-

 

 

Section VI
TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE
 

In the previous sections of this book, we have travelled through time. We began our journey by stepping into the past. As we crisscrossed the centuries, we observed wars, treachery, profiteering, and political deception.

 

That has brought us to the present. Now we are prepared to ride our time machine into the future. It will be a hair-raising trip, and much of what lies ahead will be unpleasant. But it has not yet come to pass. It is merely the projection of present forces.

 

If we do not like what we see, we still have an opportunity to change those forces. The future will be what we choose to make it.

 

24. Doomsday Mechanisms
25. A Pessimistic Scenario
26. A Realistic Scenario

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter Twenty-Four
DOOMSDAY MECHANISMS
 

The decline of American prosperity; the increase in the size of government; the decrease in personal freedom; the growth of taxes; evidence that this is according to plan by an elite riding group which hopes to merge the United States into world government on the basis of "equality'' with less-developed nations; the environmentalist movement shown to be an outgrowth of that plan.
 

That's enough history for one book. It will soon be time to reset |the coordinates on our time machine and jump into the future. Before activating that switch, however, let's take one last look around us. The future is molded by the present.

 

Where we are now will greatly affect where we are going to be.
 

 

 

MIRED IN DEBT
One of the most obvious characteristics of our present time is the extent to which Americans and their government have become 'mired in debt.

 

Annual federal deficits have grown steadily since 1950, and the rate of growth is now in a vertical climb. It had taken 198 years for the federal government to borrow the first trillion {dollars. Then, in just twelve years - mostly under the Reagan Administration - it borrowed another three trillion. By the end of 1995, after three years of the Clinton Administration, the debt had grown to about $5 trillion.

It is difficult to comprehend numbers of that size or to translate them into their effect upon each of us. $5 trillion represents about 80% of all the goods sold and all the services rendered in America throughout the entire year. If you had a stack of $100 bills 40 inches high, you would be a millionaire. $5 trillion would rise 3,350 miles into space.

By 1993, net interest payments on that debt were running $214 billion per year. That consumed about 14% of all federal revenue. It now represents the government's largest single expense; greater than defense; larger than the combined cost of the departments of,

• Agriculture

• Education

• Energy

• Housing and Urban Development

• Interior

• Justice

• Labor

• State

• Transportation

• Veterans' Affairs

These charges are not paid by the government; they are paid by you.

 

You provide the money through taxes and inflation. The cost currently is about $4,500 for each family of four. All families pay through inflation but not all pay taxes. The cost to each taxpaying family, therefore, is higher.

 

On average, over $5,000 is extracted from your family each year, not to provide government services or even to pay off previous debt. Nothing is produced by it, not even roads or government buildings. No welfare or medical benefits come out of it. No salaries are paid by it. The nation's standard of living is not raised by it. It does nothing except pay interest.

Furthermore, the interest is compounded, which means, even if the government were to completely stop its deficit spending, the total debt would continue to grow as a result of interest on that portion which already exists. In 1995, interest on the national debt was already consuming 57% of all the revenue collected by income taxes.

 

At the present rate of expansion, it will consume 100% by the year 2010. That includes corporate taxes. Interest will consume 100% of our personal income taxes much sooner.

Amazing isn't it? Without interest on the national debt, we would save enough to reduce corporate taxes and eliminate personal income taxes altogether.

 

Unfortunately, under present policies and programs, that is not going to happen, because Congress does not live within its income. Many expenses are paid, not from taxes, but from selling government bonds and going deeper into debt each year. So, even though we could save enough to eliminate personal income taxes, it would not be enough.

 

The government would still go into the red to keep up its present life style.

 

However, if a reduction in the size and scope of the bureaucracy were accomplished at the same time, then personal find corporate income taxes could be entirely eliminated, and the government would have an annual surplus.¹

 

 

1- The federal government derives substantial revenue from sources other than Income taxes, such as excise taxes and import taxes. These, plus occasional assessments to the states, were the only taxes which the founding fathers intended for the federal government. The arrangement worked well for 135 years until the income-fax was adopted in 1913.
 

 

 

THE DOOMSDAY MECHANISM
Unfortunately, the locomotive is running in the opposite direction.

 

The size of government is growing larger, not smaller. There are more people working for government than for all manufacturing companies in the private sector. There are more bank regulators than bankers, more farm-bureau workers than farmers, more welfare administrators than recipients. There are more citizens receiving government checks than there are paying income taxes.

By 1996, welfare benefits in 29 states were higher than the average secretary's wage; and in 6 states, they were more than the entry-level wage for computer programmers. When it is possible [for people to vote on issues involving the transfer of wealth to themselves from others, the ballot box becomes a weapon with which the majority plunders the minority.

 

That is the point of no return, the point where the doomsday mechanism begins to accelerates until the system self-destructs. The plundered grow weary of carrying the load and eventually join the plunderers. The productive base of the economy diminishes further and further until only the state remains.

The doomsday mechanism is also operating within government itself. By 1992, more than half of all federal outlays went for what are called entitlements. Those are expenses - such as Medicare, Social Security, and government retirement programs - which are based on promises of future payments. Many of them are contractual obligations, and millions of people depend on them.

That does not mean they cannot be eliminated.

 

For example, Entitlements include $24 billion per year for food stamps. There is fro contractual obligation to continue those, only political expediency. By now, most Americans have stood in grocery lines and watched the well-dressed customer in front of them use food stamps for ice cream, pretzels, candy, and wine and then drive away in a late-model car.

 

The political function of the food stamp program is not to help the hungry but to buy votes.

The programs that do involve contractual obligations - such as Social Security and Medicare - could be turned over to private firms which would not only operate them more efficiently but also would pay out higher benefits. Congress, however, does not dare to touch any of these entitlements for fear of losing votes.
 

Normally, with contracts for future obligations of this kind, the issuer is required by law to accumulate money into a fund to make sure that there will be enough available when future payments become due. The federal government does not abide by those laws. The funds exist on paper only. The money that comes in for future obligations is immediately spent and replaced by a government IOU. So, as those future payments come due, all of the money must come from revenue being collected at that time.

Herein lies the doomsday mechanism. These obligations will be paid out of future taxes or inflation. Entitlements currently represent 52% of all federal outlays, and they are growing at the rate of 12% each year. When this is added to the 14% that is now being spent for interest payments on the national debt, we come to the startling conclusion that two-thirds of all federal expenses are now entirely automatic, and that percentage is growing each month.

Even if Congress were to stop all of the spending programs in the normal budget - dismantle the armed forces, close down all of its agencies and bureaus, stop all of its subsidies, and board up all of its buildings, including the White House - it would be able to reduce its present spending by only one-third. And even that small amount is shrinking by 10 to 12% per year. That is a best-case scenario.

 

The real-case is that Congress is accelerating its discretionary spending, not canceling it. One does not have to be a statistical analyst to figure out where this trend is headed.

The biggest doomsday mechanism of all, however, is the Federal Reserve System. It will be recalled that every cent of our money supply - including coins, currency, and checkbook money - came into being for the purpose of being loaned to someone. These dollars will disappear when those loans are paid back. They exist only so long as the debt behind them exists. Underneath the pyramid of money, supporting the entire structure, are the so-called reserves which represent the Fed's monetization of Debt.

 

If we tried to pay off the national debt, those reserves would also start to disappear, and our money supply would be undermined.

 

The Federal Reserve would have to scramble into the money markets of the world and replace U.S. securities with bonds from corporations and other countries. Technically, that can be done, but the transition could be devastating. Under the Federal Reserve System, therefore, Congress would be fearful to eliminate the national debt even if it wanted to.

These are the doomsday mechanisms already in operation. If we do not understand how they function, we will not be prepared for our trip into the future. The scenes that will unfold there will appear too bizarre, the events too shocking.

 

We would be convinced that something surely had gone wrong with our time machine.
 

 

 

WHO OWNS THE NATIONAL DEBT?
It has been said that we need not worry about interest on the national debt because "We owe it to ourselves."

 

Let's take a look at who owes what to whom.
It may come as a surprise to learn that the Federal Reserve holds but a small portion of the national debt, only about 8%.

 

Foreign investors own approximately 27%, and agencies of the federal government have 28% (the IOUs that replaced money taken from the funds such as the Social Security Fund). Private-sector Investors in the U.S. hold the largest share of about 37%. It is partly [true, therefore, that "We owe it to ourselves" or at least that all of us owe it to some of us.

 

The some of us who receive the interest are private investors seeking income that is exempt from state income faxes, and large institutions such as banks, corporations, insurance companies, and investment funds. With institutions, the money represents pooled assets belonging to thousands of small investors. So, a major portion of the interest on the national debt does, indeed, accrue to the benefit of a large sector of the American people.

That's the good news. The bad news is that the government obtains every cent of the money it pays to us by confiscating it from us in the first place. If it is true that we owe it to ourselves, then it is also true that we pay it to ourselves. The money goes out of one pocket back into the other - minus a handling fee. The government takes $1000 from us in taxes and inflation and gives us back $350. The so-called "benefit" to the public is but a giant scam.

And more bad news: When people purchase government bonds, there is less money available for investment in private industry. It is well known that government credit "crowds out" private credit.

 

The result is that the productive side of the nation is handicapped by unfair competition for investment capital. To obtain new money for growth, private companies must pay higher interest rates. These are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices.

 

Many companies are forced to curtail their plans for expansion, and potentially new jobs are never created. Some companies are forced out of business altogether, and their employees are put out of work. The economy is always retarded by government debt.

 

The larger the debt, the greater the damage.

The 27% portion of the national debt held by foreign investors may not seem like a large percentage, but it represents a huge amount of money nevertheless. A trillion dollars cannot be ignored. These bonds could become a great problem down the line as they mature. So far, they have been a partial blessing because they were purchased with money that already existed.

 

Therefore, they were not inflationary. But it is not difficult to imagine future conditions under which the bond holders would decide not to renew. In order to pay off those bonds on maturity, the Treasury would have to issue new ones. The Federal Reserve then would have to purchase the new bonds with fiat money. Therefore, foreign-held federal debt is a ticking time bomb.

 

If it should ever have to be picked up by the Fed, the inflationary impact on our country would be staggering.
 

 

 

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
There is a tendency to read about these trends with a kind of detached fascination.

• Isn't that interesting?

• But where is the relevance?

• Why get excited over such technicalities and abstractions?

• So what if the government is mired in debt? Who cares if the interest will never be paid?

• What of it if we have a world currency or a world government?

• What difference will any of it make to me?

The first step toward answering those questions is to see what difference it already has made.

 

Our upcoming trip into the future will merely extend those lines.

As illustrated in previous sections of this book, there has been a long-term policy at the highest levels of government to shift economic resources away from the United States. That policy has peen successful. Based on doomsday predictions of environmental disaster, government has saddled private companies with such burdensome expenses for eliminating waste products that heavy industry, once the mainstay of American prosperity, has fled our shores.

 

Because of concern over the natural habitat of the spotted fowl and the desert kangaroo rat, millions of acres of timber and Agricultural land have been taken out of production. High taxes, rules beyond reason for safety devices in the work place, so-called lair-employment practices, and mandatory health insurance are Rapidly destroying what is left of America's private industry. The Jesuit is unemployment and dislocation for millions of American workers.

Federal taxes, including social-security, now take more than 40% of our private incomes. State, county, and local taxes are on top [of that. Inflation feeds on what is left. We spend half of each year working for the government.

A study by the AFL-CIO in 1977 revealed that, in spite of wage Increases in terms of dollars, the real wages of the average American - in terms of what he can buy with those dollars - were going down. That trend was confirmed in 1980 by the U.S. Census Bureau. In 1992, the Consumers' Union analyzed how many hours one had to work to buy common items compared to thirty years previously.

 

Some low-priced items - such as long-distance phone calls, gasoline, food products, and wrist-watches - were cheaper in 1992 in terms of hours worked to acquire them. But the higher-priced items - such as housing, college educations, and health care - were far more costly than ever.

 

The report concludes:

The average U.S. household has maintained its living standard largely because families are working more hours. Millions of women entered the work force in the past 25 years. In 1970, about 21 million women worked full rime. Now that figure is over 36 million. That has helped to keep family buying power fairly stable. But for many families, it now represents the labor of two earners rather than one.¹

 

1. "Has Our Living Standard Stalled?" Consumer Reports, June, 1992, p. 392.

 

 

The message here is that real wages in America have declined.

 

Young couples with a single income now have a lower standard of  living than their parents did. In spite of two incomes, the real net worth of the average household is falling. The amount of leisure time is shrinking. The percentage of Americans who own their homes is dropping.

 

The age at which a family acquires a first home is rising. The number of families counted among the middle class is falling. The size of the family savings is smaller. The number of people living below the officially defined poverty level is rising. The rate of personal bankruptcy is triple of what it was in the 1960s.

 

Over 90% of all Americans are broke at age 65.
 

 

 

THE NEW WORLD ORDER
None of this is happening by accident.

 

Chapters five and six documented the currently unfolding plan to create a functional world government within the framework of the United Nations. Often referred to as The New World Order by its advocates, the proposed global government is designed upon the principles of socialism. It is the dream-come-true for the world's socialist theoreticians, politicians, and technicians who see it as the ultimate laboratory for their social experiments upon mankind.

There are two weapons of control now being readied at the UN. One is a world military command which eventually will control all national armies and super weapons. That is being accomplished under the slogans of peace and disarmament. The other is a world central bank, now called the IMF/World Bank, with the ability to issue a common money which all nations must accept.

 

That is being accomplished under the slogans of international trade and economic growth.

Of the two weapons, monetary control is the most important. The use of military force is viewed as a crude weapon in the arsenal of world government, to be used only as a last resort. The effect of monetary control is more powerful than mega-tons of atomic energy. It reaches into every shop and home, a feat that could never be accomplished by standing armies. It can be used with precision against one nation, one group, or even one person while sparing or benefiting all others.

 

Military force may be irresistible but it causes resentment and political unrest that can smolder for decades. Since monetary manipulation is seldom understood by its victims, it does not incur their wrath. In fact, the manipulators enjoy high social status and financial reward. For these reasons, monetary control is the weapon of choice in The New World Order.

A future world parliament based upon the concept of minimum coercion and maximum freedom could be a wonderful advent for mankind. Without trying to cram all nations into a centrally-directed beehive, it would welcome cultural and religious variety. Instead of trying to place the world into a collectivist straight-jacket of rules, regulations, quotas, and subsidies, it would encourage diversity and freedom-to-choose.

 

Instead of levying ever-larger taxes on every conceivable economic activity and destroying human incentive in the process, it would encourage member nations to reduce the taxes that already exist and thereby stimulate production and creativity.

A world parliament, dedicated to the concept of freedom, would have to withhold membership from any government that violated the basic rights of its citizens. It could be the means by which totalitarian governments would be encouraged to abandon their oppressive policies in order to obtain the economic and political advantages of acceptance in the world body.

 

It could become the greatest force for peace and prosperity and freedom we have ever known.

But The New World Order that is now incubating at the United Nations is an entirely different creature. Its members represent just about every dictator and warlord in the world. Its philosophy is built upon the socialist doctrine that all good flows from the state. Those who do not conform must be bent to the government's will or be eliminated.

 

It cannot oppose totalitarianism for the simple reason that it is totalitarianism.
 

 

 

AMERICA IS THE TARGET
The New World Order cannot become a functional reality so long as the United States remains able to go it alone.

 

America is viewed as a potential bull in the china shop. Right now, it is safely under control, but the world planners are worried it might break loose in the future. If the American people were to awaken to the realities of world politics and regain control over their government, they still would have the military and economic power to break away.

 

Among the world planners, therefore, it has become the prime directive to weaken the United States both militarily and economically. And this directive has come from American leaders, not those of other countries.

 

CFR members sitting in the White House, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Treasury are now working to finalize that part of the plan. It is yet one more doomsday mechanism that, once it gains sufficient momentum, will pass the critical point of no return.

The Korean War was the first time American soldiers fought under UN authority.

 

That trend has accelerated and already includes military actions in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Somalia, and Haiti. By the time this book gets to print, there undoubtedly will be more. While the American military is being absorbed into the UN, steps are also underway to hand over American atomic weapons. When that happens, the doomsday mechanism will become activated. It will be too late to escape.

Likewise, the IMF / World Bank is already functioning - in conjunction with the Federal Reserve System - as a world central bank. The American economy is being deliberately exhausted through foreign giveaways and domestic boondoggles.

 

The object is, not to help those in need or to preserve the environment, but to bring the system dawn. When once-proud and independent Americans are standing in soup lines, they will be ready to accept the carefully arranged "rescue" by the world bank. A world currency is already designed, awaiting only an appropriate crisis to justify its introduction.

 

From that, too, there will be no escape.
 

 

 

THE REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN
The substance of these stratagems can be traced to a think-tank study released in 1966 called the Report from Iron Mountain.

 

Although the origin of the report is highly debated, the document itself hints that it was commissioned by the Department of Defense under Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara and was produced by the Hudson Institute located at the base of Iron Mountain in Croton-on-Hudson, New York. The Hudson Institute was founded and directed by Herman Kahn, formerly of the Rand Corporation. Both McNamara and Kahn were members of The CFR.

