The UsuryFree Eye Opener: November 2014

Saturday, November 29, 2014

The Evil of Usury

Reprinted from: http://www.newdawnmagazine.com.au

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."
- Proverbs 22:7

By Jason Jeffrey
Alas, the above is only too true today as it was when formulated. The rich rules over the poor - an ages long fact. The borrower is servant to the lender - and what is the method used by the lender: the insidious system of usury. The whole case against usury is too large to cover in the space of an article so the following is a concise and brief explanation of the workings of this fraudulent system.

For the many readers who are aware of these little-known facts, the following will serve as a timely reminder and hopefully, an incitement, to inform the many innocents who are daily losing their farms, houses and businesses as a result of this unjust system. Even more urgent is the need to educate the young before they embark on a future relationship with their bank or financial institution. There is no turning back once those loan papers have been signed: you are trapped right up till the day you pay it off.

For the readers who have never been fortunate to know the following, they may well be shocked and even angry. They will be angry at the banks, the Establishment that permits such a swindle, and in fact, thrives off such a swindle.

Money
"For the love of money is the root of all evil."
- 2 Timothy 6:10

"The most sinister and anti-social feature about bank-deposit money is that it has no existence. The banks owe the public for a total amount of money which does not exist. In buying and selling, implemented by cheque transactions, there is a mere change in the party to the whom the money is owed by the banks. As the one depositor's account is debited, the other is credited and the banks can go on owing for it all the time.

"The whole profit of the issuance of money has provided the capital of the great banking business as it exists today. Starting with nothing whatever of their own, they have got the whole world into their debt irredeemably, by a trick.

"This money comes into existence every time the banks 'lend' and disappears every time the debt is repaid to them. So that if industry tries to repay, the money of the nation disappears. This is what makes prosperity so 'dangerous' as it destroys money just when it is most needed and precipitates a slump.

"There is nothing left now for us but to get ever deeper and deeper into debt to the banking system in order to provide the increasing amounts of money the nation requires for its expansion and growth. An honest money system is the only alternative."
- Frederick Soddy, M.A., F.R.S., Nobel Prize Winner, 1921.

As the above makes clear, banks are able to manipulate "money" using various methods like the debiting of one account and the crediting of another, and so on, thus "balancing" the accounts. Banks also "create" money in more ways than one, through a trick that will be looked at later on.

Economists use the term "create" when observing the process by which money comes into being. Thus, creation means making something that did not exist before.
A sawmill makes boards, workers build houses from timber, a glass-blower makes fancy glass ornaments. In these examples, they did not "create", but converted already existing materials into a more usable, and thus more valuable form.
However, money "creation" is somewhat different. Here, and here alone, man "creates" something out of nothing. Pieces of worthless paper are printed, given various denominational values, which can be used to purchase, for example, a glass ornament. Its value (of the money, or piece of paper) has been "created" literally out of thin air.

As we can see from the above, manufacturing money is dirt cheap, and whoever does the "creating" and issuing stands to make impressive profits.

The Supply of Money
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes its laws."
- Attributed to Mayer Amschel (who later changed his surname to Rothschild and founded the largest financial dynasty ever to exist in its influence and power).

The proper use, distribution and supply of money is of vital importance to the efficient running of society. Modern societies are completely reliant on an adequate supply of money.

Without money, industry would grind to a halt, farms would become mere self-sustaining units, surplus food would disappear, jobs requiring one or more workers would remain unfinished, transport of all goods would cease, hungry populations would kill and steal to stay alive, and government would collapse leading to complete anarchy. It is not hard to imagine the catastrophic conditions created if money was to completely vanish.

Money remains the life-blood of society; money flows throughout society just as vital nutrients flow throughout the body, giving sustained growth, development and vitality. Money is the method by which goods and services are exchanged; remove money or hamper supply and the results will be disastrous. We need only recall Australia's Great Depression of the 1930s.

Bankers Depression of the 1930s
Australians all know about the Great Depression and the extremely hard times it brought about; but what of its causes?

In 1930, Australia did not lack industrial capacity, fertile farmland, or skilled, industrious and willing workers, residing in both the city and country. Already, extensive systems of reasonably efficient transport and communications were in place. War had not ravaged the cities or countryside, nor had famine devastated the land and its population. The one thing that industry and commerce lacked was a sufficient supply of money.

