of people now selling in distress at lower and lower prices, those citizens selling not realizing that the buyers had re-entered the market. The result of the "operation" was that all of the industrial growth of the 20's that was financed by the little people's stock investments, all those assets -- the tangible ownership of those factories and laboratories and patents etc., were transferred to the money power. And in the process the money in circulation in the economy was greatly diminished (since most of our money is checkbook money created by bank loans -- and when citizens got the margin calls they had to withdraw their savings from their banks) -- the contraction of the money supply meant that less money was now in circulation to pay wages and to buy food and clothing and shelter and Fords and General Electric washing machines.   Demand fell because people had no money to buy and because credit had disappeared from the economy. Less demand meant that prices were lower (in terms of dollars, not "cheapness" because dollars were fewer and harder to get, i.e., deflation) -- but this meant that either wages would have to come down proportionally to meet the fall in prices or else equilibrium would not be restored and some workers would have to be fired. The policy of both Hoover and Roosevelt called for maintaining wages -- a fatal mistake -- because there was no longer enough money in circulation to pay everyone that had been being paid before at the same dollar number wage as before. And if you were a boss faced with insufficient payroll to pay your employees, what would you rather do, give everyone a pay cut and have them all angry with you, or just let a few go whom you would never have to see again. Human nature being what is is, the employers took the fatal latter course -- which prevented the economy from returning to equilibrium.  The famous " "downward rigidity of wages" prevented the real economy from adjusting to the shock created by the great Stock Market Crash contraction of the money supply. But this economic crisis was anticipated and counted upon by the money power. Money elite candidate, backed by Baruch, Franklin Roosevelt ran promising balanced budgets and redistribution of wealth back tot he people -- all a lie of course. When Roosevelt took office in 1932 he filled his party with Baruch men, many of these Communists. The New Deal was nothing but a return,imperfectly accomplished, of the Baruch-run economy of World War One -- a peacetime war economy with regimentation and direction by government for the big corporations. Gold was confiscated from the people and thousands of small local banks were closed throughout the country. Monopoly came to the fore. Businesses could not stay in operation without the nod of the government. And all of this time the Federal Reserve did not re-inflate the money supply in the way that it could have -- buy reducing the reserve requirement on condition that business loans be made by the new capital. And so we had a depression even while factories were idle and a vast capable people who were willing to work were in enforced idleness. We had hunger as milk was dumped into rivers and cattle slain and buried. This was not over population. This was not the depletion of natural resources. This was not the "limits of growth" or any of those other fraudulent excuses. It was not "over production" -- which is what the whore economists working for Rockefeller called it -- the people were starving and they could not work because the factories were idle -- how could that be anything but "under production?" And of course the greatest whore of them all, John Maynard Keynes, who mysteriously became very rich in 1929, and who let a committee headed by an appointee of the Money Power write his book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money -- corrupted sometime after writing his very good and praiseworthy books The Economic Consequences of the Peace and The Economic Consequences of Mr. Churchill. Keynes by 1930 was bought off -- and the fact that he was a homosexual paedophile was almost certainly a factor in his corruption as an economist (ask any U.S. Congressman or Senator how that works and he will tell you, provided you have his confidence.) The remedy of Keynes for the contraction of credit, was for government to do a lot of buying from corporations just as in wartime -- and also pay a lot of writers and singers to praise the "deal" Baruch and Roosevelt were giving the people -- rather than giving the people money to buy their way out of the depression and with "good inflation" bring prices up since wages would not go down -- so that people would be employed again (even as those employed at too high a wage suffered the effects of the purchasing power reduction that was necessary to restore the economy to equilibrium) -- rather than doing that -- Roosevelt and the Fed kept the money supply tight -- kept the deflation going.   OF course more money in the hands of corporations (which is how the Fed operates with its open market operations on the loanable funds market at the NY Fed Reserve Bank) would not result in new investment and new hiring -- the problem was lack of Demand, lack of purchasing power in the hand of consumers. What was needed was Social Credit -- interest free money in the hands of the people so that they could buy from each other what everyone could and wanted to produce -- but could not because of the the constraints put on the economy by the Money Power syndicate. Rather than having investment bankers set up a slave plantation where corporations do what financiers tell them -- social credit would have put money in the hands of the people -- and so would have Huey Long's "Share Our Wealth" program which would have taxed the wealth of Baruch and the Money Power Americans to "give back some of that food they have taken so much of from the banquet table that the good Lord had provided for the American people to enjoy" -- and he was right which is why Weise shot Sen. Long before he could run against Roosevelt in 1936. And so we have Keynesianism, where government must do the spending, rather than the people, to get out of "low employment" and a "liquidity trap" (dried up credit) -- and of course, whenever the economy is booming the Keynesian solution is to increase taxes so that wages do not rise causing "demand-pull inflation" -- and why does the money power care about whether there is inflation or not? Simply because they are the creditor class. They own all the bonds -- they own all the debt -- did you know, btw, that the so called 'money market' is really the debt market. At any rate, creditors want deflation because it means that debtors must pay them with dollars that buy more than the dollars they lent the borrower in the first place. When money is owned to you and is coming in along with the compound interest, you want the purchasing power of the dollar to go up and up (i.e., more and more deflation).