The self-proclaimed purpose of the study was to explore various ways to "stabilize society."

 

Praiseworthy as that may sound, a reading of the Report soon reveals that the word society is used synonymously with the word government. Furthermore, the word stabilize is used as meaning to preserve and to perpetuate. It is clear from the start that the nature of the study was to analyze the. different ways a government can perpetuate itself in power, ways to control its citizens and prevent them from rebelling.

It was stated at the beginning of the report that morality was not an issue. The study did not address questions of right or wrong; nor did it deal with such concepts as freedom or human rights. Ideology was not an issue, nor patriotism, nor religious precepts.

 

Its sole concern was how to perpetuate the existing government.

 

The report said:

Previous studies have taken the desirability of peace, the importance of human life, the superiority of democratic institutions, the greatest "good" for the greatest number, the "dignity" of the individual, the desirability of maximum health and longevity, and other such wishful premises as axiomatic values necessary for the justification of a study of peace issues.

 

We have not found them so. We have attempted to apply the standards of physical science to our thinking, the principal characteristic of which is not quantification, as is popularly believed, but that, in Whitehead's words,

"...it ignores all judgments of value; for instance, all esthetic and moral judgments."

The major conclusion of the report was that, in the past, war has been the only reliable means to achieve that goal.

 

It contends that only during times of war or the threat of war are the masses compliant enough to carry the yoke of government without complaint. Fear of conquest and pillage by an enemy can make almost any burden seem acceptable by comparison. War can be used to arouse human passion and patriotic feelings of loyalty to the nation's leaders.

 

No amount of sacrifice in the name of victory will be rejected. Resistance is viewed as treason. But, in times of peace, people become resentful of high taxes, shortages, and bureaucratic Intervention. When they become disrespectful of their leaders, they become dangerous. No government has long survived without enemies and armed conflict.

 

War, therefore, has been an indispensable condition for "stabilizing society."

 

These are the report's exact words:

The war system not only has been essential to the existence of nations as independent political entities, but has been equally indispensable to their stable political structure. Without it, no , government has ever been able to obtain acquiescence in its "legitimacy," or right to rule its society. The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power.

 

The historical record reveals one instance after another where the failure of a regime to maintain the credibility of a war threat led to its dissolution, by the forces of private interest, of reactions to social injustice, or of other disintegrative elements. The organization of society for the possibility of war is its principal political stabilizer...

 

It has enabled societies to maintain necessary class distinctions, and it has insured the subordination of the citizens to the state by virtue of the residual war powers inherent in the concept of nationhood.¹

 

 

A NEW DEFINITION OF PEACE
The report then explains that we are approaching a point in history where the old formulas may no longer work.

 

Why? Because it may now be possible to create a world government in which all nations will be disarmed and disciplined by a world army, a condition which will be called peace.

 

The report says:

"The word peace, as we have used it in the following pages... implies total and general disarmament." ²

1. Mi, pp. 39, 81.
2. Ibid., p. 9.

 

 

Under that scenario, independent nations will no longer exist and governments will not have the capability to wage war.

 

There could be military action by the world army against renegade political subdivisions, but these would be called peace-keeping operations, and soldiers would be called peace keepers. No matter how much property is destroyed or how much blood is spilled, the bullets will be "peaceful" bullets and the bombs - even atomic bombs, if necessary - will be "peaceful" bombs.

The report then raises the question of whether there can ever be a suitable substitute for war? What else could the regional governments use - and what could the world government itself use - to legitimize and perpetuate itself? To provide an answer to that question was the stated purpose of the study.

The Report from Iron Mountain concludes that there can be no substitute for war unless it possesses three properties.

 

It must,

(1) be economically wasteful

(2) represent a credible threat of great magnitude

(3) provide a logical excuse for compulsory service to the government

 

A SOPHISTICATED FORM OF SLAVERY
On the subject of compulsory service, the report explains that one of the advantages of standing armies is that they provide a place for the government to put antisocial and dissident elements of society.

 

In the absence of war, these forced-labor battalions would be told they are fighting poverty or cleaning up the planet or bolstering the economy or serving the common good in some other fashion. Every teenager would be required to serve - especially during those years in which young people are most rebellious against authority.

 

Older people, too, would be drafted as a means of working off tax payments and fines. Dissidents would face heavy fines for "hate crimes'7 and politically incorrect attitudes so, eventually, they would all be in the forced-labor battalions.

 

The report says:

We will examine... the time-honored use of military institutions to provide anti-social elements with an acceptable role in the social structure... The current euphemistic clichés - "juvenile delinquency" and "alienation" - have had their counterparts in every age. In earlier days these conditions were dealt with directly by the military without the complications of due process, usually through press gangs or outright enslavement...

Most proposals that address themselves, explicitly or otherwise, to the postwar problem of controlling the socially alienated turn to some variant of the Peace Corps or the so-called Job Corps for a solution. The socially disaffected, the economically unprepared, the psychologically uncomfortable, the hardcore "delinquents," the incorrigible "subversives" and the rest of the unemployable are seen as somehow transformed by the disciplines of a service modeled on military precedent into more or less dedicated social service workers...

Another possible surrogate for the control of potential enemies of society is the reintroduction, in some form consistent with modem technology and political processes, of slavery... It is entirely possible that the development of a sophisticated form of slavery may be an absolute prerequisite for social control in a world at peace.

 

As a practical matter, conversion of the code of military discipline to a euphemized form of enslavement would entail surprisingly little revision; the logical first step would be the adoption of some form of "universal" military service.

 

BLOOD GAMES
The report considered ways in which the public could be preoccupied with non-important activities so that it would not have time to participate in political debate or resistance.

 

Recreation, trivial game shows, pornography, and situation comedies could play an important role, but blood games were considered to be the most promising of all the options. Blood games are competitive events between individuals or teams that are sufficiently violent in nature to enable the spectators to vicariously work off their frustrations.

 

As a minimum, these events must evoke a passionate team loyalty on the part of the fans and must include the expectation of pain and injury on the part of the players. Even better for their purpose is the spilling of blood and the possibility of death. The common man has a morbid fascination for violence and blood. Crowds gather to chant "Jump! Jump!" at the suicidal figure on the hotel roof.

 

Cars slow to a near stop on the highway to gawk at broken bodies next to a collision. A schoolyard fight instantly draws a circle of spectators.

 

Boxing matches and football games and hockey games and automobile races are telecast daily, attracting millions of cheering fans who give rapt attention to each moment of danger, each angry blow to the face, each broken bone, each knockout, each carrying away of the unconscious or possibly dying contestant. In this fashion, their anger at "society" is defused and focused, instead, on the opposing team.

 

The emperors of Rome devised the Circuses and gladiator contests and public executions by wild beasts for precisely that purpose.

Before jumping to the conclusion that such concepts are absurd in modern times, recall that during the 1985 European soccer championship in Belgium, the spectators became so emotionally involved in the contest that a bloody riot broke out in the bleachers leaving behind 38 dead and more that 400 injured.

 

U.S. News & World Report gives this account:

The root of the trouble: A tribal loyalty to home teams that surpasses an obsession and, say some experts, has become a substitute religion for many.

 

The worst offenders include members of gangs such as Chelsea's Anti-Personnel Firm, made up of ill-educated young males who find in soccer rivalry an escape from boredom.

 

Still, the British do not have a patent on soccer violence. On May 26, eight people were killed and more than 50 injured in Mexico City, -a 1964 stadium riot in Lima, Peru, killed more than 300 - and a hotly disputed 1969 match between El Salvador and Honduras led to a week-long shooting war between the two countries, causing hundreds of casualties.

The U.S. is criticized for the gridiron violence of its favorite sport football, but outbursts in the bleachers are rare because loyalties are spread among many sports and national pride is not at stake. Said Thomas Tutko, professor of psychology at California's San Jose State University:

"In these other countries, it used to be their armies. Now it's their competitive teams that stir passions." ¹

Having considered all the ramifications of blood games, the Report from Iron Mountain concluded that they were not an adequate substitute for war.

 

It is true that violent sports are useful distracters and do, in fact, allow an outlet for boredom and fierce group loyalty, but their effect on the nation's psyche could not match the intensity of war hysteria.

 

Until a better alternative could be found, world government would have to be postponed so that nations could continue to wage war.
 

 

 

FINDING A CREDIBLE GLOBAL THREAT
In time of war, most citizens uncomplainingly accept their low quality of life and remain fiercely loyal to their leaders.

 

If a suitable substitute for war is to be found, then it must also elicit that same reaction. Therefore, a new enemy must be found that threatens the entire world, and the prospects of being overcome by that enemy must be just as terrifying as war itself.

 

The report is emphatic on that point:

Allegiance requires a cause; a cause requires an enemy. This much is obvious; the critical point is that the enemy that defines the cause must seem genuinely formidable.

 

Roughly speaking, the presumed power of the "enemy" sufficient to warrant an individual sense of allegiance to a society must be proportionate to the size and complexity of the society. Today, of course, that power must be one of unprecedented magnitude and frightfulness.²

 

1. "British Soccer's Day of Shame" U.S. News & World Report, June 10,1985, p. 11.

2. Lewin, Report, p. 44.

 

 

The first consideration in finding a suitable threat to serve as a global enemy was that it did not have to be real.

 

A real one would be better, of course, but an invented one would work just as well, provided the masses could be convinced it was real. The public will more readily believe some fictions than others. Credibility would be more important than truth.

Poverty was examined as a potential global enemy but rejected as not fearful enough. Most of the world was already in poverty. Only those who had never experienced poverty would see it as a global threat. For the rest, it was simply a fact of everyday life.

An invasion by aliens from outer space was given serious consideration. The report said that experiments along those lines already may have been tried. Public reaction, however, was not sufficiently predictable, because the threat was not "credible."

 

Here is what the report had to say:

Credibility, in fact, lies at the heart of the problem of developing a political substitute for war. This is where the space-race proposals, in many ways so well suited as economic substitutes for war, fall short.

 

The most ambitious and unrealistic space project cannot of itself generate a believable external menace. It has been hotly argued that such a menace would offer the "last best hope of peace" etc., by uniting mankind against the danger of destruction by "creatures" from other planets or from outer space.

 

Experiments have been proposed to test the credibility of an out-of-our-world invasion threat; it is possible that a few of the more difficult-to-explain "flying saucer" incidents of recent years were in fact early experiments of this kind. If so, they could hardly have been judged encouraging.¹

 

1. Ibid., p. 66.

 

 

This report was released in 1966 when the idea of an alien presence seemed far fetched to the average person.

 

In the ensuing years, however, that perception has changed. A growing segment of the population now believes that intelligent life forms may exist beyond our planet and could be monitoring our own civilization.

 

Whether that belief is right or wrong is not the issue here. The point is that a dramatic encounter with aliens shown on network television - even if it were to be entirely fabricated by high-tech computer graphics or laser shows in the sky - could be used to stampede all nations into world government supposedly to defend the Earth from invasion.

 

On the other hand, if the aliens were perceived to have peaceful intent, an alternative scenario would be to form world government to represent a unified human species speaking with a single voice in some kind of galactic federation.

 

Either scenario would be far more credible today than in 1966.
 

 

 

THE ENVIRONMENTAL-POLLUTION MODEL

The final candidate for a useful global threat was pollution of the environment.

 

This was viewed as the most likely to succeed because it could be related to observable conditions such as smog and water pollution - in other words, it would be based partly on fact and, therefore, be credible. Predictions could be made showing end-of-earth scenarios just as horrible as atomic warfare. Accuracy in these predictions would not be important.

 

Their purpose would be to frighten, not to inform. It might even be necessary to deliberately poison the environment to make the predictions more convincing and to focus the public mind on fighting a new enemy, more fearful than any invader from another nation - or even from outer space.

 

The masses would more willingly accept a falling standard of living, tax increases, and bureaucratic intervention in their lives as simply,

"the price we must pay to save Mother Earth."

If a vision of death and destruction from pollution could be implanted into the public subconscious mind, then the global battle against it could, indeed, replace war as the mechanism for control.

Did the Report from Iron Mountain really say that? It certainly did - and much more.

 

Here are just a few of the pertinent passages:

When it comes to postulating a credible substitute for war... the "alternate enemy" must imply a more immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat of destruction. It must justify the need for taking and paying a "blood price" in wide areas of human concern. In this respect, the possible substitute enemies noted earlier would be insufficient.

 

One exception might be the environmental-pollution model, if the danger to society it posed was genuinely imminent. The fictive models would have to carry the weight of extraordinary conviction, underscored with a not inconsiderable actual sacrifice of life... It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species.

 

Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power...

It is true that the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for this purpose... But the pollution problem has been so widely publicized in recent years that it seems highly improbable that a program of deliberate environmental poisoning could be implemented in a politically acceptable manner.

However unlikely some of the possible alternative enemies we have mentioned may seem, we must emphasize that one must be found of credible quality and magnitude, if a transition to peace is ever to come about without social disintegration.

 

It is more probable, in our judgment, that such a threat will have to be invented.
 

 

AUTHENTICITY OF THE REPORT
The Report from Iron Mountain states that it was produced by a Special Study Group of fifteen men whose identities were to remain secret and that it was not intended to be made public.

 

One member of the group, however, felt the report was too important to be kept under wraps. He was not in disagreement with its conclusions. He merely believed that more people should read it. He delivered his personal copy to Leonard Lewin, a well-known author and columnist who, in turn, negotiated its publication by Dial Press. It was then reprinted by Dell Publishing.

This was during the Johnson Administration, and the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs was CFR member Walt Rostow.

 

Rostow was quick to announce that the report was a spurious work. Herman Kahn, CFR director of the Hudson Institute, said it was not authentic. The Washington Post - which is owned and run by CFR member Katharine Graham - called it "a delightful satire."

 

Time magazine, founded by CFR-member Henry Luce, said it was a skillful hoax. Then, on November 26,1967, the report was reviewed in the book section of the Washington Post by Herschel McLandress, which was the pen name for Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith. Galbraith, who also had been a member of the CFR, said that he knew firsthand of the report's authenticity because he had been invited to participate in it.

 

Although he was unable to be part of the official group, he was consulted from time to time and had been asked to keep the project a secret. Furthermore, while he doubted the wisdom of letting the public know about the report, he agreed totally with its conclusions.

 

He wrote:

As I would put my personal repute behind the authenticity of this document, so would I testify to the validity of its conclusions. My reservations relate only to the wisdom of releasing it to an obviously unconditioned public.¹

Six weeks later, in an Associated Press dispatch from London, Galbraith went even further and jokingly admitted that he was "a member of the conspiracy."²
 

 

1. "News of War and Peace You're Not Ready For/' by Herschel McLandress, Book World, in The Washington Post, November 26, 1967, p. 5.
2. "The Times Diary/' London Times, February 5, 1 968, p . 8.

 

 

That, however, did not settle the issue.

 

The following day, Galbraith backed off. When asked about his "conspiracy" statement, he replied:

"For the first time since Charles II, The Times has been guilty of a misquotation... Nothing shakes my conviction that |t was written by either Dean Rusk or Mrs. Clare Booth Luce."¹

The reporter who conducted the original interview was embarrassed by the allegation and did further research.

 

Six days later, this is what he reported:

Misquoting seems to be a hazard to which Professor Galbraith is prone. The latest edition of the Cambridge newspaper Varsity quotes the following (tape recorded) interchange:

 

Interviewer: "Are you aware of the identity of the author of Report from Iron Mountain?"

Galbraith: "I was in general a member of the conspiracy but I was not the author. I have always assumed that it was the man who wrote the foreword - Mr. Lewin." ²

So, on at least three occasions, Galbraith publicly endorsed the authenticity of the report but denied that he wrote it.

 

Then who did? Was it Leonard Lewin, after all? In 1967 he said he did not. In 1972 he said that he did.

 

Writing in the New York Times Book Review Lewin explained:

"I wrote the 'Report/ all of it... What I intended was simply to pose the issues of war and peace in a provocative way." ³

 

1. "Galbraith Says He Was Misquoted,"London Times, February 6, 1968, p. 3.
2. "Touche, Vrofessor/'London Times, February 12, 1968, p. 8.
3. "Report from Iron Mountain/'Nea; York Times, March 19, 1968, p. 8.

 

 

But wait! A few years before that, columnist William F, Buckley told the New York Times that he was the author.

 

That statement was undoubtedly made tongue-in-cheek, but who - and what are we to Believe?

 

Was it written by,

• Herman Kahn

• John Kenneth Galbraith

• Dean Rusk

• Clare Booth Luce

• Leonard Lewin

• or William F. Buckley?

In the final analysis, it make little difference.

 

The important point is that The Report from Iron Mountain, whether written as a Blink-tank study or a political satire, explains the reality that surrounds us.

 

Regardless of its origin, the concepts presented in it are now being implemented in almost every detail. All one has to Bo is hold the Report in one hand and the daily newspaper in the other to realize that every major trend in American life is conforming to the blueprint.

