Welcome to the Communist States of America

Posted on Jan 21, 2011 in Constitutional & Liberty Issues, Featured Articles, Federal Reserve & Bankers, Political Issues

Source: Truth Offering

TruthisTreason.net

Five years ago, I admit that this article would have offended me. Furthermore, I would have found it’s claim, at the outset, to be completely outlandish. 

Five years later, after a long journey of enlightenment and study, I can honestly say that everything you’re about to read is true. Whether or not you want to believe it, because of what that means for you and your family, is an entirely different issue.

Let me start with a famous United States slogan:

“Land of the Free, Home of the Brave.”

That’s America, right? Well, no, not really. Take off your blinders. Today, it’s more like:

“Land of the Fee, Home of the Slave.”

The average person works from January 1st to April 9th just to pay their taxes. That doesn’t sound very American to me.  I’d call that indentured servitude, aka, slavery.

The more I ponder our reality in the US, the more concerned I become. We’re told from a very young age that we are, in fact, the freest nation on the planet; the place where all people can come and make their dreams come true. But the older I get, and the more I see and read, the more I think that’s an outright lie, imprinted upon us by the powers-that-be to keep us from revolting.

Henry Ford once said, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Henry Ford was right. Why? First, understand that our banking and monetary system is crucial to our current form of BIG government. And as you’re about to learn, that very same banking and monetary system is clandestinely stealing our wealth. So what is this banking and monetary system? It’s called the Federal Reserve system, and it’s been in place since December 23, 1913. More on that shortly.

But before I get further into that, let me explain with a few examples of communist laws we have on our books…and by “a few” I mean “so many that I had to write this long piece about it.” 

As I drove in my car last month, I was pulled over and given a ticket for talking on my cell phone. Of course, the ticket was expensive and so will be the increase in my insurance rate for the next 7 years. But, why is it illegal to drive while talking on my cell phone? The popular argument would be that studies have shown driving while talking/dialing increases the likelihood of motor vehicle-related accidents; more deaths as well. So then of course we should create a law that makes this act illegal, right!?

Well, no. I’d argue that in a free society, that’s wrong; wrong if we follow our Constitution. Why? Because we already have laws on the books that say if you’re driving, cause an accident and are found to be at fault, you will suffer the consequences. So if you’re driving and chit-chatting on your cell phone — not paying attention — and plow into a minivan, killing a mother and her two kids, you’re going to jail. Or if you’re blabbing away and go too fast or run a red light or break any one of the rules of the road, you’ll be in trouble. But what about the lady applying make-up in the car behind me, or the guy adjusting the knob on his radio to get the big game on AM radio? Are these not equally distracting behaviors? Why don’t we just create a law banning any eye movement away from the road? That should make us safe, right? Better yet, let’s ban driving!

Where does the absurdity end!? When will government stop regulating our lives away!?

Ben Franklin famously said:

“Any society that would give up liberty to gain a little security deserves neither and loses both.”

Franklin was right. After all, no one can really provide you with safety. Think about it; there will always be accidents, for one reason or another. Life isn’t safe. So would you prefer to be stripped of your liberty for this perceived safety? Not me, because it’s a lie.

Furthermore, making me stop talking on my cell phone while driving because I may possibly one day cause an accident, is communistic. It says that for the common good, I must forego my individual liberty. It also creates a new revenue stream for the government (when I pay my ticket) and insurance companies (because the government requires I have insurance in order to drive). Gotta love that!

Even more ludicrous is the seat belt law: click-it or ticket. What a joke! Can we get any more communistic than this!? What if I’m willing to live (or die) with the consequences of my actions? What if I hate wearing my seat belt and don’t want to wear it? I know the potential end result of my actions could result in my death. Why does the government have the right to make me wear it? Don’t I have the right to my own body and decisions that will affect me? Nah…I guess big brother knows best. Karl Marx would certainly agree.

And speaking of Karl Marx, here are the 10 planks of communism as defined by Marx and Friedrich Engels in their for-some-reason popular book, “The Communist Manifesto.” With each plank, I’ll detail how the United States Federal Government currently complies…err…compares:

PLANK 1: ABOLITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE APPLICATION OF ALL RENT TO PUBLIC PURPOSE

We’re not quite to this extreme yet, but government has become more and more emboldened with regard to forced private funding of the public agenda, and in ways that are less and less conceivable when taken from a Constitutional perspective. Just look at the Waxman-Markey “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454)” More commonly referred to as “Cap and Trade,” this bill is being forced upon us as the only means of long-term economic and environmental survival of our civilization.