In the early 1930s, Bankers, who were the only source of new money or credit, deliberately refused loans to industry, commerce and agriculture. However, payment on outstanding loans was demanded, which led to a rapid decrease in the circulation of real money.

This caused a complete standstill; jobs could not be done, goods and services could not be purchased. This ploy by the greedy Bankers placed Australia in the Great Depression of the 1930s, and moreover, placed extensive amounts of businesses, private dwellings and farms in the hands of these same Bankers.

The people, not understanding the system, were in a helpless position, and were cruelly robbed of their hard-earned savings and property; they were told things like "times are hard", "money is short", "everyone is suffering." These same statements come to mind when recalling them being made during Australia's recent so-called "recession".

This was "a 'recession' we had to have," the politicians proclaimed; and one I'm sure the banks loved to have. If you should have the opportunity, a check on how the banks faired during the so-called "recession" will reveal sustained and increased profits, with an abnormal increase in acquired property assets!

Money for Peace? No! Money for War? Yes!
"The Rothschilds can start or prevent wars. Their word could make or break empires."
- Chicago Evening American, December 3, 1923.

World War II ended the Great Depression. Overnight, the same Bankers who had no money for housing, food and clothing, suddenly had millions to lend for Army barracks, uniforms, rations and weaponry.

This was a remarkable reversal in policy by the Bankers. They simply began pumping millions upon millions of dollars back into the economy when war was imminent. The Great Depression ended because of the war!

There will be some who believe that a war will lead to a "boom economy" because it leads to a massive increase in activity and production. This fallacy is easily exposed: If we were able to manufacture millions of tonnes of war equipment, dump it in the desert and blow it up, would we therefore have a "boom economy"?

On the contrary, wars create huge debts to the Bankers who are able to expand the money supply and lend more money out. In the case of a war, the victor nation would have to seize the assets of the defeated nation, occupy its place in the international trade system, and thus, sometime in the future, be able to pay back all its debts (including interest) to the Bankers who made the war possible in the first place. Big banks, that have traditionally been owned exclusively by a few collaborating families, can change the course of history and have done so for much of this century.

Usury
"Who goeth a borrowing goeth a sorrowing."
- Benjamin Franklin

The only method through which new money (not true, real money, but "credit" representing a debt) can go into circulation in Australia is when it is borrowed from Bankers. When large amounts of money are borrowed and utilised within society, an illusion of prosperity appears. Thus, when "credit" is loaned out to borrowers, more wealth circulates within society giving the outward appearance of abundance. Of course when it comes to paying that money back, there is the question of usury or interest. As "credit" is borrowed out, interest accumulates at ever-increasing rates as we will soon see.

The transaction of borrowing money proceeds as thus:

The applicant applies to borrow X amount of dollars from a Banker. The Banker, by the stroke of his pen, issues the applicant the principal (the amount borrowed), i.e. "creates" the borrowed amount. This amount does not come from individual bank accounts. The Banker lends the applicant nothing tangible (i.e. gold, silver, paper or ink) on credit, they lend the applicant intangible CREDIT on credit!

Thus, the problem of limited supply is circumvented; the Bankers are lending noTHING which means they can go on lending forever. A highly profitable venture indeed.
To conceal the fraud of lending nothing, Bankers charge interest, whereby borrowers (of nothing) agree to return more imaginary "credit" than they borrowed.

The borrower whose original loan consisted of principal only, must also pay an extra amount that the Banker specifies (interest). Therefore, the new money never equals the new debt added. The amounts needed to pay the interest on the original loan is not "created", and therefore does not exist!

Under this insidious system, the new debt will always be larger than the new money; as more money is needed to pay back interest, less money becomes available. This whole system is particularly unjust when one realises that he/she is repaying intangible principle ("created" by the bank) as well as interest (which is conceived from the "created" principal!)

The above can be illustrated by the following:

The applicant borrows $60,000 to purchase a home, farm or business, and the Bank has the borrower agree to pay back the loan PLUS interest. At just 14%, the borrower must repay $710.92 per month for 30 years. The Bank obtains its "mortgage" over the property and the borrower receives a $60,000 cheque from the Bank which is credited to his/her bank account. The borrower then writes cheques to the builder, contractors, other institutions etc. These persons in turn write cheques. Some $60,000 of new cheque-book money has been added to the money supply.