 

So many things that otherwise are incomprehensible suddenly become clear: foreign aid, wasteful spending, the destruction of American industry, a job corps, gun control, a national police force, the apparent demise of Soviet power, a UN army, disarmament, a world bank, a world money, the surrender of national independence through treaties, and the ecology hysteria.

 

The Report from Iron Mountain is an accurate summary of the plan that has already created our present. It is now shaping our future.
 

 

 

ENVIRONMENTALISM A SUBSTITUTE FOR WAR
It is beyond the scope of this study to prove that currently accepted predictions of environmental doom are based on exaggerated and fraudulent "scientific studies".

 

But such proof is easily found if one is willing to look at the raw data and the assumptions upon which the projections are based. More important, however, is the question of why end-of-world scenarios based on phony scientific studies - or no studies at all - are uncritically publicized by the CFR-controlled media; or why radical environmental groups advocating socialist doctrine and anti-business programs are lavishly funded by CFR-dominated foundations, banks, and corporations, the very groups that would appear to have the most to lose.

 

The Report from Iron Mountain answers those questions.

As the Report pointed out, truth is not important in these matters. It's what people can be made to believe that counts. "Credibility" is the key, not reality. There is just enough truth in the fact of environmental pollution to make predictions of planetary doom in the year two-thousand-something seem believable. All that is required is media cooperation and repetition. The plan has apparently worked.

 

People of the industrialized nations have been subjected to a barrage of documentaries, dramas, feature films, ballads, poems, bumper stickers, posters, marches, speeches, seminars, conferences, and concerts. The result has been phenomenal. Politicians are now elected to office on platforms consisting of nothing more than an expressed concern for the environment and a promise to clamp down on those nasty industries.

 

No one questions the damage done to the economy or the nation. It makes no difference when the very planet on which we live is sick and dying. Not one in a thousand will question that underlying premise. How could it be false? Look at all the movie celebrities and rock stars who have joined the movement.

While the followers of the environmental movement are preoccupied with visions of planetary doom, let us see what the leaders are thinking.

 

The first Earth Day was proclaimed on April 22, 1970, at a "Summit" meeting in Rio de Janeiro, attended by environmentalists and politicians from all over the world. A publication widely circulated at that meeting was entitled the Environmental Handbook.

 

The main theme of the book was summarized by a quotation from Princeton Professor Richard A. Falk, a member of the CFR. Falk wrote that there are four interconnected threats to the planet - wars of mass destruction, overpopulation, pollution, and the depletion of resources.

 

Then he said:

"The basis of all four problems is the inadequacy of the sovereign states to manage the affairs of mankind in the twentieth century."

The Handbook continued the CFR line by asking these rhetorical questions:

"Are nation-states actually feasible, now that they have power to destroy each other in a single afternoon?... What price would most people be willing to pay for a more durable kind of human organization - more taxes, giving up national flags, perhaps the sacrifice of some of our hard-won liberties?"

In 1989, the CFR-owned Washington Post published an article written by CFR member George Kennan in which he said:

"We must prepare instead for... an age where the great enemy is not the Soviet Union, but the rapid deterioration of our planet as a supporting structure for civilized life."

On March 27,1990, in the CFR-controlled New York Times, CFR member Michael Oppenheimer wrote:

"Global warming, ozone depletion, deforestation and overpopulation are the four horsemen of a looming 21st century apocalypse... As the cold war recedes, the environment is becoming the No. 1 international security concern."

CFR member, Lester Brown, heads up another think tank called the Worldwatch Institute.

 

In the Institute's annual report, entitled State of the World 1991, Brown said that,

"the battle to save the planet will replace the battle over ideology as the organizing theme of the new world order."

In the official publication of the 1992 Earth Summit, we find this:

"The world community now faces together greater risks to our common security through our impacts on the environment than from traditional military conflicts with one another."

How many times does it have to be explained?

 

The environmental movement was created by the CFR. It is a substitute for war that they hope will become the emotional and psychological foundation for world government.
 

 

 

HUMANITY ITSELF IS THE TARGET
The Club of Rome is a group of global planners who annually release end-of-world scenarios based on predictions of overpopulation and famine.

 

Their membership is international, but the American roster includes such well-known CFR members as,

• Jimmy Carter

• Harlan Cleveland

• Claiburne Pell

• Sol Linowitz

Their solution to overpopulation? A world government to control birth rates and, if necessary, apply euthanasia.

 

That is a gentle word for the deliberate killing of the old, the weak, and of course the uncooperative.

 

Following the same reasoning advanced at Iron Mountain, the Club of Rome has concluded that fear of environmental disaster could be used as a substitute enemy for the purpose of unifying the masses behind their program.

 

In their 1991 book entitled The First Global Revolution, we find this:

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... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.

Socialist theoreticians have always been fascinated by the question of controlling population growth. It excites their imagination because it is the ultimate bureaucratic plan. If the real enemy is humanity itself, as the Club of Rome says, then humanity itself must become the target.

 

Fabian Socialist Bertrand Russell expressed it thus:

I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing...

 

War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation, survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full...

A scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is world government... It will be necessary to find ways of preventing an increase in world population. If this is to be done otherwise than by wars, pestilences and famines, it will demand a powerful international authority. This authority should deal out the world's food to the various nations in proportion to their population at the time of the establishments of the authority.

 

If any nation subsequently increased its population, it should not on that account receive any more food. The motive for not increasing population would therefore be very compelling.

Very compelling, indeed.

 

These quiet-spoken socialists are not kidding around. For example, one of the most visible "environmentalists" and advocate of population control is Jacques Cousteau. Interviewed by the United Nations UNESCO Courier in November of 1991, Cousteau spelled it out.

 

Speaking of death by cancer, he said:

Should we eliminate suffering diseases? The idea is beautiful, but perhaps not a benefit for the long term. We should not allow our dread of diseases to endanger the future of our species. This is a terrible thing to say.

 

In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it.³

1- See Martin, pp. 171, 325, 463-69.
2. Bertrand Arthur William Russell, The Impact of Science on Society (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1953), pp. 103-104, 111.
3. Interviewed by Bahgat Eluadi and Adel Rifaat, Courrier de l'Unescc, November 1991, p. 13.

 

 

 

GORBACHEV BECOMES AN ECOLOGY WARRIOR
We can now understand how Mikhail Gorbachev, formerly the leader of one of the most repressive governments the world has known, became head of a new organization called the International Green Cross, which supposedly is dedicated to environmental issues.

 

Gorbachev has never denounced socialism, only the label of a particular brand of socialism called Communism.

 

His real interest is not ecology but world government with himself assured a major position in the socialist power structure. In a public appearance in Fulton, Missouri, he praised the Club of Rome, of which he is a member, for its position on population control.

 

Then he said:

One of the worst of the new dangers is ecological... Today, global climatic shifts; the greenhouse effect; the "ozone hole"; acid rain; contamination of the atmosphere, soil and water by industrial and household waste; the destruction of the forests; etc. all threaten the stability of the planet.¹

Gorbachev proclaimed that global government was the answer to these threats and that the use of government force was essential.

 

He said:

"I believe that the new world order will not be fully realized unless the United Nations and its Security Council create structures... authorized to impose sanctions and make use of other measures of compulsion."

Here is an arch criminal who fought his way up through the ranks of the Soviet Communist Party, became the protégé of Yuri Andropov, head of the dreaded KGB, was a member of the USSR's ruling Politburo throughout the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and who was selected by the Politburo in 1985 as the supreme leader of world Communism.

 

All of this was during one of the Soviet's most dismal periods of human-rights violations and subversive activities against the free world. Furthermore, he ruled over a nation with one of the worst possible records of environmental destruction.

 

At no time while he was in power did he ever say or do anything to show concern over planet Earth.

All that is now forgotten. Gorbachev has been transformed by the CFR-dominated media into an ecology warrior. He is calling for world government and telling us that such a government will use environmental issues as justification for sanctions and other "measures of compulsion."

 

We cannot say that we were not warned.
 

 

 

U.S. BRANDED AS ECOLOGICAL AGGRESSOR
The use of compulsion is an important point in these plans, people in the industrialized nations are not expected to cooperate In their own demise.

 

They will have to be forced. They will not like It when their food is taken for global distribution. They will not approve when they are taxed by a world authority to finance foreign political projects. They will not voluntarily give up their tars or resettle into smaller houses or communal barracks to satisfy Hie resource-allocation quotas of a UN agency.

 

Club-of-Rome member Maurice Strong states the problem:

In effect, the United States is committing environmental aggression against the rest of the world... At the military level, the United States is the custodian. At the environmental level, the United States is clearly the greatest risk... One of the worst problems in the United States is energy prices - they're too low...

It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class... involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and 'convenience' foods, ownership of motor-vehicles, numerous electric household appliances, home and I work-place air-conditioning ... expansive suburban housing... are not sustainable.¹

Mr. Strong's remarks were enthusiastically received by world Environmental leaders, but they prompted this angry editorial response in the Arizona Republic:

Translated from eco-speak, this means two things:

(1) a reduction in the standard of living in Western nations through massive new taxes and regulations

(2) a wholesale transfer of wealth from industrialized to under-developed countries.

The dubious premise here is that if the U.S. economy could be reduced to, say, the size of Malaysia's, the world would be a better place... Most Americans probably would balk at the idea of the U.N. banning automobiles in the U.S.²

Who is this Maurice Strong who sees the United States as the environmental aggressor against the world? Does he live in poverty? Does he come from a backward country that is resentful of American prosperity? Does he himself live in modest circumstances, avoiding consumption in order to preserve our natural resources?

 

None of the above. He is one of the wealthiest men in the world. He lives and travels in great comfort. He is a lavish entertainer.

 

In addition to having great personal wealth derived from the oil industry in Canada - which he helped nationalize - Maurice Strong was,

• the Secretary-General of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio

• head of the 1972 UN Conference on Human Environment in Stockholm

• the first Secretary-General of the UN Environment Program

• president of the World Federation of United Nations

• co-chairman of the World Economic Forum

• member of the Club of Rome

• trustee of the Aspen Institute

• a director of the World Future Society

That is probably more than you wanted to know about this man, but it is necessary in order to appreciate the importance of what follows.
 

 

 

A PLOT FOR ECONOMIC CRISIS
Maurice Strong believes - or says that he believes - the world's ecosystems can be preserved only if the affluent nations of the world can be disciplined into lowering their standard of living.

 

Production and consumption must be curtailed. To bring that about, those nations must submit to rationing, taxation, and political domination by world government. They will probably not do that voluntarily, he says, so they will have to be forced. To accomplish that, it will be necessary to engineer a global monetary crisis which will destroy their economic systems. Then they will have no choice but to accept assistance and control from the UN.

This strategy was revealed in the May, 1990, issue of West magazine, published in Canada. In an article entitled "The Wizard of Baca Grande," journalist Daniel Wood described his week-long experience at Strong's private ranch in southern Colorado.

 

This ranch has been visited by such CFR notables as,

• David Rockefeller

• Secretary-of-State Henry Kissinger

• founder of the World Bank Robert McNamara

• the presidents of such organizations as IBM, Pan Am, and Harvard

During Wood's stay at the ranch, the tycoon talked freely about environmentalism and politics.

 

To express his own world view, he said he was planning to write a novel about a group of world leaders who decided to save the planet. As the plot unfolded, it became obvious that it was based on real people and real events.

 

Wood continues the story:

Each year, he explains as background to the telling of the novel's plot, the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather in February to attend meetings and set economic agendas for the year ahead.

 

With this as a setting, he then says:

"What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. 'Will they do it?... The group's conclusion is 'no.' the rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?."

 

"This group of world leaders," he continues, "form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse. It's February. They're all at Davos. These aren't terrorists. They're world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world's commodity and stock markets. They've engineered, using their access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies, a panic. Then, they prevent the world's stock markets from closing. They jam the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davos as hostages. The markets cant close. The rich countries..."

And Strong makes a slight motion with his fingers as if he were flicking a cigarette butt out the window.

 

I sit there spellbound.

 

This is not any storyteller talking, this is Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders. He is, in fact, co-chairman of the Council of the World Economic Forum. He sits at the fulcrum of power. He is in a position to do it.

"I probably shouldn't be saying things like this," he says.

Maurice Strong's fanciful plot probably shouldn't be taken too seriously, at least in terms of a literal reading of future events.

 

It is unlikely they will unfold in exactly that manner - although it is not impossible. For one thing, it would not be necessary to hold the leaders of the industrialized nations at gun point. They would be the ones engineering this plot. Leaders from Third-World countries do not have the means to cause a global crisis.

 

That would have to come from the money centers in New York, London, or Tokyo. Furthermore, the masterminds behind this thrust for global government have always resided in the industrialized nations. They have come from the ranks of the CFR in America and from other branches of the International Roundtable in England, France, Belgium, Canada, Japan, and elsewhere.

 

They are the ideological descendants of Cecil Rhodes and they are fulfilling his dream.

It is not important whether or not Maurice Strong's plot for global economic collapse is to be taken literally. What is important is that men like him are thinking along those lines. As Wood pointed out, they are in a position to do it. Or something like it. If it is not this scenario, they will consider another one with similar consequences.

 

If history has proven anything, it is that men with financial and political power are quite capable of heinous plots against their fellow men. They have launched wars, caused depressions, and created famines to suit their personal agendas. We have little reason to believe that the world leaders of today are more saintly than their predecessors.

Furthermore, we must not be fooled by pretended concern for Mother Earth. The call-to-arms for saving the planet is a gigantic ruse.

 

There is just enough truth to environmental pollution to make the show "credible," as The Report from Iron Mountain phrased it, but the end-of-earth scenarios which drive the movement forward are bogus. The real objective in all of this is world government, the ultimate doomsday mechanism from which there can be no escape.

 

Destruction of the economic strength of the industrialized nations is merely a necessary prerequisite for ensnaring them into the global web.

 

The thrust of the current ecology movement is directed totally to that end.
 

 

 

SUMMARY
The United States government is mired in a 5-trillion-dollar debt.

 

By 1993, net interest payments on that debt were running $214 billion per year. That consumes about 14% of alb federal revenue and costs the average family over $5,000 each year. Nothing is purchased by it. It merely pays interest. It represents the government's largest single expense. Interest on the national debt is already consuming more than 57% of all the revenue collected from income taxes. At the present rate of expansion, it will consume 100% in 1998.

By 1992, there were more people working for government than for manufacturing companies in the private sector. There are more citizens receiving government checks than there are paying income taxes. When it is possible for people to vote on issues involving the transfer of wealth to themselves from others, the ballot box becomes a weapon whereby the majority plunders the minority.

 

That is the point of no return. It is a doomsday mechanism.

By 1992, more than half of all federal outlays went for what are called entitlements. Here is another doomsday mechanism. Entitlements are expenses - such as Social Security and Medicare - which are based on promises of future payments.

 

Entitlements represent 52% of federal outlays. When this is added to the 14% that is now being spent for interest payments on the national debt, we come to the startling conclusion that two-thirds of all federal expenses are now entirely automatic, and that percentage is growing each month.

The biggest doomsday mechanism of all is the Federal Reserve System. Every cent of our money supply came into being for the purpose of being loaned to someone. Those dollars will disappear when the loans are paid back. If we tried to pay off the national debt, our money supply would be undermined.

 

Under the Federal Reserve System, therefore, Congress would be fearful to eliminate the national debt even if it wanted to.

Political environmentalism has caused millions of acres of timber and agricultural land to be taken out of production. Heavy industry has been chased from our shores by our own government. High taxes, rules beyond reason for safety devices in the work place, so-called fair-employment practices, and mandatory health insurance are rapidly destroying what is left of the private sector.

 

The result is unemployment and dislocation for millions of American workers. Government moves in to fill the void it creates, and bureaucracy grows by the hour.

Federal taxes now take more than 40% of our private incomes. State, county, and local taxes are on top of that. Inflation feeds on what is left. We spend half of each year working for the government. Real wages in America have declined. Young couples with a single income have a lower standard of living than their parents did. The net worth of the average household is falling. The amount of leisure time is shrinking.

 

The percentage of Americans who own their homes is dropping. The age at which a family acquires a first home is rising. The number of families counted among the middle class is falling. The number of people living below the officially defined poverty level is rising. Over 90% of all Americans are broke at age 65.

None of this is accidental. It is the fulfillment of a plan by members of the CFR who comprise the hidden government of the United States. Their goal is the deliberate weakening of the industrialized nations as a prerequisite to bringing them into a world government built upon the principles of socialism, with themselves in control.

The origin of many of the stratagems in this plan can be traced to a government-sponsored think-tank study released in 1966 called the Report from Iron Mountain. The purpose of the study was to analyze methods by which a government can perpetuate itself in power - ways to control its citizens and prevent them from rebelling.

 

The conclusion of the report was that, in the past, war has been the only reliable means to achieve that goal.

 

Under world government, however, war technically would be impossible. So the main purpose of the study was to explore other methods for controlling populations and keeping them loyal to their leaders. It was concluded that a suitable substitute for war would require a new enemy which posed a frightful threat to survival. Neither the threat nor the enemy had to be real. They merely had to be believable.