I should add here -- scanning over this completed letter: That Roosevelt always had the emergency power to by-pass the Fed and issue Treasury money interest free and give it to people -- but he never used it. Instead the Money Power propaganda machine made war on Huey Long (ridiculed him in the whore newsreels and newspapers and radio) and gave the silent treatment to C. H. Douglas and his Social Credit solutions -- both of which we so desperately need now in 2008. (end of insertion)

The only time the Money Power wants inflation is when the public has savings that the banks want to confiscate -- in this case we have a bubble in the money market -- the Fed inflates the money supply, as token Fed Chairman Miller did betweens Arthur Burns and Paul Volker in the late 1970's -- robbing America of its savings and forcing the restructuring of the financial system to force the S & L crisis and the the massive transfer of wealth to the money power that followed from it -- under Treasury Secretary Donald Regan etc. Only when the wealth was transferred did Paul Volker jump in and immediately return to money contraction to maximize the wealth of bond holders, now that the assets were captured and the re-regulation of the financial system effected.

Well, the great housing bubble was built on margin buying of securitized mortgages -- with the new variation made possible by the derivatives market, which allows the same margin call scam as in 1929 but with greater amplification (leverage) and precision for the Money Power.

And yes, the entire US ruling class is invested in funds (Morgan Stanely, Goldman Sachs Group, Schwab that are hitched to the success of the great Kleptastrophe transfer of asset wealth. The result of the housing bubble is to capture all of the houses that Americans used to own and convert them into rental properties. With our housing being the last great pocket of citizen wealth to be plundered -- medical system is still fully under the monopoly control of the Money Power -- and ownership of the homes going to the Money Power, since the securitized mortgages have been sold in distress to them at dirt cheap prices and the government forcing the tax-payer to pay for it (Americans no longer having savings that they may be suckered into speculating with).

Ignore the big gains of the stock market -- once the citizens sold their stock, it matters not what the Money Power Syndicate members do selling back and for to each other. Those stock prices are going up -- but not going up on the people who owned the stock when it went down. (Can you guess why the "mainstream" economists and "mainstream" financial journalists never mention this fact?)

I once prepared a course in US economic history when I was teaching economics at Heritage College in Washington State (there were not enough students to make the class however -- and while doing so I ran across the following quote written during the depression of 1837 -- when the Rothschilds took vengeance upon this  country after populist President Andrew Jackson left office -- Jackson had busted the central bank of the day, the Bank of the United States, located in Philadelphia (where I was born) and headed by Rothschild agent Francis Biddle -- leading to a era of prosperity that was abruptly ended when meek and non-threatening van Burean replaced Jackson as President. The depression was created by loan calls and the deliberate withholding of credit.

Read the following from 171 years ago -- and see exactly what we face today -- exactly what the country faced in 1857 (the depression which was the real motivating cause behind the succession of the Southern States in the American Civil War) and the many other depressions (involving Morgan and Baruch and, today, the gang from Goldman Sachs) since then.