However, the flaw with this usury system is this: the only new money created and injected into circulation is the principal of $60,000. The money required to pay the interest was NOT created and was not put into circulation.

In the above case, the borrower must earn and take out of circulation $255,931, almost $200,000 more than he put into circulation when he borrowed the original $60,000. Every new loan, big or small, puts this same process into operation. The borrower adds a small amount of money to the total supply of money and deducts more than quadruple the original sum (as in above example) to meet his "obligations".
Another example given below illustrates the year by year progression of a loan for $100,000 at 20% interest for 15 years. Take note that the borrower has repaid the principle after five years of payments! The borrower continues to pay the bank a total of $216,134 over the next ten years.

The inevitable outcome of this system is the diminishment of money in circulation to the point where a depression will be imminent. Money increasingly disappears into the Bankers coffers leaving less and less in circulation. Debtors struggle against each other, vying for new loans which will mean more "created" money and more interest. The banker accrues vast sums of real money and credit that he will gamble on the stockmarket, etc. The Banker will also accumulate all types of property assets, snatched from bankrupt farmers, businessmen etc.

The Banker who produces nothing of value, slowly, then more rapidly, gains a death grip over the land, buildings and labour of future generations. The borrowers have become the servants of the lenders and have placed themselves on the economic treadmill of debt.

Banks Always Prosper - Through the Bad and Good Times
Though millions of financial transactions are carried out every year, very little money actually changes hands. 95% of all "cash" transactions are done by cheque. The Banker is perfectly safe in "creating" the so-called "loan" by writing the cheque or deposit slip, not against real money, but against your promise to pay it back! The cost to the banker is stationary and wages.

The Greatest Swindle Ever!
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it all back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits."
- Sir Josiah Stamp (President of the Bank of England in the 1920s, the second richest man in Britain)

Hidden under a veneer of respectability, integrity and competitiveness, the Banker awaits his next unsuspecting victim. The Banker is partaking in the biggest swindle of all time, and he knows it. The Banker's wealth, power and influence extends the world.

We are ruled by a capitalist Bank-owned Mammon that has usurped the mantle of government, and set about to pauperise and control the people. It is now a centralised power-hungry apparatus which promotes war, steals the people's wealth and uses every type of propaganda to keep its position.

The Banker realises that an under-educated, ignorant and confused population is easier to subvert than a healthy and intelligent people. The ruling Establishment therefore promotes all manner of degeneracy, decadence and corruption including drug use, sexual perversion and trivialities.

Through the use of high technologies, the Banker and his other plutocratic cohorts will have a most efficient and complete control over a nations finance and thus increased powers to amass even more wealth through their evil use of usury.

The future will give way to an even larger increase in financial transfers done not only by cheque but by computer transfers that the consumer/borrower will execute from ATMs (Automatic Teller Machines) and home computers. When 100% of all transactions are processed in this manner, the cashless society will have been reached - a Banker's paradise. The cashless society will be the ultimate instrument in social control; no more tax evasion, no more "extra money on the side", no existence outside the system.

So what can we do about this incredible rip-off? We can warn as many people as possible about this deceitful system and we can tell them not to participate AT ALL. The evil that lurks behind usury must not under any circumstance be supported or encouraged. When enough people realise this iniquity they will develop alternative methods of raising funds. They will come together in new community structures; independent from the old, decrepit worn-out Establishment.

For the love of money is the root of all evil; and the evil that exists at the base of materialistic societies will one day be rooted out and forever destroyed.

The above article appeared in
New Dawn No. 16 (November-December 1992)

Thursday, November 27, 2014

Global Power Project: Is the Bilderberg Group Picking Our Politicians?

By: Andrew Gavin Marshall

27 November 2014 - Originally posted at Occupy.com

his is the second installment in a series examining the little known activities and individuals behind the Bilderberg Group. Read the first part here.

When it comes to the secretive meetings of the world’s financial, corporate, political and technocratic elites at the annual Bilderberg conferences, a common criticism from conspiracy theorists and others is that the group pre-selects major politicians – choosing presidents and prime ministers in private before populations have a chance to vote themselves.

Bilderberg participants contest this framing, suggesting that Bilderberg participants simply invite up-and-coming politicians who appear to have a bright future ahead of them.