Several surrogates for war were considered, but the only one holding real promise was the environmental-pollution model.

 

This was viewed as the most likely to succeed because,

1. it could be related to observable conditions such as smog and water pollution - in other words, it would be based partly on fact and, therefore, believable

2. predictions could be made showing end-of-earth scenarios just as horrible as atomic warfare.

Accuracy in these predictions would not be important. Their purpose would be to frighten, not to inform.

While the followers of the current environmental movement are preoccupied with visions of planetary doom, the leaders have an entirely different agenda. It is world government.

 

 

 

Chapter Twenty-Five
A PESSIMISTIC SCENARIO

The future portrayed as a continuation of present trends including a hypothetical banking crisis, massive inflation, collapse of the economy, domestic violence, the issuance of a new UN money, the arrival of UN "Peacekeeping" forces, and the final merger into The New World Order, a form of high-tech feudalism.

We are ready now for the final trip in our time machine. On the control panel in front of us are several selector switches.

 

The one on the left indicates Direction of Time. Set it to Future. The switch on the right indicates Primary Assumptions. Set it to the first notch which reads: Present trends unaltered. Leave the Secondary-Assumption switch where it is. The lever in the center is a throttle to determine speed of travel.

 

Nudge it forward - and hang on tight!
 

 

 

A BANKING CRISIS
It is 4:05 in the morning. While New York City sleeps, the computers on the fourth floor at Citibank are aware that a full-blown crisis is underway.

 

It started in London - five hours ahead of the East coast - and within minutes had spread like an electronic virus to Tokyo and Hong Kong. That was an hour ago. Alarms are now sounding on computer terminals in all the trading centers of the world, and automatic dialing devices are summoning money managers to their board rooms.

The panic started from rumors that one of the large U.S. banks was in trouble because of the simultaneous default of its loan to Mexico and the bankruptcy of its second-largest corporate borrower. Yesterday afternoon, the bank's president held a press conference and denied that these were serious problems.

 

To reinforce his optimism, he announced that, on Friday, the bank will be paying a higher-than-usual quarterly dividend. The professional money managers were not convinced. They knew that writing off these loans would wipe out the bank's entire net worth.

All American banks are now so intertwined in their operations that trouble for one affects them all. By 5 A.M., the money-center banks are facing heavy withdrawals from overseas depositors. By the time the sun peeks between the New York skyscrapers, Americans are also taking their money. These are not small transactions.

 

They involve other banks, insurance companies, and investment funds. The average withdrawal is over $3 million. The reservoir is draining fast.

It is now 7:45. The banks will soon be opening their doors, and already newspaper reporters and TV crews are arriving outside. A plan of unified action must be made quickly.

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve has arranged an emergency conference call with the CEOs of all the major banks, including one who was located at great effort at his fishing lodge in northern Canada. The President is also tied into the telephone network but on a "silent-monitor" basis.

 

Other than the Chairman, no one else knows he is listening.
 

 

 

TO SAVE THE BANKS IS TO SAVE THE WORLD
The CEO at Citibank quickly summarizes the problem. None of the banks will be able to sustain withdrawals of this magnitude for more than about forty-eight hours. Perhaps less.

 

The money is not in their vaults. It has been put into interest-bearing loans.

 

Even if the loans were performing, they would not have the money. Now that some of the larger loans are in default, the problem is even worse. If the Fed doesn't provide the money, the banks will have no choice but to close their doors and go out of business. That would cause a collapse of the economy and untold suffering Would follow.

 

Americans would be thrown out of work; families would go hungry; national security would be weakened. And it would undoubtedly spread to the entire world.

 

Who knows what dire consequences would follow - chaos, famine, and riots here at home? Revolution abroad? The return of a militaristic regime in Russia? Atomic war?

The Chairman cuts the monologue short. He is well aware that the banks must not be allowed to fail. That, after all, was one of the reasons the Federal Reserve was created. He wants to get on with the details of how to do it.

Yes, the FDIC is already broke, but don't worry about that. Congress will authorize a "loan" or some other mechanism for the Wed to create whatever amount of new money the FDIC might need. If Congress moves too slowly, the Fed has other technical means to accomplish the same result.

 

In the meantime, unlimited funding will be available at the Fed's discount window by 8 A.M., Eastern Standard time.

 

The printing presses are already running at full capacity to provide the currency. Fleets of airplanes and armored cars are standing by to deliver it. Furthermore, don't give up on those defaulted loans. Congress will probably bailout the bankrupt American corporation. And the President has said he will ask for additional funding for the IMF/World Bank.

 

That money will be created by the Fed and carry the stipulation that it must be [used by Mexico and other defaulting countries to resume interest payments on their loans.

The bankers are told to open their doors to the public and act calm. The press already knows that something is going on but not the seriousness of it. So tell them only what they already know. Nothing more. If people want to withdraw their money, give it to them. If lines should develop, call the police to maintain order, but continue paying out.

 

Offer to stay open after closing hours, if necessary, to accommodate everyone. Above all, have the tellers lake their time. Check and double check each transaction Move the lines slowly.

The armored trucks will arrive at the busiest hours so the guards can carry sacks of money past the customers for visual confirmation that there is enough for everyone. A bank officer then should tell the crowd that a fresh delivery of money has just been made from the Federal Reserve System and that there is plenty more where that came from.

 

Once people become convinced that the bank is able to pay, most of them will tire of the wait and go home.
 

 

 

PANIC AVERTED
It is now 6 P.M. of the following day. The plan was successful.

 

Lines of anxious depositors had formed yesterday morning, mostly In the larger cities, and resumed again this morning. But there has peen enough money for everyone. The news media treated the story lightly, making sure to include sound bites from various experts that banks can no longer fail, thanks to the FDIC and the Federal Reserve System. More than half the video time is devoted to armored trucks and guards carrying sacks of money.

 

The banks closed on schedule today, and there were no more lines.

While everything appears calm to the passengers on deck, the fire still rages out of control in the boiler room. Over a billion dollars has already fled, mostly overseas, and the hemorrhage continues. The Fed is pumping in fresh money to replace it. Two of the banks have instructed their computer technicians to activate an automatic two-hour delay on all incoming transactions.

 

There is talk of deliberately disabling the entire network and blaming the breakdown on overload, but the idea is abandoned. There are too many people in the system. Someone surely would leak the truth to the press.

The danger of a run on the banks by private depositors used to be the nightmare of the Federal Reserve. Now it is nothing compared to the electronic run that is taking place involving institutional depositors around the world. These are professionals who are not impressed by armed guards carrying bags of currency. They want their money now - and they are getting it.

 

Although they are receiving it in the form of electronic credits, they are immediately exchanging that for something more dependable, such as stocks, other currencies, and bullion.

This is the Fed's finest hour. It is exercising its many powers, carefully accumulated over the years, to create money out of whatever is at hand: U.S. Treasury bonds, bonds from other governments, corporate debt obligations, even direct loans to individuals and partnerships. Billions of new dollars are springing into existence.

 

They are spreading around the globe to fulfill the banks' obligation to give people back their money.
 

 

 

A REAL RUN ON THE BANKS
It is now seven weeks later. Something happened, but no one knows what.

 

Like a spark igniting a twig, spreading to a branch, and then engulfing the entire forest, the public has panicked. Responding to a primitive herd instinct, they are descending on the banks and the thrifts. They want their money. They want their savings.

Perhaps it was,

• the newly released statistics showing higher unemployment

• or the continued rise in bankruptcies

• or the Congressional vote to increase the national debt again

• or the jump in Social-Security taxes

• or the loss of another 140,000 jobs to Mexico

• or the riots in Chicago and Detroit for more food stamps and government housing

• or the presence of UN "Peacekeeping" troops to augment the National Guard

• or the rumor that the Bank of America was technically insolvent

• or the UN World Court ruling that the number of American automobiles had to be cut by 30% by December 31^st

• or the skeptical tone in the voice of the CBS news anchor as he quoted the latest prediction of renewed prosperity

Whatever it was, there are now long lines of sober-faced depositors outside every bank.

 

There is not enough cash in the vaults to meet the demand. Most money is checkbook money, which means it consists merely of magnetic impulses in a computer. Only about five per cent of the monetary supply is in the form of coins or currency. Most of that is already outside the banks in cash registers, wallets, and mattresses.

 

The amount inside the banks is only about one-half of one per cent. The Fed's emergency supply of currency - a large quantity warehoused for exactly this kind of crisis - is inadequate. This time, the printing presses cannot keep up.

Spokesmen from the Treasury and the Federal Reserve appear on TV and assure the nation that there is no need for panic. Everything is under control. The only problem is the irrational behavior of alarmists who have no faith in their country.

No one believes them. The lines grow longer, and the people become angry. Bank employees are jeered on their way to work. Bomb threats are made. Sporadic violence breaks out, and bank windows are smashed.

 

The International Guard is called up. The President declares a bank holiday.

Since people cannot close out their bank accounts by withdrawing currency, they rush through the stores on checkbook-spending sprees. If they cannot get their money back, at least they can buy things with it. Garages and basements are filling up with canned goods, shoes, liquor, tires, ammunition. Goods are becoming scarce, pushing prices upward. The Dow Jones is going through the roof as investors empty their checking accounts to buy anything for sale.

 

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) finally suspends trading.

Nine months have now passed. The crisis has been a blessing for politicians. They have thrived upon it and grown in stature because of it. It has given them an excuse to swarm through the country on fact-finding trips, to appear in shirt sleeves at town-hall meetings, to give speeches, and to be seen on television - all the time expressing grave concern and appearing to take charge. It has legitimized their role and somehow made them seem more necessary than before.

 

They have been converted in the public eye from oafs and bumpkins to serious-minded statesmen.

The party in power said it inherited the mess. The previous party blamed the current one for dropping the ball. Both parties, however, agreed on the solution: more of exactly the same policies that created the crisis: expanded power to the Federal Reserve, more government control over the economy, more subsidies and benefits, and more international commitments.

 

These were called "emergency reforms" and became law. The same men who created the problem prescribed the solution.

 

The public was grateful to have leaders of such vision and wisdom.
 

 

 

BANK BAILOUT AND MORE INFLATION
The most important emergency reform was to bail out the banks with taxpayers' dollars.

 

Defaulted foreign loans were taken over by the IMF/World Bank, and the failing corporate borrowers were given government grants disguised as loans - loans which everyone knew would never be paid back.

Next, the banks were nationalized, at least in part. In return for the bailout money, they gave large blocks of stock to the government which now operates as an official business partner. This was not a drastic change. The banks were already heavily regulated by government, even to the point of determining their profits, dividends, and executive salaries. That is the way the cartel wanted it.

 

It was the means by which competition was avoided and profits assured. Monetary scientists and political scientists have always worked as a hidden partnership. This merely made the relationship more visible.

Technically, no bank was allowed to fail. The Fed kept its promise on that. When the troubled banks were taken over, all depositors with $100,000 or less were fully protected. If they wanted their money and the bank didn't have it, the Fed simply manufactured it. No one was worried about the value of those dollars. They were just happy to have them.

Ten more months have now passed. Those new dollars are flooding throughout the system. The money supply has increased by the amount of the bailout plus the amount of new spending for welfare, health care, interest on the national debt, and foreign aid, all of which are in a vertical climb. Inflation has become institutionalized.

The dollar has been dethroned as the world's defacto currency.

 

Foreign investors and central banks no longer have any use for dollars. They have sent them back to the United States from whence they came. Over a trillion of them have returned to our shores like a huge flock of homing pigeons that fills the sky from horizon to horizon. They are buying our refrigerators, automobiles, computers, airplanes, cargo ships, armored tanks, office buildings, factories, real estate - pushing prices to levels that would have seemed impossible a year ago.

 

A single postage stamp costs as many dollars as once would have purchased a new TV set.

Most stores have stopped accepting checks and credit cards. Workers are paid daily with bundles of paper money. People rush to the stores to purchase groceries before prices rise even further. Commerce is paralyzed. Bank loans and mortgages are unobtainable. Savings accounts have been destroyed, including the cash values of insurance policies. Factories are shutting down. Businesses are closing their doors. Barter is commonplace. Old silver coins come out of private hoards and a hundred-dollar bill is exchanged for one silver dime.

Following the crash of 1929, the supply of paper money was limited because it was backed by silver, and the amount of silver itself was limited.

 

Those who had money were able to buy up the assets of those who did not. Since prices were falling, the longer they held on to their dollars, the more they could buy. Now, things are exactly the opposite. There is nothing to back the money supply except politics. There is no limit to the amount of currency that can be created. It is just a question of printing and delivering it. Money is abundant, and prices are rising.

 

Those who have money are spending it as soon as possible to prevent further loss of purchasing power. In the 1930s, everyone wanted dollars. Now, everyone wants to get rid of them.

The Emergency Banking Regulation No. 1, originally issued in 1961, empowered the Secretary of the Treasury - without consent of Congress - to seize anyone's bank account, savings account, or safe-deposit box. It also gave him the power to fix rents, prices, salaries, and hourly wages, and to impose rationing.

 

This was to be done "in the event of attack on the United States."

 

That phrase now has been changed to read: "in the event of national emergency." The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has been expanded to administer the directives of the Treasury.

 

FEMA also has the power to detain and forcibly relocate any citizen "in the event of a national emergency."
 

 

 

NEW MONEY
Three more months have passed, and the President has declared a state of national emergency.

 

Today, the Secretary of the Treasury announced that the nations of the world had ratified a multilateral treaty that would solve the inflationary problems of the United States. This will be accomplished through the issuance of a new world-wide monetary unit called the Bancor, the name proposed by John Maynard Keynes at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944.

 

This new money will restore our commerce and put a stop to inflation. At last, said the Treasury Secretary, man will have total control over his economic destiny. Money will now become his servant instead of his master.

The United States, he said, has agreed to accept the Bancor as legal tender for all debts, public and private. The old money will still be honored but will be phased out over a three-month period. After that date, Federal Reserve Notes will no longer be valid. During the transition period, the old money may be exchanged at any bank at the ratio of one Bancor for five-hundred dollars.

 

All existing contracts expressed in dollars - including home mortgages - are now converted to Bancors in that same ratio.

In the same announcement, the Secretary advised that the IMF/World Bank was backing this new money with something far more precious than gold. Instead, it will be backed by the assets of the world. These include bonds from the participating governments plus millions of acres of wilderness lands that have been deposited into the UN "Environmental Bank."

 

The National Parks Land forests of the United States have been added to those reserves, and they will now be under the supervision of the UN Wilderness Asset Preservation and Enhancement Agency (WAPEA). From this pate forward, the Federal Reserve System will operate as a subdivision of the IMF which is now the central bank of the world.

Although the Secretary did not mention it in his public appearance, the UN treaty also obligated the government to put restrictions on the use of cash. Every citizen is to be issued an international ID card. The primary purpose of these machine-readable cards is to provide positive identification for all citizens at transportation depots and military checkpoints.

 

They also can be used by the banks and stores to access checking accounts, which are how called debit accounts.

Every citizen is being issued an account in a bank near his place of residence. All payments by employers or government agencies will be made by electronic transfer. Cash transactions larger than live Bancors will be illegal in three months. Most expenditures will be paid by debit card.

 

That is the only way in which the UN Monetary Transaction Tracking Agency (MTTA) can combat counterfeiting and prevent money laundering by organized crime. That, of course, is camouflage. The government complex issuing the new money is the greatest perpetrator of counterfeiting and organized prime the world has ever seen. The real targets are political dissidents and those escaping taxes in the underground economy.

No one will be allowed to earn or buy or sell without this ID card, nor will they be allowed to leave the country or even to migrate to another city. If any government agency has reason to Bed-flag an individual, his card will not clear, and he will be Rocked from virtually all economic transactions and geographical movements. It is the ultimate control.

The new money offers the Cabal yet one more benefit. There can never be another run on the banks, because it is now illegal to demand currency.
 

 

 

THE RISE OF REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS
Hyperinflation is fertile ground for the seeds of revolution.

 

Economic despair led the masses to grasp at the promises of,

• Lenin in Russia

• Hitler in Germany

• Mussolini in Italy

• Mao in China

It has now been three years since that fateful run on the banks in New York, and inflation has not abated, even with the introduction of the Bancor.

 

Now we are witnessing massive public demonstrations in every major city for higher wages, more jobs, larger government benefits, and more stringent price controls. Since there are practically no goods in the stores at any price, the demonstrators are also calling for higher output from government factories.

 

The demonstrations have been organized by radical organizations advocating the overthrow of the "decadent capitalist" system and the enthronement of socialism in its place. The participants in the street do not understand the words they chant. They are unaware that capitalism has been dead in America for many years and that it is socialism they already have.

Nevertheless, there are tens of thousands of desperate people who are attracted to the rhetoric of revolution. Terrorism and revolutionary insurgency have become common occurrences in the major urban areas. The ranks of the revolutionaries are swelled by those who come solely for the looting that always follows.

