Posts Tagged ‘politics’

And That Is Banking

18 May 2017

INFLATION IS DETERMINED BY THE RATIO BETWEEN THE DEPOSITED GOODS AND THE NUMBER OF RECEIPTS (money) ISSUED.

…real banking, can all by itself, increase production.

– L. Ron Hubbard
HCO Policy Letter of 2 September 1982
AND THAT IS BANKING

The implication of the above reference is that poor banking practices can cause runaway price increases, while sound banking practices can increase the prosperity of all.

I wanted to write something about this subject because I have been studying about how home loans work, and it helped me realize some things that others have been pointing out for a long time.

Note that on 19 May I rewrote this post to try to make it more accurate; see more about that below.

Financial people tend to speak in terms that are not easily understood, and to assume you know about something that you don’t actually know about. However, most people have heard of the term “balancing the books” and this is a basic concept worth going over.

I suppose the idea that the books have to “stay in balance” is similar to the idea that “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” In the physical universe, this is true by observation. However, money and finance are conceptual universes, or you could say a kind of mathematical model of the physical universe. If a car exists, it is assumed that someone was paid to make it, whether that’s really what happened or not. So if I buy a car, I basically convert some of my cash into a vehicle. In my books (if I kept books), the price paid moves out of the Cash asset category and into the Vehicles asset category, and they stay balanced. What if someone gave me the car? I basically have to create a special category for gifts, which in a commercial business would be similar to something called “retained earnings”.

Debt

Now, say I’m a bank, and I have some deposits from my customers, and loan a portion of these to someone. This decreases my cash – the pool I make loans from. How do I replenish that pool (other than by getting more deposits)? In normal banking I would have to use part of my income (payments on loans I had already made to other people) and put that back into my cash. In mortgage banking I could do something called “selling the loan.” Basically, the loan turns into a security (essentially a document that can be bought and sold) that I can sell to a company that buys those types of securities.

Where do those companies get their money? They also create and sell securities – stock, basically – to investors. The investors include a lot of firms that help people save for retirement, as well as other investment firms. Those firms buy all sorts of stocks and other securities with that money.

The ultimate source of money for buying debt (making loans) in the U.S. is the Federal Reserve. The “Fed” is part of a network of “Central Banks.” Central Banks get charters from governments to control the money supply for them. They regulate banks, and they buy debt (or make loans, however you want to look at it). The Central Banks deal mostly with the large commercial banks, which are all international corporations. Smaller local institutions deal mostly with the big banks. The chain of purchasing debt works its way down until you get to the borrowers, who are expected to keep up their flow of payments. Governments are also large borrowers. To borrow money, they issue “bonds,” which come with a promise to pay dividends, and the full amount borrowed at the time of maturity. So in the case of government borrowing, the taxpayers, have to pay all that through their taxes. That’s why “bond initiatives” have to be approved by voters. In the end, a lot of what we make at our jobs goes to make profits for the owners of “debt.”

Making Money

Before my recent studies, I hadn’t really heard about this practice of “selling debt.” But debt is a receivable on the bank’s books, so it is worth something. It never occurred to me that you could somehow sell that to another company to get more cash (stay liquid, as the financial people call it). But this is really just another way of saying that the bank borrowed some cash. I’ve heard of companies borrowing to make payrolls, or buy new equipment. I’d just never heard of banks borrowing so they could make more loans. Of course, assuming they continue to service (collect payments) on the loans they sell, they have to forward most of those payments to the new owners of the loans, so that portion of their income is no longer available for lending.

As I wrote this, I came to see that “selling debt” could also be given another meaning. It could also be seen as selling people – governments in particular – on the idea that they should borrow money in order to do things. They shouldn’t save, they should borrow. You shouldn’t “wait until you can afford it,” you should buy it right now, do it right now. With governments, this is particularly pushed as a way to finance wars. Every major war I am aware of was financed with debt – the taxpayers (via the government) borrowed money from banks, then had to pay it all back afterwards. It is a potent way to “make money” in a short amount of time. I don’t know, however, if it really accomplishes anything over longer periods, especially if it involves making war.