The truth is that it’s a bit of both. Bilderberg invites politicians who appear to have an influential future in their respective nations, but their attendance at the meetings (depending on their ability to impress Bilderberg members and participants) can itself have a very significant influence on their political futures. This is because the industrialists, bankers and media moguls in attendance hold significant individual and collective power over the political processes across much of the Western world.

The main ideologies that pervade the group are an undeterred commitment to corporate and financial globalization, support of a Western-led world order, and the advancement and further institutionalization of global governance. Politicians who share similar views are more likely to be invited. As former Bilderberg chairman Etienne Davignon explained, “automatically around the table [at meetings] you have internationalists” who support European integration, the WTO and trans-Atlantic cooperation.

The result: invited politicians who impress the attended members and guests through speeches or contributions to debates are likely to gain the support of some of the world’s most powerful individuals and institutions. This is no absolute guarantee of political success for higher office, but there are numerous examples of politicians whose attendance may have provided supportive – or even pivotal – influence in their reaching higher office.

As Bilderberg’s former Steering Committee member Denis Healey explained in an interview with the Guardian, “Bilderberg is a way of bringing together politicians, industrialists, financiers and journalists. Politics should involve people who aren’t politicians. We make a point of getting along younger politicians who are obviously rising, to bring them together with financiers and industrialists who offer them wise words. It increases the chance of having a sensible global policy.”
Of course, the notion of what is “sensible” is clearly biased toward policies that benefit the interests and objectives of financiers and industrialists.

The Thatcher and Clinton Factors

One good example of this is the rise of Margaret Thatcher. In 1975, when Thatcher became the leader of the opposition in British Parliament, she was invited to that year’s Bilderberg conference. A Financial Times article that year by C. Gordon Tether noted that Thatcher and other British participants “were engaging – in company with a handful of British banking and industrial chiefs – in ‘completely private talks on world problems’ with the top-most brass of the international business community – the super-capitalists.”

The article noted that “if Bilderberg is not a conspiracy, it is conducted in such a way as to give a remarkably good imitation of one.”

Jon Ronson interviewed the member of Bilderberg (who remained anonymous) that had invited Thatcher to the meeting. The former Bilderberg member recalled that Thatcher had sat in silence for the first two days of the meeting, leading to some participants “grumbling” about this lady who “hasn’t said a word.” So the Bilderberg member spoke with Thatcher, and then, “the next day she suddenly stood up and launched into a three-minute Thatcher special… The room was stunned. Here’s something for your conspiracy theorists. As a result of that speech, David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger and the other Americans fell in love with her. They brought her over to America, took her around in limousines, and introduced her to everyone.” Four years later, Thatcher was Prime Minister, and her reign left a legacy of privatizations, neoliberalism and profit for the powerful.

But Thatcher is not the only politician who reached great heights after attending a Bilderberg meeting. Bill Clinton was invited to a 1991 meeting in Germany when he was the Governor of Arkansas. Two years later he would be the U.S. president. Clinton was invited by his friend and Bilderberg Steering Committee member Vernon E. Jordan Jr., a major corporate figure in America who later became known as President Clinton’s “closest confidant.”

As the Washington Post reported in 1998: “Plenty of governors try to make that scene; only Clinton got taken seriously at that meeting, because Vernon Jordan said he was okay.”

Vernon Jordan later recalled that after Bill Clinton won the presidential election and became president, “the steering committee of Bilderberg came to Washington in January, and I called the president up and said ‘Mr. President, they’re here’ – and he came to the Four Seasons hotel, and the Europeans felt like they owned them because they met him when he was totally unknown.”

Shaping Canada, America, the U.K. and beyond

Among the Canadian politicians who attended Bilderberg meetings before they became prime ministers were Pierre Trudeau, Paul Martin, Jean Chrétien and Stephen Harper. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair had also attendedbefore becoming prime minister of the UK. Virtually all presidents of the European Commission attended Bilderberg meetings before being appointed to office.

In 2004, as John Kerry was running for president against George W. Bush, a potential running mate, John Edwards, was invited to speak at that year’s Bilderberg meeting. According to a report in the New York Times, John Edwards “spoke so well in a debate on American politics… that participants broke Bilderberg rules to clap before the end of the session.” A friend of John Kerry’s who had attended that meeting recalled that the speech by John Edwards “was important… I have no doubt the word got back to Mr. Kerry about how well he did.” Shortly after, Edwards was selected as Kerry’s running mate (though they clearly did not win the more important election that year).