People are frightened by these violent events and demand the restoration of law and order. They are relieved when martial law is declared. They are happy to see the international Guard patrolling their neighborhoods. They are not resentful of being confined in their homes or arbitrarily detained by soldiers. They are actually grateful for the omni-presence of the police state.

It is curious that the revolutionary groups behind this violence have not been inhibited by the government. To the contrary, they have been given grants from CFR organizations, and their leaders have been treated courteously by CFR politicians.

 

The CFR media have given them extended coverage in the news and has presented their cause with sympathy. A few dissidents have begun to wonder if the revolutionaries are but the unknowing pawns of those in power and that their primary function is to frighten the population into accepting the constraints of a police state.

Such voices, however, are quickly silenced. Those who question the government or the media are branded as extremists at the lunatic fringe.

 

Authorities say that they are the cause of our present woes. They are remnants of the old system based on profit-seeking and race-hating. They are guilty of politically-incorrect attitudes and hate crimes. They are sentenced to attitude-correction centers for psychological treatment and rehabilitation.

 

Those who do not immediately recant are never seen again.
 

 

 

HOMES ARE NATIONALIZED
One of the first industries to feel the raw power of "emergency measures" was the home industry.

 

During the early stages of inflation, people were applying their increasingly worthless dollars to pay down their mortgages. That was devastating to the lenders. They were being paid back in dollars that were worth only a fraction of the ones they had loaned out.

 

The banking crisis had paused the disappearance of savings and investment capital, so they were unable to issue new loans to replace the old. Besides, people were afraid to sell their homes under such chaotic times and, if they did, very few were willing to buy with interest rates that high. Old loans were being paid off, and new loans were not replacing them. The S&Ls, which in the 1980s had been in trouble because home prices were falling, now were going broke because prices were rising.

Congress applied the expected political fix by bailing them out and taking them over. But that did not stop the losses.

 

It merely transferred them to the taxpayers. To put an end to the losses, Congress passed the Housing Fairness and Reform Act (HFRA). It converted all Bancor-denominated contracts to a new unit of value - called the "Fairness Value" - which is determined by the National Average Price Index (NAPI) on Fridays of the preceding week. This has nothing to do with interest rates.

 

It relates to Bancor values.

 

For the purpose of illustration, let us convert Bancors back to dollars. A $50,000 loan on Friday became a $920,000 loan on Monday. Few people could afford the payments. Thousands of angry voters stormed the Capitol building in protest. While the mob shouted obscenities outside, Congress hastily voted to declare a moratorium on all mortgage payments. By the end of the day, no one had to pay anything!

 

The people returned to their homes with satisfaction and gratitude for their wise and generous leaders.

That was only an "emergency" measure to be handled on a more sound basis later on. Many months have now passed, and Congress has not dared to tamper with the arrangement. The voters would throw them out of office if they tried. Millions of people have been living in their homes at no cost, except for county taxes, which were also beyond the ability of anyone to pay. Following the lead of Congress, the counties also declared a moratorium on their taxes - but not until the federal government agreed to make up their losses under terms of the newly passed Aid to Local Governments Act (ALGA).

Renters are now in the same position, because virtually all rental property has been nationalized, even that which had been totally paid for by their owners. Under HFRA, it is not "fair" for those who are buying their homes to have an advantage over those who are renting.

 

Rent controls made it impossible for apartment owners to keep pace with the rising costs of maintenance and especially their rising taxes. Virtually all rental units have been seized by county governments for back taxes. And since the counties themselves are now dependent on the federal government for most of their revenue, their real estate has been transferred to federal agencies in return for federal aid.

All of this was pleasing to the voters who were gratified that their leaders were "doing something" to solve their problems. It gradually became clear, however, that the federal government was now the owner of all their homes and apartments. The reality is that people are living in them only at the pleasure of the government.

 

They can be relocated to other quarters if that is what the government wants.
 

 

 

WAGE-PRICE CONTROLS AND WORK ARMIES
Meanwhile, the UN Wage and Price Stabilization Agency (WPSA) has instituted wage and price controls to combat inflation. What few businesses were able to survive the ravages of inflation are knocked out by these measures.

 

Vital industries have been seized by the WPSA and prevented from closing.

 

When employees refuse to work for low, fixed wages or to take the jobs assigned to them, they are placed under arrest and convicted of anti-democratic activities. Given a choice between prison or "volunteering" for the UN Full Employment and Environmental Restoration Army (FEERA), most of them chose the army. They are now doing the work prescribed for them in return for food and shelter.

 

Many have been reassigned to new jobs, new cities, even new countries; depending on the employment quotas established by the UN International Human Resource Allocation Agency (IHRAA). Their families have been given living quarters which are appropriate to their work status and their willingness to cooperate.

Automobiles are now used only by the ruling elite who hold government positions of authority. To the extent possible, workers have been relocated to barracks which were constructed within walking distance of major industries. Others use rapid-transit systems, which have been greatly expanded by FEERA. For middle management and the more skilled workers who are allowed to live in the suburbs, there are "Peoples' Van Pools" (PVPs) that shuttle them to and from assigned boarding areas.

Last week, Maurice Strong, who is now the Director of IHRAA, toured the fifteen regional subdivisions that have been carved out of the North-American continent - including the former United States and Canada - and expressed gratification that America, at last, has ceased to be an aggressor against the world.

Another twenty years have slipped by, and we now find ourselves in The New World Order. No one around us is sure exactly when it began. In fact, there was no official starting date, no announcement in the media, no ceremony with blaring of trumpets. Sometime during the past ten or fifteen years, it became obvious that it just was, and everyone accepted it as the natural evolution of political trends and necessities.

 

Now, a whole generation is in place that has no memory of another way of life. Many of the older folks have all but forgotten the details of their previous existence. And, of course, many of them have been eliminated.

 

Schools and textbooks speak of the bygone era as one of unbridled competition, selfishness, and injustice.

 

Previously commonplace possessions such as automobiles and private homes and three pairs of shoes are hardly mentioned, and when they are, they are derided as wasteful artifacts of a decadent society that, fortunately, has ceased to exist
 

 

 

NO TAXES OR INFLATION OR DEPRESSIONS
The public is no longer concerned over high taxes. For the most part, there are none.

 

Everyone works for the government - directly or indirectly - and is paid by electronic transfer to a government-regulated bank which controls all spending accounts. Even those large corporations which have been allowed to maintain the appearance of private ownership are merely junior partners of government. They are totally regulated and, at the same time, totally protected from failure.

 

The amount each citizen receives for his labor is determined by his technical usefulness and his political rank. His taxes are pleasantly low or non-existent. The cost of government now is derived almost totally from expansion of the money supply - and from the economic value of the work battalions.

Each regional government of the world determines its spending needs and then offers to sell bonds in the open market to raise the money. The IMF/World Bank, acting as the UN's central bank, is the primary buyer. The Bank determines how much money to allow each regional government and then "purchases" that amount of bonds.

 

It accomplishes that by making an electronic transfer of "credits" to one of its correspondent banks within the region receiving the money.

 

Once that has happened, the local government can draw upon those credits to pay its bills. Not a single tax dollar is needed for any of that. The IMF/World bank simply creates the money and the regional governments spend it.

In days gone by, this increase in the money supply would have caused prices and wages to go up almost immediately. Not anymore. Prices and wages are controlled. What does happen, however, is that the government is caught in its own trap. It needs to keep the workers happy by giving them wage increases, but it also needs to keep its factories functioning by allowing price increases as well. The wage-price spiral, therefore, is not eliminated.

 

It is merely delayed a few months. And, instead of happening in response to the interplay of supply and demand in a free market, it is directed by bureaucratic formula. The end result is the same either way. The people of the world are still paying the cost of their international and local governments through the hidden taxation called inflation.

In the chaotic past, the industrialized nations of the world went through phases of disruptive inflation often exceeding 1000% per year.

 

That served a purpose in helping to destroy public faith in their existing national governments. It softened them up and made them more willing to accept drastic changes in their life styles and their political institutions. It paved the way to The New World Order.

 

But now we have arrived, and extreme inflation rates - at least in the absence of war - would cause public dissatisfaction and be counterproductive. Inflation, therefore, has now been institutionalized at a fairly constant 5% per year. That has been determined to be the optimum level for generating the most revenue without causing public alarm.

 

Five per cent, everyone agrees, is "moderate." They can live with that. But we tend to forget that it is 5% per year, forever.

A 5% devaluation applies, not only to the money earned this year, but to all that is left over from previous years. At the end of |he first year, the original dollar is worth 95 cents. At the end of the second year, it is reduced again by 5% leaving its worth at 90 cents, and so on.

 

After 20 years, the government will have confiscated 64% of every dollar we saved at the beginning of our careers. After working 45 years, the hidden tax on those dollars will be 90%. The government will take virtually all of them over our lifetime.

 

Earned interest will partially offset this effect but it will not alter the underlying reality of government confiscation.
 

 

 

EFFECT OF "MODEST" 5% INFLATION
For the past forty years, all the published charts illustrating the decline of the dollar from such-and-such a date to the "present" show the following type of curve.
 

 

These, of course, are averages.

 

A few people in the middle class of the bureaucracy will have managed to place some of their dollars into tangible assets or income-producing securities - what few that remain - where they are somewhat protected from the effects of inflation. For the vast majority, however, inflation hedges constitute but a tiny fraction of all they have earned over a lifetime.

And so we find that, in The New World Order, inflation has been institutionalized at a "modest" level of five per cent. Once in every five or six generations - as prices climb higher and higher - a new monetary unit can be issued to replace the old in order to eliminate some of the zeros. But no one will live long enough to experience more than one devaluation.

 

Each generation is unconcerned about the loss of the previous one. Young people come into the process without realizing it is circular instead of linear. They cannot comprehend the total because they were not alive at the beginning and will not be alive at the end. In fact, there need not even be an end. The process can be continued forever.

By this mechanism - and with the output of work battalions - government can operate entirely without taxes. The lifetime output of every human being is at its disposal. Workers are allowed a color TV, state-subsidized alcohol and recreational drugs, and violent sports to amuse them, but they have no other options. They cannot escape their class.

 

Society is divided into the rulers and the ruled, with an administrative bureaucracy in between.

 

Privilege is now largely a right of birth. The worker class and even most of the administrators serve masters whom they do not know by name. But serve they do. Their new lords are the monetary and political scientists who created and who now control The New World Order.

 

All of mankind is in a condition of high-tech feudalism.
 

 

 

HIGH-TECH FEUDALISM
Inflation is not the only aspect of economic chaos that is now under control.

 

Booms and busts in the business cycle are also a thing of the past. Like direct taxes, there are no business cycles any more. Now that the government has firm control over every economic check point, business cycles simply are not allowed.

 

There is no speculation in the market, because no one has funds with which to speculate. There are no expansions of inventories or capital goods in order to maximize future profits, because inventories now are determined by formula. Besides, profits are also determined by formula and, although they are just large enough to keep pace with inflation, they are guaranteed.

Chaos in the economy is now impossible because it is not tolerated. Neither is a depression. Yes, there are hundreds of bullions of human beings living under conditions of extreme hardship, and thousands die of starvation every day, but depressions are outlawed. No politician, no author, no one in the media [would dare to suggest that the system was a failure.

 

Each month the government releases new statistics showing in some obscure way or another that the economy is steadily improving.

 

Although people are starving everywhere, hunger does not exist anymore. Although work battalions are crammed into flimsy barracks and tents, and although older homes and apartment buildings are falling down for lack of maintenance, forcing more and more families to share their tiny, unheated dwellings - nevertheless, the [housing shortage is officially being eliminated.

 

There are no more problems in the economy, because they now are illegal.
 

 

 

VOICES FROM THE PAST
There is a message flashing on the front panel of our time machine.

 

It reads:

Duplicate sequence in memory bank. Check years 1816, 1831, 1904, and 1949.

That tells us that the on-board computer was found a similarity between what we are now viewing in the future and something that was recorded in the past. We had better check it out. On your keyboard, type: Send data to printer and press the key labeled Execute.

The first item is coming out of the printer now. It is a warning, m\ the year 1816, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to Sam Kercheval in which he said:

We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.

 

If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessities and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements... our people... must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give our earnings of fifteen of these to the government... have no time to think, no means of calling our mis-managers to account.

 

But be glad to obtain sustenance by hiring ourselves out to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers... And this is the tendency of all human governments... till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery...

 

And the forehorse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.

Here is the second printout. It is a political commentary and a prophesy.

 

In the year 1831, a young Frenchman, named Alexis de Tocqueville, toured the United States to prepare an official report to his government on the American prison system. His real interest, however, was the social and political environment in the New World. He found much to admire in America but he also observed what he thought were the seeds of its destruction.

 

Upon his return to France the following year, he began work on a four-volume analysis of the strengths and weaknesses he found. His perceptivity was remarkable, and his work, entitled Democracy in America, has remained as one of the world's classic works in political science.

 

This is the part that our computer recognized:

The Americans hold that in every state the supreme power ought to emanate from the people; but when once that power is constituted, they can conceive, as it were, no limits to it, and they are ready to admit that it has the right to do whatever it pleases...

 

The idea of rights inherent in certain individuals is rapidly disappearing from the minds of men; the idea of the omnipotence and sole authority of society at large rises to fill its place...

The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men, all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. Each of them, living apart, is a stranger to the fate of all the rest; his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind...

Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing...

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.

 

The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd...

Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free.

 

As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians.

 

Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain.

 

By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again. ¹

 

1. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. TI (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1945), pp. 290-91,318-19.

 

 

 

EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR HUMAN ENGINEERING
The third printout is dated 1904 and is a report issued by the General Education Board, one of the first foundations established by John D. Rockefeller, Sr.

 

The purpose of the foundation was to use the power of money, not to raise the level of education in America, as was widely believed at the time, but to influence the direction of that education. Specifically, it was to promote the Ideology of collectivism and internationalism.

 

The object was to use the classroom to teach attitudes that encourage people to be passive and submissive to their rulers.

 

The goal was - and is - to create citizens who are educated enough for productive work under Supervision but not enough to question authority or seek to rise above their class. True education was to be restricted to the sons and daughters of the elite. For the rest, it would be better to produce skilled workers with no particular aspirations other than BD enjoy life.

 

It was enough, as de Tocqueville phrased it,

"that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing."

In the first publication of the General Education Board, Fred Gates explained the plan:

In our dreams we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands.

 

The present educational conventions fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers of mental learning or of science. We have not to raise from among them authors, editors, poets, or men of letters.

 

We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen of whom we have ample supply.

 

The task we set before ourselves is very simple as well as a very beautiful one: To train these people as we find them to a perfectly ideal life just where they are... in the homes, in the shop, and on the farm.¹

 

1. "Occasional Paper No. 1," General Education Board, 1904.

 

 

 

BACK TO THE FUTURE
Here is the fourth computer printout from the past. It is a satire - and a warning.

 

In the year 1949, George Orwell wrote his classic novel entitled 1984. In it, he portrayed the same "futuristic" scenes that now lie before us as we sit in our time machine. His only error appears to have been the date that became the title of his book. If he were writing it today, it is likely he would call it 2054.

 

Orwell described the world of our future as being divided into three regions called Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia.

 

Oceania consists of the Americas plus England, Australia, and the Pacific Islands; Eurasia is Russia and continental Europe; Eastasia comprises China, Japan, Southeast Asia, & India. These superstates are constantly at war with each other. The wars are not fought to conquer the enemy, they are waged for the primary purpose of controlling the population.

 

The people in all three territories tolerate their misery and oppression because sacrifices are necessary in time of war. Most of the stratagems outlined in The Report from Iron Mountain are to be found in Orwell's narrative, but Orwell described them first. The think-tank was even willing to credit Orwell as the source of some of its concepts. For example, on the subject of establishing a modern, sophisticated form of slavery, the group at Iron Mountain said:
 

Up to now, this has been suggested only in fiction, notably in the works of Wells, Huxley, Orwell, and others engaged in the imaginative anticipation of the sociology of the future. But the fantasies projected in Brave New World and 1984 have seemed less and less implausible over the years since their publication.

 

The traditional association of slavery with ancient preindustrial cultures should not blind us to its adaptability to advanced forms of social organization.

From this we see that Orwell's work is far more than an entertaining novel. It is relevant to our present journey in time. Our would-be masters have studied him carefully. So should we.

 

This is what he wrote:

These three superstates are permanently at war, and have been so for the past twenty-five years.

 

War, however, is no longer the desperate, annihilating struggle that it was in the early decades of the twentieth century... This is not to say that either the conduct of the war, or the prevailing attitude toward it, has become less bloodthirsty or more chivalrous.

 

On the contrary, war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal...

The primary aim of modem warfare... is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. [The "machine" is society's technical and industrial capacity to produce goods.]...

 

From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations...

But it was also clear that an all-around increase in wealth threatened the destruction - indeed in some cases was the destruction - of a hierarchical society.

 

In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motorcar or even an airplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction...

 

Such a society could not long remain stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance...

The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labor. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking into the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent...