The speech excerpted below was delivered by Leonard Bacon on May 21, 1837 in New Haven, Connecticut. See how much of it applies to today:

"A few months ago, the unparalleled prosperity of our country was the theme of universal gratulation. Such a development of resources, so rapid an augmentation of individual and public wealth, so great a manifestation of the spirit of enterprise, so strong and seemingly rational a confidence in the prospect of unlimited success, were never known before. But how suddenly has all this prosperity been arrested! That confidence, which in modern times, and especially in our own country, is the basis of commercial intercourse, is falling in every quarter; and all the financial interests of the country seem to be convulsed and disorganized. The merchant, whose business is spread out over a wide extent of territory, and who, regarding all his transactions as conducted on safe principles, feared no embarrassment, finds his paper evidences of debt, and acceptances and promises which he has received in exchange for his goods, losing their value; and his ability to meet his engagements is at an and ... and loss succeeds to loss, til he shuts up his manufactory and dismisses his laborers. The speculator who dreamed himself rich, find his fancied riches disappearing like an exhalation.

   "Already, in many a huge fabric that but a few days since resounded with the roar of enginery, all is silent as in a deserted city. Already many a great work of public improvment, upon which multitudes were toiling to bring it ot the speediest completion, that commerce might ruse upon its iron track with wings of fire, is broken off, and stands unfinished, like the work of some great conqueror struck down amidst his victories. Already want, like an armed man, stands at the threshold of many a dwelling, where a few days ago, daily industry brought the supply of daily comforts.

   "What more may be before us in the progress of God's judgments -- what tumults -- what convulsions -- what bloody revolutions -- we need not now imagine. It is enough to know that this distress is hourly becoming wider and more intense; and that no political or financial foresight can as yet discover the end.

"Amid these present calamities, and these portentions omens of the future, it is not strange that many minds are seeking, and all voices are debating, the cause and the remedy."

In 2008 the world is suffering from the Great Kleptastrophe, one of a long line of Kleptastrophes. There are winners. Real wealth that people have lost has been transferred to these winners, thanks to the boys from Goldman Sachs, the masterminds of the Kleptastrophe The Kleptastrophe is part of an ongoing policy of the International Money syndicate (remember, the money market under monopoly credit is the debt market) for controlling the trade and industry of the world and the token systems which control everyone's behavior in a world where no one and no national economy is any longer self-sufficient and all linkages among nations are in the Money Power's hands. The Kleptastrophe has been a self-provided blessing for every usurer and money lender in the world. Credit which we need to make industry industry provide for us is being deliberately kept scarce. And the stupid remedies of Bob Barr and Ron Paul for a gold standard are exactly what the creditors and usurers want most -- that Americans should be forced pay back in gold what was costless to lend to them in the first place. They would love that purchasing power (the goods and labor that the dollar will buy -- keeping real wages low, in other words) of each dollar owed to them be maximized, that people have to work longer for each dollar they have to pay to a creditor in fixed amounts at compound interest each month.

We don't need gold. We don't even need new dollars to be printed. All that is needed is Social Credit for interest free injections of purchasing (and debt paying) power to households and small entrepreneurs. But that is not allowed. As in the 1930's and the 1830's gold as legal tender (dollars were redeemable in gold and also constrained by the amount of gold the gold holders would permit in the system) limited the purchasing power of the public, placing boundaries on our standard of living that had nothing to do with our capacity to produce, our natural resources, our ingenuity, our transportation and industrial means, but had everythying to do with monopoly of credit -- as I was saying, in the 1930's and 1830's gold was the constraining legal tender -- today it is the dollar reserves in the banks against which loans are made. And the Federal Reserve could have expanded credit at any time to head off the Kleptastrophe if that was their intention -- and we can NEVER ascribe ignorance of the relevant economics to the Money Power, the effects they get are the effects they have hired people to effect! All the Fed had to do was reduce the reserve requirement that banks must hold for each dollar they loan out -- so they could extend their loans outstanding or make new loans (at no interest cost, since the freed reserves are already in their possession -- the loans would be costless to them -- the stimulation that would have save the economy -- if saving the economy had been the plan.

But Americans were starved of purchasing power and forced, with great help from high pressuring selling, to get second and third mortgages on their homes or to refinance throwing all of their debt into their home loans in order to stay afloat a little longer, not knowing how they could ever dig out of the debt -- vaguely hoping that their individual "luck" would improve and they would get a higher paying job etc. --which of course is impossible for everyone to do in a credit (and purchasing power) starved economy.