Fractional Reserve Banking

Some people believe that this is a new idea. But it is really just a newer term for an old idea. According to Google’s Ngram viewer, the phrase first appeared in literature around the turn of the last century.
As long as banks have been loaning money, they have been using deposited funds (or other assets) to do so. The idea of “Central Banks” was pushed into place after it seemed that unregulated banks had an inclination to dig too deep into their cash. Now Central Banks police what fraction of a bank’s deposits (or cash, to use a simpler term) must be held in reserve so that their depositors will be happy with the illusion that their full deposited balance could be withdrawn at any time. Depositors get to account for their full deposited amounts as “cash,” when in reality only a fraction of that amount is actually available to be paid out from the bank’s reserves.

No one likes “reserves” because they just sit there and don’t do anything. It’s kind of like a having a Fire Department in your town. In a perfect world, they would never have a fire to fight, or even a cat to get out of a tree. In this real world, you need to have one because “stuff happens.” Same goes for reserves.

Some would argue that amounts held is reserve should be quite substantial. It gives stability to an economy, and breeds a certain level of confidence, even a certain willingness to take risks. I think there is validity to those arguments. But that does not mean banks need to keep 100% of their “on demand” cash deposits as reserves. This is discussed more below.

The beauty of a cashless system (in the eye of the banker)

In the “old days” money meant gold coins, or ingots of silver, or other precious metals, or gems. Today it can be reduced to a code in a bank’s database. Money (currency, really) had to be manufactured, transported and stored when not in use. Meanwhile, businessmen had grown used to account books, and moving larger sums around using bank drafts instead of currency. This began the move away from “hard” money. The “softer” the money, the easier it was to handle and move about. Banks and their major customers really liked these benefits. And so, national currencies were pushed into place, the use of paper money was greatly expanded, and finally computer systems were developed that just require an ID card to access account records.

Global-scale electronic funds transfer systems now exist, and are very widely used. All accounts at all modern banks are computerized. Banks are now relieved of the problem of having to store precious metals in their vaults, though “modern” money can still be stolen. To the extent that the world goes cashless, banks and stores are relieved of the problem of securing their on-hand currency, and only have to worry about their computers, which can be locked away in their now-empty vaults.

So, what’s so good about cash?

However, the credit or debit card holder now has to worry about the security of his electronic transactions. I once had a bank make a $2,500 error in my favor. They never bothered to correct it, though I told them about it more than once. For them it was insignificant, but that’s a huge amount for me. What if my account suddenly one day had $2,500 less in it? They better be able to correct that!

In a secure and honest world, using a card instead of cash (currency) would be a great way to go. In the world as it really exists, I want to be able to fall back on coins and paper money. If a store’s electronic payment system goes down, I want them to accept my cash. If I need some water out of an old-style vending machine, I need some coins or I go thirsty. If I want to tip a waiter, it’s easier for me to think with using a couple of extra bills.

When money is a commodity, then you can’t have some unless you earn it or physically steal it from somebody. When money is only a number in a database, what happens if I can’t get access to that database? And what happens if someone can get illegal access to it? Or in some other way fiddle with accounts just by making some entries in a computer program? It gives the tech-savvy an advantage I’m not sure they’ve earned. The cashless ideal includes a reliance on technology that is not necessarily as reliable as I need it to be. At the business level, if a transaction gets fouled up, it can be fixed later. At a personal level, it could mean the difference between staying fed or going hungry.

I’m not advocating a return to cash necessarily, though we might be forced into it should the electronic funds transfer systems stop working. But I am pointing out that our turn away from cash did not handle the most important problems we have always had: dishonesty, thievery and avoidance of real productive work.

Reality Check

My original concept of how this scam works was simple, but incorrect:

The bank has my $100. I thought this meant it could loan out $1000. That’s not exactly right. It is only allowed to loan, maybe, $90. Except, that loaned money is going to end up in another bank account, and then about $80 of that could be loaned back out. That whole cycle can be imagined to repeat maybe 5 or ten times. Now a lot more than my $100 has been loaned – deposited – and re-loaned. That’s what people call “creating money.” I discuss this more below.