In practice the needs of the population are always underestimated, with the result that there is a chronic shortage of half the necessities of life; but this is looked on as an advantage. It is deliberate policy to keep even the favored groups somewhere near the brink of hardship, because a general state of scarcity increases the importance of small privileges and thus magnifies the distinction between one group and another...

 

The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city, where the possession of a lump of horseflesh makes the difference between wealth and poverty. And at the same time the consequences of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival...

War, it will be seen, not only accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labor of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them.

 

But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society...

War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair... waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact.¹

1. George Orwell, 1984 (New York: New American Library/Signet, 1949), pp 153-164.

 

 

 

THE FUNCTION OF WASTE IN MODERN TOTALITARIANISM
Once again, it is clear that Orwell's grim narrative was a primary model for The Report from Iron Mountain.

 

The authors of that blueprint for our future spoke at length about the value of planned waste as a means of preventing the masses from improving their standard of living.

 

They wrote:

The production of weapons of mass destruction has always been associated with economic "waste." The term is pejorative, since it implies a failure of function. But no human activity can properly be considered wasteful if it achieves its contextual objective...

In the case of military "waste," there is indeed a larger social utility... In advanced modern democratic societies, the war system... has served as the last great safeguard against the elimination of necessary social classes.

 

As economic productivity increases to a level further and further above that of minimum subsistence, it becomes more and more difficult for a society to maintain distribution patterns insuring the existence of "hewers of wood and drawers of water."...

The arbitrary nature of war expenditures and of other military activities make them ideally suited to control these essential class relationships...

 

The continuance of the war system must be assured, if for no other reason, among others, than to preserve whatever quality and degree of poverty a society requires as an incentive, as well as to maintain the stability of its internal organization of power. ¹

1. Lewin, Report, pp. 34-35,40-41.

 

 

These documents from the real past and the imagined future £an help us to better understand our present.

 

The spectacle of wasteful government spending suddenly becomes logical. It is not [stupidity that pays farmers to destroy their crops, or that purchases trillion-dollar weapons systems that are never deployed or in some cases not even completed, or that provides funding for studies of the sex life of the tse-tse fly, or that gives grants to pornographers posing as artists.

 

The overriding object behind most of these Boondoggles is to waste the resources of the nation. It is obvious by now that the decline in living standards in the Western world is Associated with a widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. What is not so obvious, however, is that this is according to plan.

 

To that end, massive waste in government spending is not an unfortunate by-product, it is the goal.

That brings us back to the question of finding an acceptable substitute for war. War is not only the ultimate waste, it is also the ultimate motivation for human action. As Orwell said, waste in the absence of war "would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society." Will the environmental-pollution model be able to sufficiently motivate human action to be a substitute for war?

That is not a safe assumption. The possibility of war in our future cannot be ruled out. The environmental-pollution model is pot yet thoroughly proven. It is working well for limited purposes and on a limited scale, but it is still doubtful that it will ever equal the hysteria potential of a physical war.

The world planners will not abandon the use of war until the new model has been proven over many years. On that point, the Report from Iron Mountain was emphatic:

When asked how best to prepare for the advent of peace, we must first reply, as strongly as we can, that the war system cannot responsibly be allowed to disappear until,

1) we know exactly what it is we plan to put in its place

2) we are certain, beyond reasonable doubt, that these substitute institutions will serve their purposes in terms of the survival and stability of society...

It is uncertain, at this time, whether peace will ever be possible. It is far more questionable... that it would be desirable even if it were demonstrably attainable. ¹

 

1. Ibid., pp. 88-90.

 

 

REGIONALISM AS A TRANSITION TO WORLD GOVERNMENT
The coalescing of the world's nations into three regional superstates was already visible even before we activated our time machine.

 

The first steps had been strictly economic but were soon followed by political and military consolidation. The European Union (EU), including Russia, began with the issuance of a common money and eventually merged into a functional regional government. It was Orwell's Eurasia, even though it avoided calling itself by that name.

 

Treaties binding Canada, the United States, Mexico, and South America formed the basic outline of Oceania, built around the Federal-Reserve Note as the regional money.

 

Japan eventually became hostile to the West when trading was no longer to her sole advantage and, along with China which had been built up by Western aid and technology, and with India which had been given atomic technology by the West, became the political center of Eastasia.

 

Even as far back as the 1980s, it was known as the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" Its monetary system was to be based upon the Yen.

The people of the former nations were not yet ready for a giant leap into world government. They had to be led to that goal by a series of shorter and less frightening steps. They were more willing to surrender their economic and military independence to regional groupings of people who were closer in ethnic and cultural origin and who shared common borders.

 

Only after several decades of transition was it possible to make the final merger. In the meantime, the world was plunged alternately between war and peace. After each cycle of war, the population was more frightened, impoverished, and collectivized.

 

In the end, world government was irresistible. By that time, the environmental-pollution model and the alien-invasion model had been perfected to provide high levels of human motivation. But, even then, regional uprisings were occasionally engineered when necessary to justify massive "peacekeeping" operations.

 

War was never fully abandoned. It remained, as it always had been, a necessity for the stabilization of society.
 

 

 

HOW FIXED IS THE FUTURE?
Let us return now to the present from which we departed and reflect upon our journey.

 

The first thing that strikes us is that we cannot be certain the future will unfold exactly as we have seen it. There are too many variables. When we originally set our Primary-Assumption selector to Present trends unaltered, we left the Secondary-Assumption selector where it was. It was pointing to Banking Crisis. Had we chosen the next position, no Banking Crisis, our journey would have been different.

 

We would not have seen long lines of Depositors or panic-buying in the stores or closing of the stock market. But we would still have witnessed the same scenes of despair in the more distant future. We merely would have travelled a different path of events to get there.

The forces driving our society into global totalitarianism would [not change one iota. We still would have the doomsday mechanisms at work. We would have the CFR in control of the power renters of government and the media. And we would have an electorate which is unaware of what is being done to them and, therefore, unable to resist.

 

Through environmental and economic treaties and through military disarmament to the UN, we would witness the same emergence of a world central bank, a world government, and a world army to enforce its dictates. Inflation and wage/price controls would have progressed more or less the same, driving consumer goods out of existence and men into bondage. Instead of moving toward The New World Order in a series of economic spasms, we merely would have travelled a less violent bath and arrived at exactly the same destination.

There is little doubt that the master planners would prefer to follow the more tranquil route. Patient gradualism is less risky. But not everything is within their control. Events can get out of hand, and powerful economic forces can become suddenly unleashed.

 

Banking crises can occur even without being deliberately caused.

On the other hand, the Cabal also knows that crises are useful in driving the masses into the corral faster than they would otherwise move.

 

Therefore, the application of some kind of scientifically engineered crisis cannot be ruled out. It could take many forms:

Ethnic violence, terrorism, plague, even war itself.

But none of that makes any difference. It will not alter our direction of travel through time. It will only determine our specific route.

 

Like a flowing river, it may be diverted this way or that by natural barriers or even by man-made channels, dikes, and dams, but it eventually will reach the sea. Our concluding reflection, therefore, is that it is relatively unimportant whether there will be a banking crisis or any other cataclysmic event. These are all secondary assumptions which are meaningless.

 

Our only real hope for averting the new feudalism of the future is to change the Primary assumption.

 

We must change it to read: Present Trends Reversed.
 

 

 

SUMMARY
A pessimistic scenario of future events includes a banking crisis, followed by a government bailout and the eventual nationalization of all banks. The final cost is staggering and is paid with money created by the Federal Reserve.

 

It is passed on to the public in the form of inflation.

Further inflation is caused by the continual expansion of welfare programs, socialized medicine, entitlement programs, and interest on the national debt. The dollar is finally abandoned as the defacto currency of the world.

 

Trillions of dollars are sent back to the United States by foreign investors to be converted as quickly as possible into tangible assets. That causes even greater inflation than before. So massive is the inflationary pressure that industry and commerce come to a halt. Barter becomes the means of exchange. America takes her place among the depressed nations of South America, Africa, and Asia - mired together in economic equality.

Politicians seize upon the opportunity and offer bold reforms. The reforms are more of exactly what created the problem in the first place: expanded governmental power, new regulatory agencies, and more restrictions on freedom. But this time, the programs begin to take on an international flavor. The American dollar is replaced by a new UN money, and the Federal Reserve System becomes a branch operation of the IMF/World Bank.

Electronic transfers gradually replace cash and checking accounts. This permits UN agencies to monitor the financial activities of every person.

 

A machine-readable ID card is used for that purpose. If an individual is red flagged by any government agency, the card does not clear, and he is cut off from all economic transactions and travel. It is the ultimate control.

Increasing violence in the streets from revolutionary movements and ethnic clashes provide an excuse for martial law. The public is happy to see UN soldiers checking ID cards. The police-state arrives in the name of public safety.

Eventually all private dwellings are taken over by the government as a result of bailing out the home-mortgage industry.

 

Rental property is also taken, as former landlords are unable to pay property taxes. People are allowed to live in these dwellings at reasonable cost, or no cost at all. It gradually becomes clear, however, that the government is now the owner of all homes and apartments. People are living in them only at the pleasure of the government. They can be reassigned at any time.

Wages and prices are controlled. Dissidents are placed into work armies. There are no more autos except for the ruling elite. Public transportation is provided for the masses, and those with limited skills live in government housing within walking distance of their assigned jobs. Men have been reduced to the level of serfs who are subservient to their masters.

 

Their condition of life can only be described as high-tech feudalism.

There is no certainty that the future will unfold in exactly that manner, because there are too many variables. For example, if we had assumed that there will not be a banking crisis, then our journey would be different.

 

We would not see long lines of depositors or panic-buying in the stores or closing of the stock market. But we would still witness the same scenes of despair in the more distant future.

 

We merely would have travelled a different path of events to get there. That is because the forces driving our society into global totalitarianism would not have changed one iota. We still would have the doomsday mechanisms at work. We would have the CFR in control of the power centers of government and the media. We would have an electorate which is unaware of what is being done to them and, therefore, unable to resist.

 

Through environmental and economic treaties and through military disarmament to the UN, we would witness the same emergence of a world central bank, a world government, and a world army to enforce its dictates. Inflation and wage/price controls would have progressed more or less the same, driving consumer goods out of existence and men into bondage.

 

Instead of moving toward The New World Order in a series of economic spasms, we merely would have travelled a less violent path and arrived at exactly the same destination.

 

 

 

 

Chapter Twenty-Six
A REALISTIC SCENARIO

What must be done if we are to avert the pessimistic scenario; a list of specific measures that must be taken to stop the monetary binge; an appraisal of how severe the economic hangover will be; a checklist for personal survival - and beyond.

The pessimistic scenario presented in the previous chapter is the kind of narrative that turns people off. No one wants to hear those things, even if they are true - or we should say especially if they are true.

 

As Adlai Stevenson said when he was a candidate for President:

"The contest between agreeable fancy and disagreeable fact is unequal. Americans are suckers for good news."

So, where is the optimistic scenario in which everything turns out all right, in which prosperity is restored and freedom is preserved after all?

 

Actually, it is not hard to locate. You can find it [every day somewhere in your newspaper. It is the shared faith of almost all politicians, experts, and commentators. If that is what won want to hear, you have just wasted a lot of time reading this book.

There is no optimistic scenario. Events have progressed too far for that. Even if we begin to turn things around by forcing Congress to cut spending, reduce the debt, and disentangle from UN treaties, the Cabal will not let go without a ferocious fight.

 

When the Second Bank of the United States was struggling for its life in 1834, Nicholas Biddle, who controlled it, set about to cause as much havoc in the economy as possible and then to blame it on president Jackson's anti-bank policies. By suddenly tightening credit and withdrawing money from circulation, he triggered a full-scale national depression.

 

At the height of his attack, he declared:

"All other banks and all the merchants may break, but the Bank of the United States shall not break."

The amount of devastation that could be caused by today's Federal Reserve is infinitely greater than what Biddle was able to unleash.

 

It would be pure self-deception to think that the Cabal would quietly give up its power without exercising that option. We must conclude that no one is going to get out of this one unscathed.

 

There is hell to pay, and it is we who are going to pay it.
 

 

 

SEVENTH REASON TO ABOLISH THE FED
What has any of this to do with the Federal Reserve System? The answer is that the Federal Reserve is the starting point of the pessimistic scenario.

 

The chain of events begins with fiat money created by a central bank, which leads to government debt, which causes inflation, which destroys the economy, which impoverishes the people, which provides an excuse for increasing government power, which is an on-going process culminating in totalitarianism.

 

Eliminate the Federal Reserve from this equation, and the pessimistic scenario ceases to exist. That is the seventh and final reason to abolish the Fed: It is an instrument of totalitarianism.

If the optimistic scenario is too optimistic and the pessimistic scenario is too pessimistic, then what is the scenario that we should hope lies in our future?
There is a middle course that lies between optimism and pessimism. It is called realism. Calling it a realistic scenario is not meant to imply that it is predetermined to happen, nor that it is even likely to happen.

 

It is realistic only in the sense that it can happen if certain conditions are met. The balance of this chapter will be devoted to an analysis of those conditions.

Let us begin by allowing our opponent, Cynicism, to state the problem we face:

"Is it realistic to believe that the current trends can actually be reversed? Isn't it just fantasy to think that anything can be done at this late date to break the CFR's hold over government, media, and education? Do we really expect the gum-chewing public to go upstream against the indoctrination of newspapers, magazines, television, and movies?"

Apathy joins in:

"Forget it. There's nothing you can do. The bankers and politicians have all the money and all the power. The game is already over. Make the most of it, and enjoy life while you can."

Do not listen to Cynicism and Apathy. They are agents of your enemy.

 

They want you to quietly get in line and submit without a struggle. However, they do make a point that must not be overlooked. The battle has progressed far, and our position is not good. If we are to reverse the present trends, we must be prepared to make a herculean effort.

 

That does not mean "Write your Congressman" or "Vote on Tuesday" or "Sign a petition" or "Send in a donation" That is far too easy. Those measures still play an important role in the battle plan but they fall far short of the need. Armchair campaigns will no longer do it.

Before turning to the question of what kind of effort will be required, let us first be clear on what it is we want to accomplish.
 

 

 

WHAT MUST NOT BE DONE
Let us begin with the negatives: what must not be done.

 

The most obvious item in this category is that we must not turn to government for more of the same "cures" that have made us ill. We do not want more power granted to the Fed or the Treasury or the President, nor do we need another government agency. We probably don't even need any new laws, with the possible exception of those legislative acts which repeal some of the old laws now on the books.

 

Our goal is the reduction of government, not its expansion.

We do not want to merely abolish the Fed and turn over its Operation to the Treasury. That is a popular proposal among those who know there is a problem but who have not studied the history of central banking. It is a recurrent theme of the Populist movement and those advocating what they call Social Credit.

 

Their argument Is that the Federal Reserve is privately owned and is independent of political control. Only Congress is authorized to issue the [nation's money, not a group of private bankers. Let the Treasury issue paper money and bank credit, they say, and we can have all the money we need without having to pay one penny in interest to the bankers.

It is an appealing argument, but it contains serious flaws. First, the concept that the Fed is privately owned is a legal fiction. The member banks hold stock, but it carries no voting weight. No matter how large the bank or how much capital is paid in, each bank has one vote. The stock cannot be sold or traded.

 

Stockholders have none of the usual elements of control that come with ownership and, in fact, they are subservient to the central board. The seven members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. It is true that the Fed is independent of direct political control, but it must never be forgotten that it was created by Congress and it can be extinguished by Congress.

 

In truth, the Federal Reserve is neither an arm of government nor is it private. It is a hybrid. It is an association of the large commercial banks which has been granted special privileges by Congress.

 

A more accurate description would be simply that it is a cartel protected by federal law.

But the more important point is that it makes no difference whether the Fed is government or private. Even if it were entirely private, merely turning it over to the government would not alter its function.

 

The same people undoubtedly would run it, and they would continue to create money for political purposes.

 

The Bank of England is the granddaddy of central banks. It was privately owned at its inception but became an official arm of the British government in more recent times. It continues to operate as a central bank, and nothing of substance has changed. The central banks of all the other industrialized nations are direct arms of their respective governments.

 

They are indistinguishable in function from the Federal Reserve. The technicalities of structure and ownership are not as important as function. Turning the Federal Reserve over to the Treasury without at the same time denuding it of its function as a central bank - that is, its ability to manipulate the money supply - would be a colossal waste of time.

The proposal of having the Treasury issue the nation's money is another question and has nothing to do with who owns the Fed. There is nothing wrong with the federal government Issuing money so long as it abides by the Constitution and adheres to the principle of honesty. Both of these restraints forbid Congress from issuing paper money that is not 100% backed by gold or silver.

 

If you are in doubt about the reasoning behind that statement, it would be a good idea to review chapter fifteen before continuing.

It is true that, if Congress had the power to create as much money as it needs without the Federal Reserve System, interest would not have to be paid on the national debt. But the Fed holds only a small percentage of the debt. Over 90% of those bonds are held by individuals and institutions in the private sector.