Yes, as Oswald Stoll (his book The People's Credit) and Arthur Kitson (books A Scientific Solution to the Money Question, 1894, and The Fraudulent Standard (1917) pointed out in the 19th century and C. H. Douglas (Social Credit and a dozen others) and Frederick Soddy (book: Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt, which was dedicated to Kitson) in the 20th and Richard C. Cook in the 21st (read his book  We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform which I understand came out last week) all have argued -- information of extreme importance to EVERY member of the every American community -- when credit is monopolized American businesses and families are forced out of their factories and out of their houses because the checkbook money that could sustain them is no longer in circulation. Yes, the government -- that is Congress, the President and the Supreme Court -- could allow for national social credit to prevent this, but they do not. The governments bailouts are not for the distressed producer/householder but for the financiers who are buying up all of the foreclosed properties and distress sale assets. And those bailouts are not from social credit -- the national credit -- but from government loans from the very bankers who created the Kleptastrophe and are receiving the bail money in ways described in this earlier letter http://groups.yahoo.com/group/frameup/message/29495 to the frameup yahoogroup. (The article and others about the Kleptastrophe can be read at on rense -- use his search engine to find articles by "Dick Eastman"  at www.rense.com  . )

Today credit is limited and bankers are not extending credit because they know the American people have been rendered insolvent by deliberate purchasing power starvation by the Fed. (The new money being pumped by the Fed is going to the top loop people to finance their purchase of bargains resulting from our distress selling. It is not going to bail us out. I have mentioned that the money Treasury had given to banks to buy foreclosed assets is enough to build 1000 World Trade Center towers -- but none of it is going to building anything -- the rich don't want a lot of new houses -- new houses is new supply in the house rental market and they lose money -- they want to buy up existing houses and rent them and keep the supply short and, therefore, the rent high.

All this is going on and yet the bankers and the Goldman Sachs men at Treasury and the Fed act as if they are doing us a favor for which we should be grateful and respectful -- and of course that is how the hirelings on the media portray it. But whose credit is it that the bankers are withholding from us, ours or theirs. Who puts securities or houses up as collateral for these loans? Who produced the assets that are collateralized, the borrower or the lender? What did it cost the bank to take our mortgaged house or bonds in order to "secure the loan" the creditors extend -- and if it is "secured" where is the risk they took? The risk is all taken by the borrower. The financial sector isn't losing anything, it is merely converting paper assets, your mortgage, into real ones, i.e, your former house. They did not part with one cent of their own assets to make this loan. And they -- their club of the Money Power -- had the means of turning off your ability to meet debt obligations that seemed reasonable at the time you took the loan -- before they raised fuel prices purely through their monopoly power. (Prices down temporarily for duration of the election season, as I am sure you already suspect.) When the bank made your mortgage loan the bank's (or whatever lending institution it was) their assets actually increased. They got the foreclosure rights on your house and they got your IOU for which you pay interest. They lost nothing and gained your house and -- through the new tighter bankruptcy laws -- your continued debt slavery after you have been dispossessed.

Yet as I said -- as Kitson, Douglas and Cook have said -- the people's credit has been sequestered by the Money Power and they are using it to enslave us and it is not necessary that this be happening. We do not have to allow national credit to continue in the hands of the privately owned companies who are able to tax the communities of this nation to any degree they choose (for all loss through money manipulation of this kind is a tax imposed by the private Money Power on the people -- as well as the incidence of the tax imposed by the government to pay the interest and principal on these vast bailouts etc. And so we have all the means in this country to provide for ourselves (although now most of our resources are owned by foreigners as a result of the Kleptastrophe --the government lands, for example, are collateral on the national debt as is the taxed paycheck of our children and our children's children and their children as long as your posterity may be lucky (unlucky) enough to survive.

The business of the world is carried on by means of loans, loans that float corporations, loans that expand industry, loans to governments for infrastructure and loans to buy political power. Loans and credit are co-extensive -- when you have a loan the bank takes your house or company or securities and gives you a checking account against the bank which you can start distributing as you buy and hire and those receiving those checks will deposit those checks in banks who will then count those deposits as new reserves on which, in our fractional reserve banking system, will create new deposits by making new loans to a fraction of the new deposit they have received. And just as deposits of fresh credit led to multiplication of industry, opportunity and plenty, now the revers happens. And those new loans will then be spent and the sellers will take those checks and deposit them in their banks allowing still more new loans.

The economy then grows by leaps and bounds -- prices go up, yes, but wages go up too and enough so that purchasing power of the citizen is actually increased as his services are bid up in a "sellers market for labor" -- what the Money Power hates the most of course. And so, with their leveraged position in international markets and their control of credit, the Fed, Congress and the media they arrange Kleptastrophes.