So how will Cap and Trade work? According to the Environmental Defense Fund, “The “cap” is the cornerstone of the policy. It is an absolute, nationwide limit on global warming pollution. Congress would most likely establish a cap measured as billions of tons of carbon dioxide (or equivalent) released into the atmosphere each year. Over time, the cap would be lowered to cut emissions enough to avoid the worst consequences of global warming.

“The “trade” part is a market that creates powerful incentives for companies to reduce pollution, and provides flexibility in how companies can meet the limits. Here’s how it works: The government will create “allowances” that add up to the total emissions allowed under the cap. Every year, those subject to the cap must turn in allowances equal to their emissions for that year. These entities include power plants, manufacturers, and others who release large amounts of carbon dioxide.

“For the nation to meet the cap, entities will have to reduce emissions. If an entity reduces its emissions enough that it has more allowances than it needs, it can profit by selling the extra allowances. This gives them the incentive to reduce below what’s mandated by the cap. If an entity finds it expensive to reduce its emissions, it can buy more allowances from those with extra ones. It can choose the cheapest way to comply with the limits.

“The key advantage to a cap-and-trade system is that the more a company reduces its emissions, the more money it can either make or save. Across the whole economy, the most efficient ways to cut pollution will be put into practice most widely.”

Okay, so ignoring the unconstitutionality of this legislation, in a perfect, communist utopia, this is a slam dunk! But, how will this play out in the real world where government policy only succeeds at failing? Here’s what a recent Wall Street Journal article entitled, “Cap and Trade Doesn’t Work,” had to say:

“Advocates of the system like it because “the polluter pays.” Setting aside for the moment the question of whether it is justifiable to call carbon dioxide a pollutant, companies of course do not simply absorb these extra costs. Instead, they pass them on to their customers who are also, by and large, taxpayers. Not only does the taxpayer carry the cost of any cap and trade scheme, but their money also provides profit for a whole new industry: the new carbon trading sector, the middlemen who make the system work.”

Sounds just like every other big government scheme: sap the little guy to profit the big-wigs. But there’s more; it gets worse:

• “Unlike normal tradable commodities, carbon dioxide emissions can only be estimated, rather than quantified exactly. The result is a system open to misuse, since all parties — seller, middleman and buyer — have an incentive and opportunity to manipulate the estimates.”
• “Despite the….goal to dole out permits based on objective criteria, industry lobbying [leads] to an overallocation. When push comes to shove, governments will always protect their national champions. The German government, for example, negotiated an easing of planned caps on emissions from cars to the advantage of manufacturers of higher-powered cars such as Mercedes-Benz and Porsche.”
• “The program lacks predictability as prices vary dramatically. Since the inception of the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), this price for the right to emit a ton of carbon dioxide has varied from below €10 to peaks of more than €30. This is of no help for long-term investment decisions to permanently reduce carbon emissions.”
• “According to European Commission figures, emissions from the 27 member states rose by 1.9% in the first three years of the ETS regime.”
• “The costs are considerable. In 2006, individual business and sectors had to pay €24.9 billion for over one billion tons’ worth of permits. The WorldWatch Institute estimates that the costs of running a trading system designed to meet the EU’s Kyoto obligations at about $5 billion. The estimated costs of a trading system to meet the EU’s own and far more demanding commitments of a 20% reduction (against a 1990 baseline) by 2020 are around $80 billion annually.”

With all of the above in mind — that we don’t live in a Marxist-Communist utopia, and the fact that the system has failed in the EU — I’m pretty sure that this system won’t work as purportedly intended. What it will succeed in, however, is stripping yet more of our liberties, possibly collapsing our already debilitated economy, and reallocating far more power to the Federal Government. Does this not sound like a recipe for totalitarianism?

Moving on…

The issue of universal health care, or as it’s now legally referred to, “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200).” We all deserve health care as human beings, don’t we? It’s a God-given right!

Well, no, it isn’t. And if you still believe it is, tell that to the people throughout history who didn’t have it; to the people in sub-saharan Africa and the world over that today don’t have it. And why don’t they have it? Because we all can’t have everything. There’s this pesky little issue of “scarcity,” to contend with, which dictates –whether it fits your agenda or not — that there are infinite human needs, but finite available resources. We all want a doctor, but there aren’t enough to go around. We all want to be rich, but there’s only so much money out there. This is true of everything in life.