 

Terminating interest payments would not hurt those big, bad bankers nearly as much as it would the millions of people who would lose their insurance policies, investments, and retirement plans. The Social Credit scheme would wipe out the economy in one fell swoop.

And we still would not have solved the deeper problem. The bankers would be cut out of the scam, but the politicians would remain Congress would now be acting as its own central bank, the money supply would continue to expand, inflation would continue to roar, and the nation would continue to die.

 

Besides, issuing money without gold or silver backing violates the Constitution.

 

 

 

THE JFK RUMOR
In 1981, a rumor was circulated that President Kennedy had been assassinated by agents of the hidden money power because he had signed Executive Order #11110 instructing the Treasury to print more than $4 billion in United States Notes.

 

That is precisely the kind of money we are discussing: paper bills without gold or silver backing issued by the government, not the Federal Reserve. According to the rumor, the bankers were furious because they would lose interest payments on the money supply. When the Order was tracked down, however, it involved Silver Certificates, not United States Notes.

 

Silver Certificates are backed by silver, which means they are real money, so the rumor was wrong on that point. But there is no interest paid on Silver Certificates either, so the rumor held up on that point. There was a third point, however, which everyone seemed to overlook.

 

The Executive Order did not instruct the Treasury to issue Silver Certificates. It merely authorized it to do so.

 

There is no evidence that this was ever done. If the Certificates were printed at all, they never found their way into circulation. In 1987, the order was rescinded by President Reagan.

The Treasury did print a small supply of United States Notes in 1963, but these were authorized by an 1878 act of Congress to replace Civil War Greenbacks which had been retired from circulation. JFK did not initiate that issue. The greatest quantity of those Notes to be in circulation since their last printing in 1969 was $322 million - not a significant figure compared to Federal Reserve Notes. Most of them are now collectors' items.

The persistent rumor regarding the bankers' role in JFK's death was reinforced by several books circulated in conservative circles.

 

They contained an ominous passage from Kennedy's speech at Columbia University, just ten days before his assassination. He is quoted as saying: "The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the Americans' freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight."1

 

However, when Columbia University was contacted to provide a transcript of the speech, it was learned that Kennedy never spoke there - neither ten days before his assassination nor at any other time!

 

Ronald Whealan, head librarian at the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library in Boston, provides this additional information:

"Ten days prior to the assassination he was at the White House meeting with, among others, the ambassador to the United States from Portugal."

It is possible that the President did make the remarks attributed to him on a different date before a different audience.

 

Even so, it is a cryptic message which could have several meanings. That he intended to expose the Fed is the least likely of them all. Kennedy had been a life-long socialist and internationalist. He had attended the Fabian London School of Economics; participated in the destruction of the American money supply; and engineered the transfer of American wealth to foreign nations.

 

There is little reason to believe that he had suddenly "seen the light" and was preparing to reverse his life-long beliefs and commitments.
 

 

 

MONETARISTS VS. SUPPLY-SIDERS
But we are off the topic. Let us return to those unworkable theories regarding monetary reform. Prominent in this category are the Monetarists and the Supply-Siders.

 

The Monetarists, adhering to the theories of Milton Friedman, believe that money should continue to be be created by the Mandrake Mechanism of the Federal Reserve, but that the supply should be determined by a strict formula established by Congress, not the Fed. The Supply-siders, represented by Arthur Laffer and Charles Kadlec, believe in formulas also, but they have a different one.

 

They want the quantity of money to be determined by the current demand for gold.

 

They are not talking about a true gold standard in which paper money is fully backed. By following what they call a "gold-price rule," they would simply observe the price of gold in the free market and then tinker with the dollar by expanding or contracting the money supply to keep its relative value, compared to gold, fairly constant.

These groups are alike in their underlying philosophy. Each has a different goal and a different formula, but they agree on method: manipulation of the money supply. They share the same conviction that the free market will not work without assistance; the same faith in the wisdom and integrity of politically-created formulas, bureaus, and agencies. The Fed remains unscathed throughout all these debates because it is the ultimate mechanism for intervention.

 

These people don't really want to change it. They just want their turn at running it.

Occasionally a truly original proposal appears that captures one's attention. Addressing a prestigious gathering of conservative monetary theorists in 1989, Jerry Jordan suggested that the monetary base could be expanded by holding a national lottery.

 

The government would pay out more dollars in prize money than it received in ticket sales. The excess would represent the amount by which the monetary base would expand. Presumably, if they wanted to contract the money supply, they would pay out fewer dollars than taken in.

 

It was an intriguing thought, but Mr. Jordan was quick to add:

"The problem, of course, is that there would not be any effective institutional restraint on the growth of the monetary base."1

Indeed, that is the problem with all schemes involving monetary control by men.
 

 

 

BALANCED-BUDGET AMENDMENT
A so-called balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution is not the answer either. In fact, it is an illusion and a fraud.

 

Some of the biggest spenders in Congress are supporters. They know that it is popular with the voters but would not cramp their spending style in the least. If they were not permitted to spend more than they receive in taxes, they would have a perfect excuse for raising taxes. It would be a way of punishing the voters for placing limits on them.

 

The voters, on the other hand, would collapse under the burden of higher taxes and demand that their Congressmen circumvent the very amendment they previously supported. And that would be easy. Most versions of the balanced-budget amendment have an escape hatch built for just that purpose. Congress shall balance its budget "except in cases of emergency."

 

Who decides what constitutes an emergency? Congress, of course. In other words, Congress shall balance its budget except when it doesn't want to. So what else is new?

A serious amendment would have to tackle, not balancing the budget, but limiting the spending. If that were done, the budget would take care of itself. But even that would be a waste of time considering the present composition of Congress. Instead of generating political pressure for a Constitutional amendment, we would be better off directing that same effort toward throwing the big spenders out of office.

 

As long as the spenders are allowed to stay in there, they will find a way to get around any law - including the Constitution itself.

Another flaw in most versions of the balanced-budget amendment is that it would not affect the off-budget expenditures called entitlements. They now represent 52% of all federal outlays and are growing by 12% each year. A strategy that ignores that back-breaking load is not worth even considering. Furthermore, even if Congress could be forced to stop deficit spending, the balanced-budget amendment would not solve the problem of inflation or paying off the national debt.

 

The Federal Reserve can now inflate our money supply by using literally any debt in the world. It does not have to come from Congress. Unless we zero in on the Fed itself, we will just be playing political games with no chance of winning.

Every year, a few concerned Congressmen submit a bill to investigate or audit the Federal Reserve System. They are to be commended for their effort, but the process has been an exercise in futility. Their bills receive little or no publicity and never get out of committee for a vote.

 

Even if they did receive serious attention, however, they could actually be counterproductive.

On the surface, it would appear that there is nothing wrong with a Congressional investigation or an audit, but what is there to investigate? We must assume the Fed is doing exactly what it says and is in total compliance with the law. A few minor improprieties probably would be discovered involving personal abuse of funds for insider profiteering, but that would be minor compared to the [gigantic fraud that already is out in the open for all to see.

 

The federal Reserve is the world's largest and most successful scam. Anyone who understands the nature of money can see that without a team of investigators and auditors.

The danger in a proposal to audit the Fed is that it would Provide an excuse to delay serious action for several years while the audit is going on. It would give the public a false impression that Congress is doing something. It also would give the monetary technicians an opportunity to lay down a smoke screen of verbiage and confusing statistics.

 

The public would expect that all the Answers will be forthcoming from the investigation, but the very groups and combines that need to be investigated would be conducting, or at least confounding, the investigation. By the time fourteen volumes of testimony, charts, tables, and exhibits finally appear, the public would be intimidated and fatigued.

 

The bottom line is that we do not need a bill to audit the Fed.

 

We need one to abolish it.
 

 

 

A PLAN FOR ELIMINATING THE FED
So much for things not to do. Now let's get down to the Business at hand.

 

To abolish the Federal Reserve System would be quite simple. All that would be required is an act of Congress consisting of one sentence: The Federal Reserve Act and all of its amendments are hereby rescinded.

 

But that would wipe out our monetary system overnight and create such havoc in the economy that it would play right into the hands of the globalists. They would use the resulting chaos as evidence that such a move was a mistake, and the American people would likely welcome a, rescue from the IMF/World Bank. We would find ourselves back in the Pessimistic Scenario even though we had done the right thing.

There are certain steps that must precede the abandonment of the Fed if we are to have a safe passage.

 

The first step is to convert our present fiat money into real money. That means we must create an entirely new money supply which is 100% backed by precious metal - and we must do so within a reasonably short period of lime.

 

To that end, we also must establish the true value of our present fiat money so it can be exchanged for new money on a realistic basis and phased out of circulation.

 

Here is how it can be done:

1. Repeal the legal-tender laws. The federal government will continue accepting Federal Reserve Notes in the payment of taxes, but everyone else will be free to accept them, reject them, or discount them as they wish. There is no need to force people to accept honest money. Only fiat money needs the threat of imprisonment to back it up. Private institutions should be free to innovate and to compete. If people want to use Green Stamps or Disney-ride coupons or Bank-of-America Notes as a medium of exchange, they should be free to do so. The only requirement should be faithful fulfillment of contract. If the Green-Stamp company says it will give a crystal lamp for seven books of stamps, then it should be compelled to do so. Disney should be required to accept the coupon in exactly the manner printed on the back. And, if Bank of America tells its depositors they can have their dollars back any time they want, it should be required to keep 100% backing (coins or Treasury Certificates) in its vault at all times. In the transition to a new money, it is anticipated that the old Federal Reserve Notes will continue to be widely used.

    

2. Freeze the present supply of Federal Reserve Notes, except for what will he needed in step number eleven.
    

3. Define the "real" dollar in terms of precious-metal content, preferably what it was in the past: 371.25 grains of silver. It could be another weight of silver or even another metal, but the old silver dollar is a proven winner.
    

4. Establish gold as an auxiliary monetary reserve which can be substituted for silver, not at a fixed-price ratio, but at whatever ratio is set by the free market. Fixed ratios always become unfair over time as the prices of gold and silver drift relative to each other. Although gold may be substituted for silver at this ratio, it is only silver that is the foundation for the dollar.
    

5. Restore free coinage at the U.S. Mint and issue silver "dollars" as well as gold "pieces." Both dollars and pieces will be defined by metal content, but only corns with silver content can be called dollars, half-dollars, quarter-dollars, or tenth-dollars (dimes). At first, these coins will be derived only from metal brought into the Mint by private parties. They must not be drawn from the Treasury's supply which is reserved for use in step number six.

    

6. Pay off the national debt with Federal Reserve Notes created for that purpose. Creating money without backing is forbidden by the Constitution; however, when no one is forced by law to accept Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender, they will no longer be the official money of the United States. They will be merely a kind of government script which no one is required to accept. Their utility will be determined by their usefulness in payment of taxes and by the public's anticipation of having them exchanged for real money at a later date. The creation of Federal Reserve Notes, with the understanding that they are not the official money of the United States, would therefore not be a violation of the Constitution. In any event, the deed is already done. The decision to redeem government bonds with Federal Reserve Notes is not ours. Congress decided that long ago, and the course was set at tine instant those bonds were issued. We are merely playing out the hand. The money will be created for that purpose. Our only choice is when: now or later. If we allow the bonds to stand, the national debt will be repudiated by inflation. The value of the original dollars will gradually be reduced to zero while only the interest remains. Everyone's purchasing power will be destroyed, and the nation will die. But if we want not to repudiate the national debt and decide to pay it off now, we will be released from the burden of interest payments and, at the same time, prepare the way for a sound monetary system.

    

7. Pledge the government's hoard of gold and silver (except the military stockpile) to be used as backing for all the Federal Reserve Notes in circulation. The denationalization of these assets is long overdue. At various times in recent history, it was illegal for Americans to own gold, and their private holdings were confiscated. The amount which was taken should be returned to the private sector as a matter of principle. The rest of the gold supply also belongs to the people, because they paid for it through taxes and inflation. The government has no use for gold or silver except to support the money supply. The time has come to give it back to the people and use it for that purpose.

    

8. Determine the weight of all the gold and silver owned by the U.S. government and then calculate the total value of that supply in terms of real (silver) dollars.
    

9. Determine the number of all the Federal Reserve Notes in circulation and then calculate the real-dollar value of each one by dividing the value of the precious metals by the number of Notes.
    

10. Retire all Federal Reserve Notes from circulation by offering to exchange them for dollars at the calculated ratio. There will be enough gold or silver to redeem every Federal Reserve Note in circulation.
     

11. Convert all contracts based on Federal Reserve Notes to dollars
    using the same exchange ratio. That includes the contracts called mortgages and government bonds. In that way, monetary values expressed within debt obligations will be converted on the same basis and at the same time as currency.
     

12. Issue Silver Certificates. As the Treasury redeems Federal Reserve Notes for dollars, recipients will have the option of taking coins or Treasury Certificates which are 100% backed. These Certificates will become the new paper currency.
     

13. Abolish the Federal Reserve System. It would be possible to allow the System to continue as a check clearing-house so long as it did not function as a central bank. A check clearing-house will be needed, and the banks that presently own the Fed should be allowed to continue performing that service. However, they must no longer receive tax subsidies to operate, and competition must be allowed. However, the Federal Reserve System, as presently chartered by Congress, must be abolished.
     

14. Introduce free banking. Banks should be deregulated and, at the same time, cut loose from protection at taxpayers' expense. No more bailouts. The FDIC and other government "insurance" agencies should be phased out, and their functions turned over to real insurance companies in the private sector. Banks should be required to keep 100% reserves for demand deposits, because that is a contractual obligation. All forms of time deposits should be presented to the public exactly as CDs are today. In other words, the depositor should be fully informed that his money is invested and he will have to wait a specified time before he can have it back. Competition will insure that those institutions that best serve their customers' needs will prosper. Those that do not will fall by the wayside - without the need of an army of bank regulators.
     

15. Reduce the size and scope of government No solution to our economic problems is possible under socialism. It is the author's view that the government should be limited to the protection of life, liberty, and property - nothing more. That means the elimination of almost all of the socialist-oriented programs that now infest the federal bureaucracy. If we hope to retain - or perhaps to regain - our freedom, they simply have to go. To that end, the federal government should sell all assets not directly related to its primary function of protection; it should privately sub-contract as many of its services as possible; and it should greatly reduce and simplify its taxes.
     

16. Restore national independence. A similar restraint must be applied at the international level. We must reverse all programs leading to disarmament and economic interdependence. The most significant step in that direction will be to Get us out of the UN and the UN out of the US, but that will be just the beginning. There are hundreds of treaties and administrative agreements that must be rescinded. There may be a few that are constructive and mutually beneficial to us and other nations, but the great majority of them will have to go. That is not because we are isolationist. It is simply because we want to avoid being engulfed in global tyranny.

Some will say that paying off the national debt with Federal Reserve Notes amounts to a repudiation of the debt.

 

Not so. Accepting the old Notes for payment of taxes is not repudiation. Exchanging them for their appropriate share of the nation's gold or silver is not repudiation.

 

Converting them straight across to a sound money with little or no loss of purchasing power is not repudiation. The only thing that would be repudiated is the old monetary system, but that was designed to be repudiated. The monetary and political scientists who created and sustained the Federal Reserve System never intended to repay the national debt. It has been their ticket to profit and power. Inflation is repudiation on the installment plan.

 

The present system is a political trick, an accounting gimmick. We are merely acknowledging what it is. We are simply refusing to pretend we don't understand what they are doing to us.

 

We are refusing to play the game any longer.
 

 

 

MEASURING THE SIZE OF THE HANGOVER
So those are the sixteen steps, but what are their effects? It should come as no surprise that there is a price to pay for a return to monetary sobriety.

 

A hangover cannot be avoided, except by continuing the binge, which is the road to death. Let/s take a look at what this binge has already cost us. We will measure that by calculating how much each Federal Reserve Note will be worth when the new money appears.

The following figures are presented for illustrative purposes only. The data are drawn from public sources and from the Federal Reserve itself, but there is no way to know how accurate they really are. In addition to the question of accuracy, there are some statistical items which are so obscure that not even the experts at the Fed are certain what they mean.

 

When the time comes to apply this program, it will be necessary to assemble a task force of experts who can audit the books and assay the metals. Nevertheless, based on the best information available to the public, this is what we get:

The total quantity of silver held by the government on September 30, 1993, was 30,200,000 troy ounces. If we assume the new dollar will be defined as 371.25 grains of silver (which equals .77344 troy ounces), then that supply is valued at $39,046,338.¹

 

The price of gold on that date was 384.95 Federal-Reserve notes per ounce. Silver was 4.99 fiat dollars per ounce. The ratio between them, therefore, was 77-to-1.

The supply of gold was 261,900,000 ounces. The value of the gold supply, therefore, (at 77 times its weight in ounces) was $26,073,517,000.
 

The value of silver and gold combined would be $26,112,563338.