When loans -- especially by sudden margin calls -- the process of expansion is reversed -- each called in loan means that people will not be able to meet obligations and their banks will call in their loans -- the real interest rate for American citizens, American production is further destroyed, more jobs are lost,   is raised (not the rate set by the Fed which is the rate at which banks borrow from the Fed) until we have a situation like you are seeing around you today. All unnecessarily. And of course the prosperity the candidates are promising, "after a lot of suffering," is really impossible -- impossible that is, as long as we continue to stand for it. The Fed and its monetary policy are merely a break upon the people who are in competition the the Money Power's international corporations.

Interest is the monopoly charge on national credit -- us being charged by banks for making loans on collateral that we ourselves own -- it is usury payment to on privileged class, the Money Power interests.  Interest is the price of legally created scarcity purely financial in nature. The Austrian Economists are wrong who say that interest is the effect of present goods being worth more than future goods. Alfred Marshall was wrong when he said interest is the "reward of abstinence." The government can make loans right now -- make them a permanent steam of payments -- without financing them with taxes or with borrowing from the Rothschilds. It would not be inflationary, because the nation has so much idle capacity, so many gifted unemployed (I have not had a job since I was fired as a Blockbuster clerk after eleven years -- since I taught economics only part time as adjunct faculty -- and I know other people are capable of producing more value from society than society is willing to pay -- even though that value would be such a boon. But the merchant bankers, the Money Power, are the predators of the world -- they have been causing poverty and death all around the world for centuries -- why should they treat Americans, who are not of their tribe or creed or class, any differently? To them their is their gain from us -- the plunder is the reward of free trade and free competition -- and any attempt to take back any of that ill-gotten gain is a violation of sacred property rights written expressly to protect the privileges and vested interests of these Money Pirates in holding on to their booty. No one notices that the market system is supposed to be based on competition, not monopoly of credit, capital and land. No one notices that the consumer, the household is supposed to direct production through consumer demand (which social credit -- purchasing power going directly to the household, to families and domestic businesses -- would permit) so that demand can call forth American supply. But instead the money power drains our blood and takes our savings and wealth and invests it in the industrialization of China because the Dictatorship of China is allied with the money power and sells the labor of its population as any corporation would sell the services of its machines. They burden our trade and limit our output of wealth making us paupers when we could be, as Huey Long promised, "Every Man a King."

Do we really want the Goldman Sachs pirates determining whether this country shall be solvent or insolvent?

As economist Walter Bagehot wrote in his book Lombard Street, as quoted by Kitson in The Fraudulent Standard:

"All our credit system depends upon the Bank of England for its security. On the wisdom of the directors of that Joint Stock company it depends whether England shall be solvent or insolvent. This may seem too strong, but it is not. All banks depend on the Bank of England, and all merchants depend on some banker!"

On this Aruthur Kitson commented:

"It speaks volumes for the honesty of British bankers as a class (compared to those of other nations) that they have, generally speaking, so moderately used the enormous powers which privileged legislation has placed in their hands. But it must be remembered that they are members of a larger circle of cosmopolitan financiers who operate in all countries and are not troubled by the scruples of most of our British bankers. And who is to ensure a continuance of this policy of moderation? And what is to prevent our bank shares from falling entirely into the possession of a syndicate of unscrupulous cosmopolitan financiers ... Bank shares are purchasable with money. Imagine the results, if the bulk of these shares fell under the control of some foreign syndicate, whose policy might be to destroy British commerce!"

"So why the Lone Ranger, Dick?" Because, even Arthur Kitson gave too much credit to "our British bankers" in not realizing that the "cosmopolitan finaniciers" had already captured Britain and had already captured the United States -- remember what the Civil War was really about, what the election of Wilson was really about. I draw on the Lone Ranger, because that is the only model of the mental approach we must take to this kind of crime against us all. As you can learn from the wikipaedia article on him:

"The Lone Ranger never shoots to kill, but rather only to disarm his opponent as painlessly as possible. (We have to get out of this mess with the least death and pain possible.] The Lone Ranger never wins against hopeless odds. [We need to have realistic expectations of how we are going to overthrow the Goldman Sachs gang.] Even though The Lone Ranger offers his aid to individuals or small groups, the ultimate objective of his story is to imply that their benefit is only a by-product of a greater achievement -- the development of the West or our Country. His adversaries are usually groups whose power is such that large areas are at stake. [This is the big one.] The Lone Ranger does not drink or smoke. [And we have to get free of the corrupting and degrading vices that this alcohol, cocaine, pornography and violence-and-domination glorifying society has imposed on us.]