In China, men want wives but there aren’t enough women to fulfill that demand (due to communist mandates). Should they then create legislation that demands they all need a woman? Every man deserves a family, right? But what if that mandate required the shipping of women from the US to fulfill that demand? Does one person’s right to a family supersede the woman’s right to free choice? Of course not, right!?

So how is that different with health care, or the progressive tax structure or any number of other unjust tax policies in America? Why should I have to pay more money than others, just because I make more of it, to subsidize the needs of other citizens?

The fatal flaw of communism/socialism/fascism, is this belief that everything can be perfected. The reason this can never be true is because of human nature. Why would I ever want to work my tail off to subsidize your laziness? The answer is: I wouldn’t.

So what happens then? Well…

“Eventually, you run out of other people’s money.” – Margaret Thatcher

And it’s money that pays for the health insurance of those who have no money, right? So we steal from the rich to pay for the poor. Does that sound like a Constitutionally-granted right? Do you have the right to steal from your neighbor to obtain what you need? In literal terms, that’ll get you in jail for a long time, but I guess if Uncle Sam’s the middle man, it’s okay.

Make sure to check out this bottomless list of reasons you should take issue with “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009.” But in case you don’t have the time, here are a few highlights:

• “Sec. 122, Pg. 29, Lines 4-16 – Your health care will be rationed.”
• “Sec. 142, Pg. 42 – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice.”
• “Sec. 163, Pg. 58-59 beginning at line 5 – Government will have real-time access to individual’s finances & a National ID health care card will be issued.”
• “Sec. 163, Pg. 59, Lines 21-24 – Government will have direct access to your bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.”
• “Sec. 1233, Pg. 425, Lines 17-19 – Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills and durable powers of attorney. Mandatory end-of-life planning.”

Don’t believe any of this? Look at the official bill for yourself to corroborate the above.

Now let’s look at the issue of eminent domain!? It’s to the point where if Uncle Sam wants the property you own, you’re out…and you have no rights, as reported by a recent CBS/60 Minutes article:

“Just about everyone knows that under a process called eminent domain, the government can (and does) seize private property for public use; to build a road, a school or a courthouse. But did you know the government can also seize your land for private use if they can prove that doing it will serve what’s called “the public good.“ Cities across the country have been using eminent domain to force people off their land, so private developers can build more expensive homes and offices that will pay more in property taxes than the buildings they’re replacing.”

Further, land owners are required to get permission, from the government, relative to the use of their own property, i.e. zoning laws. You can’t just build what you want to build with the property you supposedly own. More on this to come in Plank 9.

How about newly-government-seized Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? “On September 7, 2008, James Lockhart, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were being placed into conservatorship of the FHFA. The action is “one of the most sweeping government interventions in private financial markets in decades.” As of 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned or guaranteed about half or 56.8% of the U.S.’s $12 trillion mortgage market^[update] (4).”

So what happens if you default on your home loan? Technically, the government takes it over.

With respect to “…the application of all rent to public purpose,”  how about school and property taxes, both of which are paid to our government for “the common good.” If I don’t have children, I pay taxes for your kids to go to school for my entire life; money I could have used to do any number of other things that would have benefited the economy. But we must not think we are bigger than the common good, now, must we!?

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” – Karl Marx

I just threw up in my mouth.

Moving on….

PLANK 2: A HEAVY PROGRESSIVE OR GRADUATED INCOME TAX

We certainly already have this…and this one is key because it ensures a transfer of wealth from the haves, to the have nots; from those that produce, to those that do not; from the bourgeoisie, to the proletarians. It keeps us all down. This is patently un-American, yet today, as has been the case since February 12, 1913, the more you earn, the more you pay in taxes. 

So what happened on February 12, 1913? That was the day the Sixteenth Amendment was added to the United States Constitution under the presidency of Woodrow Wilson. The amendment states that, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” This is a 100% communist-minded amendment and goes completely against the original Constitution.

Evidence strongly suggests that the 16th Amendment, which establishes the federal income tax, was not approved properly as required by the Constitution and was fraudulently ratified. In the World Net Daily article, “Is income tax legal?: Evidence suggests 16th Amendment never ratified,” Robert L. Schulz, head of We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc., a New York state-based organization, says, “If this evidence is true, the income tax is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”

What evidence? Here’s more from the article:

“William J. Benson, author of a two-volume investigative report on the ratification of the 16th Amendment entitled “The Law That Never Was,” and special agent with the Illinois Department of Revenue for 10 years, was fired after uncovering evidence of corruption in the agency. It took more than six years to get his case into a federal court, but the jury sided with him for violations of his First Amendment rights.