Bilderberg’s Influence on Obama

In fact, it was a Bilderberg member, James A. Johnson, a prominent American corporate executive, who John Kerry tapped for choosing a running mate. And in 2008, that same Johnson “was tasked with spearheading Barack Obama’s 2008 search for a running mate.” As the Financial Times reported in May of 2008, James Johnson was appointed “to head a secret committee to produce a shortlist for [Obama’s] vice-presidential running mate,” though the Obama campaign refused to comment “on this process.”

From June 5 to 8 of 2008, Bilderberg was meeting in Chantilly, Virginia, just as the campaign to win the presidential nomination was heating up between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. As is typical during campaign season, the candidates traveled with a regular entourage of journalists. But on the night of June 5, following a campaign rally in Bristow, Virginia, Obama’s press entourage was “whisked away to Dulles Airport outside of Washington, D.C., to board a flight to Chicago,” as CBS reported.

The press waited on the plane for Obama, who was said to be doing interviews with local reporters. After an hour of waiting, the pilot informed the press that the plane was about to take off, without Obama on board, leading many journalists to feel that they “had all been duped.” Robert Gibbs, Obama’s communications director (and later press secretary) informed the reporters on the plane that Obama decided to stay behind in Washington for “meetings,” though he refused to say whom the meetings were with. Gibbs explained: “It wasn’t an attempt to deceive in any way, it’s just private meetings.”

Shortly after the plane landed in Chicago, Gibbs informed the press that Obama had gone to meet with Hillary Clinton, though provided no details of the meeting or where it took place.

At the time, there was speculation that both Obama and Clinton had gone to attend the Bilderberg meeting taking place nearby. Though never confirmed, the question remains, and two days after the “private meetings,” Hillary withdrew from the race and Obama became the presidential nominee. Later, as president, Obama gave Clinton the role of Secretary of State.

In the summer of 2012, John Kerry attended the Bilderberg meeting, and he went on to replace Hillary Clinton as Obama’s Secretary of State for the second term. Forbes noted that Kerry’s attendance at the Bilderberg meeting may have helped his selection as secretary – also noting that Canadian Mark Carney had attended his first Bilderberg meeting in 2011 when he was Governor of the Bank of Canada, and was invited back in 2012 when he attended alongside British Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne. Within a couple months of the meeting, Osborne announced Carney’s appointment as the Governor of the Bank of England – the first time a non-British citizen was appointed to head the institution.

Just prior to being appointed as President of the European Council in 2009, Belgian politician Herman Van Rompuy attended a “secret dinner” of the Bilderberg group’s Steering Committee in order “to promote his candidacy.” He was invited by then-Bilderberg chairman Etienne Davignon, and attending members included other leading industrialists and financiers as well as influential figures like Henry Kissinger. Van Rompuy impressed the audience. He later served as President of the European Council from 2009 to 2014.

Attending Bilderberg is not a guarantee of higher office, but it can often support a rapid rise to state power for politicians who impress the members and guests at the annual meetings. As Etienne Davignon explained, Bilderberg’s Steering Committee “does its best assessment of who are the bright new boys or girls in the beginning phase of their career who would like to get known.”

Andrew Gavin Marshall is a freelance writer and researcher based in Montreal, Canada.

NOTE: This article is re-published from this website:andrewgavinmarshall.com/2014/11/27/global-power-project-is-the-bilderberg-group-picking-our-politicians

Monday, November 24, 2014

10 Reasons Why Usury Should Be Banned From Society

[these are all intrinsically related]

k
1/. We had ought to learn from cultural history
Usury is banned from Islamic society and was originally banned in orthodox Christianity. Unfortunately a vast amount of Muslims do trade within this usury-based system. However these religions have already worked out the pervasive and destructive force in their societies of making profit from borrowing. Interest off of interest. They knew it was simply wrong. It works against nature, against social structures and of course against God’s laws.

This is why ‘Jubilee’ was created, in order to wipe out debt after seven years.
These people of these cultures, within these religions were not idiots; their social and ethical values had substance. We must reflect on what has worked in society and what doesn’t. Usury doesn’t work for the benefit of society. It only works for the benefit of the satanic controllers of society – because that is what it is designed for.