The Money Power bankers and the Chinese (whose leaders were put in power by the bankers -- Rockefeller, Kissinger, Zhou Enlai and Deng) after allowing us to live on credit they extended as we exported all of our industrial capital to China -- now are withholding that credit so that we all crash and, most fatally, fail in having the means to feed, warm and otherwise provide for ourselves. (See the last part of the letter from 1837, above, for a better statement of our present position.) They are waging assymetrical economic warfare against us. War led in the battlefield by saboteurs of the Goldman Sachs gang. Neither economics nor political science as taught in our schools and universities has equipped us to be able to cope with this model. Good men are forced to fall back on the Lone Ranger model of their childhood -- we at least that is what I find it best to fall back on.

[Not quite a digression: I've already sent my five box tops and one dollar for the the code ring. I hope you will send in for yours so you can send this message to good scouts you may know. (And do it before Johnny Depp destroys the Lone Ranger image forever. I remember when the lawyers forced Clayton Moore to take off his mask and stop making appearances as The Long Ranger -- so they could make their movie showing the Lone Ranger to be a fool and Tonto the politically correct native American who taught him how to shoot and ride and use silver bullets, when, in fact, Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels gave us the the best role-model representation of close and equal friendship between ever portrayed in American television or cinima. Leave it to present day Judeo-pornographic culture to try to impose a homosexual angle on the Lone Ranger. Perhaps after reading this you will understand why they do that. See the Long Ranger code, below. It doesn't matter who owns the rights to the Lone Ranger now -- I honor and owe my debt to the men who created and embodied the concept -- back when the real and populist Walt Disney was still alive.]

Do you think the Congressman you will be voting for understands that? Could a Congressman ever understand and say and act on that analysis and remain a Congressman very long? Or a President? (I am not expecting Chuck Baldwin to institute social credit -- but at least he is on our side and lives up to the Lone Ranger code (below).

One more thing -- compare the message of this old Depression song from 1931 with the message of leonard Bacon from 1837 given above. Aren't we all feeling like that today in 2008?

Brother, Can You Spare A Dime? (1931)

by Yip Harburg

They used to tell me I was building a dream, and so I followed the mob,
When there was earth to plow, or guns to bear, I was always there right on the job.
They used to tell me I was building a dream, with peace and glory ahead,
Why should I be standing in line, just waiting for bread?

Once I built a railroad, I made it run, made it race against time.
Once I built a railroad; now it's done. Brother, can you spare a dime?
Once I built a tower, up to the sun, brick, and rivet, and lime;
Once I built a tower, now it's done. Brother, can you spare a dime?

Once in khaki suits, gee we looked swell,
Full of that Yankee Doodly Dum,
Half a million boots went slogging through Hell,
And I was the kid with the drum!

Say, don't you remember, they called me Al; it was Al all the time.
Why don't you remember, I'm your pal? Buddy, can you spare a dime?

Once in khaki suits, gee we looked swell,
Full of that Yankee Doodly Dum,
Half a million boots went slogging through Hell,
And I was the kid with the drum!

Say, don't you remember, they called me Al; it was Al all the time.
Say, don't you remember, I'm your pal? Buddy, can you spare a dime?

Well, that's more than anyone is going to read, and its hasta luego, populistas.

And remember to keep with me the "Creed of the Lone Ranger."

Dick Eastman

Yakima, Washington

Every man is responsible to every other man.

Here, from wikapedia, is the original creed of "the Lone Ranger":

"I believe.....

That to have a friend, a man must be one.

That all men are created equal and that everyone has within himself the power to make this a better world.

That God put the firewood there, but that every man must gather and light it himself.

In being prepared physically, mentally, and morally to fight when necessary for that which is right.

That a man should make the most of what equipment he has.

That 'this government of the people, by the people, and for the people' shall live always.

That men should live by the rule of what is best for the greatest number.

That sooner or later...somewhere...somehow...we must settle with the world and make payment for what we have taken.

That all things change but truth, and that truth alone, lives on forever.

In my Creator, my country, my fellow man."