 “Benson later stumbled upon the 16th amendment and became interested in its origin. He delved into the history of the federal income tax — the granddaddy of the state income taxes — and became suspicious. He noted irregularities in the ratification of the 16th Amendment and pressed on in his research; research that took him to the archives in the state capitals of each of the 48 states that were part of the United States in 1913, when the 16th Amendment was passed by the Congress.

 “The Constitution requires ratification of amendments by three-fourths of the states, and Benson’s meticulous research says this was never properly done. Secretary of State Philander Knox declared the amendment ratified on the basis of a report from his solicitor, but that report was “fraudulent,” says Benson.

 “In each state archive, Benson uncovered the records of that state’s consideration of the proposed amendment. To present a legally acceptable case “you must have documents that are notarized and certified,” he explains. “Otherwise they’re considered hearsay in court.”

“All total, Benson collected 17,000 documents, all properly notarized and certified by officials of the states. And what they reveal is shocking. The ratification required by at least 36 states — three-fourths of the 48 states then in existence — has to be identical to the amendment passed by Congress. Benson cites federal documents affirming that for state approval to be acceptable, neither words nor punctuation can be changed. And the states may not violate their own state constitutions in ratifying the amendment.

“Of the 48 states, here’s the story:

• Eight states (Rhode Island, Utah, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Florida, Virginia and Pennsylvania) did not approve or ratify the amendment.
• Texas and Louisiana were forbidden by their own state constitutions to empower the federal government to tax.
• Vermont and Massachusetts rejected the amendment with a recorded vote count, and only later declared it passed without a recorded vote after the amendment was declared ratified by Knox.
• Tennessee, Ohio, Mississippi, California and Washington violated their state constitutions in their ratification procedures.
• Minnesota did not send any copy of its resolution to Knox, let alone a signed and sealed one, as required.
• And Oklahoma, Georgia and Illinois made unacceptable changes in wording. (Some of the above states also made such changes, in addition to their other unacceptable procedures.)

“Take 48 states, deduct these 21, and you have proper ratification by only 27 states — far less than the required 36. But Benson’s story doesn’t end with the compilation and publication of his research. As expected, his evidence that our present system of government is based on a fraud did not get a friendly reception in Washington. Benson says a senatorial aide attempted to bribe him. “Suppress all copies of your books,” he was told, and “you will live in comfort for the rest of your life.” Benson didn’t cooperate, and he landed in prison on income tax charges.”

For more great info on why the Federal Income tax is unconstitutional, check out this great article by Irwin Schiff. Mr. Schiff’s also in jail for fighting against this unjust law. I guess we’re the United States of Do As We Say or You’ll End Up in jail.

Prior to the 16th Amendment, the United States only levied regressive taxes, such as property and sales taxes. After, the tax rate became progressive: 1% of all income up to $20,000 was to be paid to the government. This rate rose to 6% for those that made over $500,000.

Over the years, as generations become more and more ignorant to history and politics, it has become increasingly progressive, with 15 tax brackets of differing incomes and rates. This system was designed to take more from those who have more, and redistribute the income to those who have less. Later, Social Security would formalize this through the direct redistribution of income.

PLANK 3: ABOLITION OF ALL RIGHTS OF INHERITANCE

Today, our government has not abolished our rights of inheritance, but they’ve certainly reduced our rights via heavy taxes, i.e. the estate tax. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 temporarily halted the estate tax, but is set to repeal it in 2010.

Yay…

Estate tax is a tax on the total value of the money and assets left behind by the recently deceased. After various exemptions are applied, the executor of the estate uses money from the estate itself to pay the tax. The rate of taxation depends on the overall value of the estate; appraisers assess the fair market value of the estate’s assets and interests to come up with the overall value of the estate.

For example, appraisers declare that Mr. Jones’s estate is worth $18 million. The executor is responsible for paying the federal estate tax on the $18 million value, which is currently 45% of that fair market value, or $8.1 million. He or she uses the estate’s holdings – cash, real estate, stocks, trusts, business investments, etc. — to pay that tax; a tax, by the way, that is assessed before the heirs receive their inheritances (that bastard Uncle Sam gets its loot before anyone else).