The number of Federal-Reserve notes this supply would have to redeem would be the combined total of the Ml money supply (currency and demand deposits) plus the additional number of notes needed to pay off the national debt. Ml on September 27, 1993, was 1,103,700,000,000 FRNs.² The national debt stood at 4,395,700,000,000 FRNs. The total amount to be redeemed, therefore, would be 5,499,400,000,000 FRNs.

The bottom line of this calculation is that the value of each Federal-Reserve note will be equal to .0047 silver dollar. One silver dollar would be worth 213 Federal-Reserve notes!

 

1. Although the weight of the silver-dollar is 412.5 grains (.8594 troy ounces), it is only 90% pure. Its silver content, however, is exactly 371.25 grains (.77344 troy ounces).

2. For those who feel that M2 or M3 would be a more logical figure, see "Is M1 Subtractive or Accumulative?" in the Appendix, containing the author's notes and correspondence with the Federal Reserve.

 

 

 

BAD, BUT NOT THAT BAD
That will be a bitter pill to swallow, but it sounds worse than it really is.

 

Remember that the new dollars will have more purchasing power than the old. Coins will play a larger role in everyday transactions. The nickel phone call and the ten-cent cigar will have returned. In the beginning at least, the price of these items probably will be less than that.

 

As explained in chapter seven, any quantity of gold or silver will work as the foundation for a monetary system.

 

If the quantity is low - as certainly will be the case at the time of transition - it merely means the value of each unit of measure will be high. In that case, coins will solve the problem. Pennies would be used for a cup of coffee; one mill (a tenth of a cent) would pay for a phone call, and so on. New, small-denomination tokens would fill that need.

 

In a relatively short period of time, however, the monetary supply of gold and silver would increase in response lo free-market demand. When the supply increases, the relative value will decrease until a natural equilibrium is reached - as fedways has happened in the past. At that point, the tokens will no longer be needed and can be phased out.

An inconvenience? Yes. Vending machines will have to be retrofitted for the new coins, but that would be no more difficult than retrofitting them to take paper bills or plastic debit cards, which is what will be required if we do not adopt these measures. It is a small price to pay for an orderly return to real money.
Another possible solution would be to redefine the new dollar to contain a smaller quantity of silver.

 

The advantage would be that we could continue to use our present coinage. On the negative side, however, is the fact that it would create headaches after the transition, because coinage then would be too cheap. Instead of changing over now, we would merely be postponing the task for later. Now is the time to do it - and do it right. The original value of a silver dollar was determined after centuries of trial and error.

 

We don't have to reinvent the wheel. We know that it will work in the long run.

In the past, the banks have enjoyed a bountiful cash flow from interest on money created out of nothing. That will change. They will have to make a clear distinction between demand deposits and time deposits. Customers will be informed that, if they want the privilege of receiving their money back on demand, their deposit of coins or Treasury Certificates will be kept in the vault and not loaned to others.

 

Therefore, it will not earn interest for the bank. If the bank cannot make money on the deposit, then it must charge the depositor a fee for safeguarding his money and for checking services. If the customer wants to earn interest on his deposit, then he will be informed that it will be invested or loaned out, in which case he cannot expect to get it back any time he wants.

 

He will knowingly put his money into a time deposit with the agreement that a specified amount of time must pass before the investment matures.

The effect of this practice on banking will be enormous. Banks will have to pay higher interest rates to attract investment capital. They will have to trim their overhead expenses and eliminate some of the plush. Profit margins will be tightened. Efficiency will improve. They used to offer "free" services which actually were paid out of interest earned on their customers' demand deposits.

 

Now they will charge for those services, such as checking and safe storage of deposits. Customers probably will grumble at first at having to pay for those things, and there will be no more free toasters.

Electronic transfer systems will probably become popular for their convenience, but they will be optional. Cash and check transactions will continue to play an important role. Government monitoring will be illegal. Although there will be fewer dollars in circulation than there were Federal Reserve Notes, the value of each one will be correspondingly greater. Each person will end up with the same purchasing power he had before the conversion.

 

For a short period, both the old and the new money will circulate together, and some people will have difficulty making the necessary calculations to determine their relative values. But that is a routine operation for people who live in Europe or for anyone who travels to a foreign country.

 

There is no reason to think that Americans are too stupid to handle it.
 

 

 

SOME BAD NEWS AND SOME GOOD
We should not delude ourselves into thinking that this will be an easy transition.

 

It will be a very difficult period, and people will pave to get used to a whole new way of thinking and doing. The freeze on the current money supply may trigger panic in the stock market and the business community. Stock prices could tumble, causing paper fortunes to disappear back into the computers from which they came.

 

Some businesses may fold for a lack of easy credit. Weak banks will be allowed to close rather than be bailed but with taxes. Unemployment may worsen for a while. Those who [have been used to a free ride will now have to walk or push or pay their way. The masses on welfare will not give up their checks and food stamps quietly. The media will fan the flames of discontent. The Cabal will be at every switch to derail the train.

This will be the moment of our greatest danger, the moment when the people could tire of their hard journey in the desert and lose interest in the promised land. This is the time when they may long for a return to captivity and head back to the slave pits of Pharaoh.

The important point, however, is that most of these problems would be temporary.

 

They would be present only during the period of transition to a new money. As soon as free coinage is available at the Mint, and as soon as people see how much demand there is for silver and gold coins, there will be a steady stream of miners and jewelers who will add great new stores of precious metal to the nation's monetary stock.

 

Foreigners undoubtedly will add to the inflow. Old silver and gold coins will also reappear in the market place. Very quickly, as the stores of precious metal respond to supply and demand, the quantity of money will increase and its per-unit value will drop to its natural equilibrium.

Won't that be inflation?

 

Yes it will, but it will be significantly different from inflation by fiat money on four counts:

1. instead of being caused by politicians and bankers attempting to manipulate the economy to enhance their personal agendas, it will be caused by natural economic forces seeking an equilibrium of supply and demand

2. instead of being harmful to the nation, leading to the destruction of the economy, it will be part of a healing process, leading to prosperity

3. it will be less severe than what we will experience if we do not make the transition

4. instead of being part of a continuum that is designed to go on forever, it will have a built-in termination point: the point of natural equilibrium where the human effort to mine gold and silver equals the effort to create those things which gold and silver can buy

When that point is reached, the money supply will cease to expand, and inflation will stop - once and for all.

 

The hangover will be gone. From that point forward, prices will begin a gradual descent as advances in technology allow improved efficiency in production. With the arrival of lower prices, better job opportunities, and increasing prosperity, the voices of discontent will gradually fade. After the storm is over, America will have an honest money supply, a government with no national debt, and an economy without inflation.

No matter what scenario unfolds in the future, there is white water ahead.

 

We had better tighten our straps and prepare for the rapids. We owe it to ourselves and our families to take measures which will increase our chances of coming out at the other side. If the pessimistic scenario is played out, it will make little difference what we do, because there will be no other side. But in the realistic scenario, there are certain precautions that will make a big difference in our economic well being.

To fully appreciate the wisdom of some of these measures, it is well for us to pause and consider the possibility that a transition to economic safety and sanity will not be orderly. Another variant of the realistic scenario is that our entire system could collapse, including the international structure being assembled at the UN. If that should happen, we won't have to worry about an orderly transition to a sound monetary system, because it won't happen.

 

Our primary concern will be basic survival.

Economic chaos and civil disorder would not necessarily have to be the prelude to world government. If a sufficient number of people were well enough informed to know in advance what the enemy's game plan is, and especially if they were in the right places within the system, they might be able to provide leadership at the critical moment.

 

If there is blood in the streets and long periods of anarchy, it is theoretically possible that groups of enlightened individuals who have prepared in advance could move into the power vacuum and take charge. That may sound like another pessimistic scenario, but it is not. In the final analysis, it may be the most realistic one of all.

 

But we should not hope for it.

 

All we can do is prepare for it should it come to pass.
 

 

 

HOW TO PREPARE
What can we do to prepare financially? To avoid making this a lengthy dissertation, let's use the outline form.

 

Elaboration should not be necessary.

 

1. Get out of debt.

   A mortgage on one's home is a logical exception, provided the price is right. Borrowing for one's business is also an exception if based on a sound business plan. Speculative investments are not a good idea in these times unless they are made with money you can afford to lose.

   
    

2. Pick a sound bank.

   Maintain accounts at several institutions. Do not keep over $100,000 in any one bank. Remember that not all types of accounts are covered by FDIC. Some institutions now offer private insurance. Make sure you know to what extent you are at risk.

   
    

3. Diversify your investments,

   ...among blue ribbon, over-the-counter, growth, income, large, small, mutuals, bonds, real estate, bullion coins, mining stock, and tangibles. Industries that do well in hard times are gambling, alcohol, and escapist entertainment. Study the fields and companies in which you invest. Personal knowledge is indispensable.

    

    

4. Avoid the most recent "best" performers.

   Their great track records are historical. They have no bearing on future performance. To the contrary, they may now be overpriced and poised for a fall. See how an investment fared over the long run - at least fifteen years - and particularly how it performed during periods of economic downturn.

   
    

5. When investing in coins, avoid those with high numismatic value,

   ...unless you are prepared to become an expert. As with other types of investments, seek advice but don't depend on it. The same is true for diamonds, art pieces, and other collectibles. Stay with what you know. Otherwise, you will be vulnerable in shark-infested waters where even the most experienced traders can lose money.

   
    

6. Maintain a stash of cash, including some old silver coins.

   The currency should be enough to provide your family with necessities for about two months. The coins are for more severe and prolonged conditions. There is no "correct" quantity. It is a matter of personal judgment and financial ability.

 

PROFITING FROM DISASTER
All of this is aimed at surviving the storm and preparing ourselves to offer leadership in troubled times ahead. That is a rather negative view.

 

There is a more positive outlook for those who are looking for good news, as Adlai Stevenson said. It is the exciting prospect that we can turn this calamity to our advantage. We can actually profit from the coming collapse. That thought has spawned hundreds of books and newsletters offering advice on how to get rich while others are being destroyed. There is even one that gives advice on how to cash in on the environmental-industry boom.

 

The pitch is how to make a fortune on the downfall of America.

There is no doubt that opportunities exist to profit from investment decisions based on a realistic appraisal of current trends. Most of those opportunities, however, depend on making market-timing decisions. One must know precisely when to buy, when to sell, and at what price.

 

To know all that, the investor must become expert on the nature of the industries involved and must monitor the daily shifts in market forces. He must attempt to complete his analysis and reach his conclusions in advance of the crowd.

 

And, of course, he must be right Most investors are not prepared to do that, so they must depend on the services of professionals, usually the same experts who are encouraging them to invest in these kinds of enterprises. If the investment is profitable, the analyst receives an income. If the investment turns sour, the analyst still receives an income.

That relationship is not unique to the "profit-from-crash" group, however. It is to be found at every level of the investment business as well as within the legal and medical professions. The customer pays for the advice regardless of its quality. What is disturbing about this investment concept is that it actually may help to make matters worse.

 

By focusing on finding clever ways to avoid the effects of inflation or of making a profit from it, we are doing nothing to stop it and, thereby, encouraging its continuation. Those who are gaining from inflation are not likely to offer serious resistance to it.

 

As they watch their profits pile up, they may become its most ardent supporters - even though they know deep in their hearts that it will destroy them in the end.

There is nothing wrong with trying to preserve one's capital on the way down, but the only real solution is to use one's capital to stop the present trends. In the long run, there is no way to profit from a destroyed America. There is no refuge from a collapse.

 

There is no way to protect your assets, your home, your job, your family, your freedom.

 

As Henry Hazlitt phrased it,

"There is no safe hedge against inflation except to stop it".

 

 

AN EDUCATIONAL CRUSADE
The best investment one can make at this time is to finance an educational crusade.

 

Americans have allowed their nation to be stolen from right under their noses because they did not understand what was happening. There is no hope for the future as long as that condition remains. The starting point for any realistic plan for survival and beyond is the awakening of America.

 

What does that entail?

 

These are the tasks:

 

1. Become self-informed.

   That's not as easy as it sounds. It involves a major commitment of time and money for books, recordings, and seminars. Do it.

   
    

2. Become a pamphleteer.

   Develop a mailing list of friends who you think would be most receptive to learning more about these issues. Send them something every month that is informative and not too long to read. See the end of this chapter for information on how to obtain suitable publications.

   
    

3. Join forces with others of like mind.

   There is strength in numbers. Three people acting alone are a force of three. When working together, however, they multiply their efforts and equal a force of nine. That is the power of organization. When choosing an organization, look for experienced and principled leadership which has proven that it understands the deeper issues and cannot be sidetracked by the Cabal.

   
    

4. Form an educational study group.

   Give it an enticing name such as The Reality Club or The Awareness Lunch Bunch. Make the meetings interesting and short. Use local speakers, ask members to give book reviews, show videos, have mock debates, throw parties. The goal is to reach new people, not to preach to the choir.

   
    

5. Form ad-hoc committees, along with other like-minded friends, to promote specific projects and programs.

   Here are a few hypothetical examples covering a range of issues: The Committee for Sound Money, Parents for Better Education, Americans for Tax Relief, North-Bay Residents for Private Property. That is an excellent way to bring pressure to bear on the political structure and, at the same time, attract the support of new people who share your common objective.

   
    

6. Expand your influence within the community.

   People seldom follow strangers. Become known and respected for your knowledge. Join groups which are influential within your city or profession. Political groups are particularly important, regardless of party. Volunteer for work and seek a leadership role. Personally visit your city and county politicians and maintain ongoing communication. Send them books, articles, baseball tickets - anything to make sure they don't forget who you are. This is doubly important for political candidates. If you have the talent and the aptitude, consider running for some kind of public office yourself.

   
    

7. Use politics, don't be used by it.

   We got into our present mess through politics and we must get out the same way; but getting out is a lot harder than getting in. The strategy, however, is simple: remove the big-spending internationalists from office and replace them with men and women dedicated to sound money and national independence. The way to remove the spenders is to expose their voting records to their constituents, most of whom have no idea how they vote on key issues. The way to get better candidates elected is to volunteer to work in their campaigns. Work within party organizations where possible but beware! Never allow loyalty to the party to override loyalty to principle. Political parties are always controlled from the top, and the major parties are controlled by the very forces we must oppose. It is imperative that you and your candidate remain independent of party control. Otherwise, your money and your effort eventually will be used against you.

With that warning aside, we should be encouraged by the fact that the task is not as overwhelming as it seems.

 

The power to reverse the present trend rests in the hands of only 535 people. There are 435 Representatives and 100 Senators. To control a majority, all we have to do is influence the election of 268 people. In reality, if we began to come even close to that figure, we likely would see a wave of sudden political conversions among those who remain in office.

 

It is possible that we could achieve our goal by influencing the election in only 100 Congressional districts!

 

By using the political freedom that yet remains in our system, we can Overthrow the government of the United States every two years without firing a shot! But we had better get going on it.

 

Time is running out.
 

 

 

CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
We have finally come to the end of this book. It was not a textbook on banking theory. It was a who-dunnit, and by now you know the answer.

We have covered a vast expanse of history and have wandered far afield from our main topic. It was necessary. Without the larger view, the case against the Federal Reserve System would have been "weak. It would have omitted the elements of war, revolution, depression, and fraud.

 

Without that long journey, we would be limited to a sterile discussion of interest rates, discount policies, and reserve ratios. That is not where the body is hidden.

In the foreword, it was stated that there were seven reasons to abolish the Federal Reserve System.

 

It is time to repeat them here:

• It is incapable of accomplishing its stated objectives.

• It is a cartel operating against the public interest.

• It is the supreme instrument of usury.

• It generates our most unfair tax.

• It encourages war.

• It destabilizes the economy.

• It is an instrument of totalitarianism.

The purpose of this book has been to demonstrate the accuracy of those assertions.

A plan for recovery was finally presented which involves sixteen steps, each based upon lessons which emerged from history. These lessons were mingled with a large amount of theory which is traceable only to the mind of the author himself. Which is to say there is no guarantee the plan will work. But it is a plan. It is better to fail trying than to do nothing. Like men on a sinking ship, we must risk the water. We cannot stay where we are.

There undoubtedly are technical flaws in these proposals, for the mechanism is merely a prototype. Someone surely will discover a gear that will not mesh or a lever that is disconnected. It will need the additional work of specialists in many diverse fields.

 

Even then, the job will not be complete, for it must finally be handed over to those who are skilled in drafting legislation.

 

Their task will be two-fold.

• First, they must make it workable in the real world of politics.

• Secondly, they must prevent loopholes and vagaries which could eventually subvert the plan.

But none of these considerations should deter us from beginning the process. We may not have answers to all the technical questions, but we do have an answer to the big question. We do know that the Federal Reserve System must be abolished. Let us, therefore, begin.

The Creature has grown large and powerful since its conception on Jekyll Island. It now roams across every continent and compels the masses to serve it, feed it, obey it, worship it. If it is not slain, it will become our eternal lord and master.

Can it be slain? Yes it can.

How will it be slain? By piercing it with a million lances of truth. Who will slay it? A million crusaders with determination and courage.

The crusade has already begun.

 

Back to Contents