So you work hard your whole life to accumulate wealth, even though you’re swimming the entire time against the tides of the progressive income tax, social security, et al. And then, when you still succeeded in attaining some wealth, you lose half when you die. Does that sound American to you? I guess the government just deserves it instead of your family. All hail, Uncle Sam.

PLANK 4: CONFISCATION OF THE PROPERTY OF ALL EMIGRANTS AND REBELS

Here are a few examples of present day confiscation of property of emigrants and rebels:

Rex 84 (Readiness Exercise 1984): is a plan by the United States federal government to test their ability to detain large numbers of American citizens in case of civil unrest or national emergency. According to the Miami Herald, as reported on July 5, 1987: “Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)….had drafted a contingency plan providing for the suspension of the Constitution, the imposition of martial law, and the appointment of military commanders to head state and local governments and to detain dissidents and Central American refugees in the event of a national crisis.”

So in this case, the confiscation of property is you; you are, in a Rex 84 scenario, property of the government. And with so many Executive Orders and government mandates already on the books that allow for this sort of dictatorial authority, this should scare you.

The USA PATRIOT Act: an acronym standing for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. This act increases the ability of law enforcement agencies to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eases restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expands the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadens the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. The act also expands the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the Patriot Act’s expanded law enforcement powers can be applied.

I’m sure this won’t be abused. Oh wait, it’s abused every day!

Tax liens: a lien imposed by law upon a property to secure the payment of taxes. A tax lien may be imposed for delinquent taxes owed on real property or personal property, or as a result of failure to pay income taxes or other taxes. Don’t pay Uncle Sam and he’ll take your stuff. Sounds like freedom to me.

Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 (Public law 99-570): allows the US Coast Guard to unconstitutionally — i.e. sans habeas corpas — arrest and detain persons suspected of drug trafficking or other crimes. Again, there’s no chance of this not-constitutionally-granted power being violated. Or is there..?

Executive Order 11490: specifically section 2002.10, which states that the Federal Government will, “develop plans and emergency operating procedures for the utilization of excess and surplus real and personal property by Federal Government agencies with emergency assignments or by State and local governmental units as directed, including review of the property holdings of Federal agencies which do not possess emergency functions to determine the availability of property for emergency use, and including the disposal of real and personal property and the rehabilitation of personal property.”

In other words, they can take your property or any property they deem necessary, and use it however they so choose. We’re seeing a pattern here; a pattern that grants our government dictatorial powers in an emergency situation. Unfortunately, the word “emergency” is never defined, so you can be certain these powers will be abused at some point, as all big governments abuse their power.

Confiscation of property without due process: asset forfeiture laws are used by the DEA (state-legal marijuana clinics are raided by federal agencies), IRS (homes, places of business, assets), ATF (firearms, legal marijuana), etc. Where does the power of the federal government end? Can you find liberty in any of this? I see only an all-powerful government with little individual liberty to be found.

PLANK 5: CENTRALIZATION OF CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE STATE, BY MEANS OF A NATIONAL BANK WITH STATE CAPITAL AND AN EXCLUSIVE MONOPOLY

Here’s where we get into what I was babbling about at the beginning of this article. This is the central plank of Communism, and it’s easy to understand why: it’s all about control over the masses. As Meyer Amschal Rothschild, the founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty said: ”Give me the right to issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who governs the country.”

In 1886, a group of millionaires purchased Jekyll Island and converted it into a winter retreat and hunting ground, the USA’s most exclusive club. By 1900, the club’s roster represented 1/6th of the world’s wealth. Names like Astor, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Pulitzer and Gould filled the club’s register. Non- members, regardless of stature, were not allowed. Dignitaries like Winston Churchill and President McKinley were refused admission (3).

In 1908, the year after a national money panic purportedly created by J. P. Morgan, Congress established the Aldrich–Vreeland Act which established the National Monetary Commission. In 1910 another, more secretive, group was formed, consisting of the chiefs of major corporations and banks in this country and Europe. The group left secretly by rail from Hoboken, New Jersey, and traveled anonymously to the hunting lodge on Jekyll Island.  The meeting was so secret that none referred to the other by his last name (3).

Why the need for secrecy? Frank Vanderlip wrote later in the Saturday Evening Post, “…it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich’s plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill…I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System (3).”  

At Jekyll Island, the true draftsman for the Federal Reserve was Paul Warburg. The plan was simple. The new central bank could not be called a central bank because America did not want one, so it had to be given a deceptive name. Ostensibly, the bank was to be controlled by Congress, but a majority of its members were to be selected by the private banks that would own its stock (3).

To keep the public from thinking that the Federal Reserve would be controlled from New York, a system of twelve regional banks was designed. Given the concentration of money and credit in New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York controlled the system, making the regional concept initially nothing but a ruse (3).

The board and chairman were to be selected by the President, but in the words of Colonel Edward Mandell House, the board would serve such a term as to “put them out of the power of the President.” The power over the creation of money was to be taken from the people and placed in the hands of private bankers who could expand or contract credit as they felt best suited their needs (3).

On December 23, 1913, congress passed the Federal Reserve Act (formerly the Aldrich Act). This legislation set up a monetary system controlled by a central bank. Years later, after America plunged into the Great Depression due to the closed-door operations of the Federal Reserve, Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, had this to say as he addressed congress on June 10, 1932:

“We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are U.S. government institutions. They are private credit monopolies; domestic swindlers, rich and predatory money lenders which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. The Federal Reserve banks are the agents of the foreign central banks. The truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States by the arrogant credit monopoly which operates the Federal Reserve Board.”

Sensationalized as that may sound, it’s 100% true, and those “swindlers” who run the Fed are ruining our country, stealing our prosperity for their own personal piggy banks and leaving us the bill. All the more reason you should write/call your congressman and demand they support HR 1207 and S 604, the House and Senate legislation created by Ron Paul of Texas and his co-sponsors, that will allow congress — for the first time ever, mind you — to audit the Federal Reserve banking system.

As we sit here today, there is no system of checks and balances with the Fed, as is required of our government by our Constitution. Why? Well, they’re not a part of our government? They’re a private bank! Yes, you heard right: private! And because of the Federal Reserve Act, they operate with impunity. Through their unobserved monetary policy, they have turned us into a welfare-warefare state; such a state is only possible through the creation of a fiat currency, which was established by the Federal Reserve when — through their machinations — the federal government pulled our money away from the gold standard. Now, with a printing machine and almighty power, they print trillions of dollars as a means of inflating away our wealth and sovereignty, all the while enriching their plutocracy…

..but this must stop, and an audit of their business would bring to light their corrupt ways. If this can happen, it’s possible we can do as President Andrew Jackson did in 1832 when he terminated the then central bank of the US, known as the Second Bank of the United States.

We must End the Fed!

To summarize, so far, we’re pretty much 5 for 5 in terms of fitting the planks of the communist manifesto. Does this make you feel as uneasy as it makes me feel? It should, because like our federal income tax, it’s getting progressively worse.

Head over to TruthOffering.com to finish reading about the other planks of Communism and Socialism…

PLANK 6: CENTRALIZATION OF THE MEANS OF COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSPORTATION IN THE HANDS OF THE STATE

PLANK 7: EXTENSION OF FACTORIES AND INSTRUMENTS OF PRODUCTION OWNED BY THE STATE, THE BRINGING INTO CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS, AND THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE SOIL GENERALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH A COMMON PLAN 

PLANK 8: EQUAL LIABILITY OF ALL TO LABOR. ESTABLISHMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ARMIES, ESPECIALLY FOR AGRICULTURE 

PLANK 9: COMBINATION OF AGRICULTURE WITH MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, GRADUAL ABOLITION OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN TOWN AND COUNTRY, BY A MORE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION OVER THE COUNTRY

PLANK 10: FREE EDUCATION FOR ALL CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. ABOLITION OF CHILDREN’S FACTORY LABOR IN ITS PRESENT FORM. COMBINATION OF EDUCATION WITH INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION

Communism is the device of the elite, used time and time again throughout history, to coax people into believing it is a system of complete equality for the people. In truth, it’s an extremely efficient system of theft, stealing the wealth of the common man for the profit of those truly in power. We may not be a communist nation yet, but we’re well on our way if our citizenry doesn’t awaken from their still-comfortable slumber. The slumber’s about to end.

In the meantime — now that you’ve taken the red pill — welcome to the United Communist States of America.

Related Articles:

1. The Constitution of the United States of America
2. Levi’s: All-American or Neo-Communist?
3. Goldman Sachs, Obama, the Federal Reserve, Al Gore & a Communist Revolutionary Group
4. 10 Indications That the United States is Becoming a Dictatorship

Tiny URL for this post: http://tinyurl.com/4pebmv5