The other part of my perception of what was wrong with this system was the cashless nature of modern transactions. This possibly provides more opportunity to “fiddle” the system. If you have to provide a borrower with real currency to complete a loan, then if you run out of currency, you can’t make any more loans. If you only have to credit an account on a computer, then you don’t need the currency. So, who’s to stop you from just pumping out loans? Your accountant, if he’s honest. Or a regulator, the next time you get audited. So the real point here is that the removal of hard currency from the system, reducing it all to numbers in databases, has a tendency to degrade the underlying concepts of what money is and represents. It should represent real value, real productive work. You should not be able to “fiddle” it into existence when you have done nothing to earn it.

Interest

I originally linked this trend towards a cashless system to the decline of interest rates, close to their total disappearance. I have a problem with interest because I don’t think most of the explanations for it are correct. It is often described as a payment to the lender based on the risk he takes by loaning money. But what about the risk the borrower takes in borrowing money? And what about loans between friends or relatives? I think the banks just decided to shift the paradigm because they had the power to do so. Look at interest rates on savings accounts, for instance. It used to be recognized that the depositor was actually making the bank a loan, and should earn interest on his unused balance. But depositors had no way to enforce that idea on bankers, so gradually interest payments on savings accounts have reduced to almost nothing.

The abandonment of the use of interest rates to control inflation in certain markets, and the subsequent increase in the supply of money in those markets, are bits of history not totally explained by the factors discussed above. Though the smaller banks that overextended themselves before the Great Depression could be blamed for what happened, I think that blame would be misplaced. They, however, felt the brunt of new banking regulations, while at the same time, what was to become a huge boom in the mortgage markets can be traced back to those times. I think there remains an untold story (at least it hasn’t been told to me) about how that all came about and about what is unfolding today. My concern is that we will strike out at the wrong targets (called misidentifying root cause where I work) and simply prolong our agony as a result. Benefiting from the suffering of others has never been an honorable way to gain status in a society. Yet suffering continues while a few grow unbelievably rich. Until we begin to apply more effective solutions to problems of finance, the economy, and politics, we will continue on our slide towards a non-sustainable system that will eventually totally break down.

Credit:

I relied heavily on an article written my Kenneth Ballard here:
http://www.kennethballard.com/?p=2322
to get an explanation of how banks account for the loans they make.
I don’t know much about this guy, but he seems to know what he’s talking about…I wish the subject were easier to understand. I have had a terrible time trying to do so…
Wow! Mr. Ballard has responded with corrections here:
http://www.kennethballard.com/?p=4120

Follow-up notes for those interested

According to the Federal Reserve’s own website:
“Reserve requirements are the amount of funds that a depository institution must hold in reserve against specified deposit liabilities. … Depository institutions must hold reserves in the form of vault cash or deposits with Federal Reserve Banks.”

Notice that this says nothing about loaning money. The “reserve requirement” is a fraction of total monies on deposit. So, that means the rest of the monies on deposit are available to loan out. I think the first stumbling block here is the term “deposit liabilities.” Who, who isn’t accounting trained, knows what this really refers to? It’s like two conflicting ideas in the same term. This goes back to the fact that there are two balancing sides to every transaction. When a bank receives money from a depositor, it’s not a gift, but on the other hand, the depositor gets nothing in return, except a receipt. As the reference I cited at the beginning states, in the “old days” that receipt acted as money. Nowadays, the fact that a person has money “on account” gives them the right – or ability – to buy things with it.

The depositor counts his bank balance as cash – as a liquid asset. He can do this because there is an implied promise (perhaps written somewhere) that the bank will pay him back “on demand.” More realistically, the depositor has loaned the bank some money for its use. But there is no formal loan contract, as would be the case if the depositor had purchased a CD or a bond. So the depositor is encouraged to not think of his deposits as “on loan” to the bank. However, that is closer to the actual situation. I think this difference between perception and reality is what some people object to. Yet, if the banks do a good job, no one will ever know the difference.

It could be argued that banks should be more honest about what they are doing. It would probably better reflect how they actually operate if they sold bonds or CDs to anyone who wanted to maintain a significant balance with them. Or to make them a “member” like the Credit Unions do.

Private individuals are never going to fully realize that a portion of their deposited funds is being loaned to others unless the way their account at the bank works actually makes that clear. In the past it has been a workable system in spite of this. But since interest rates collapsed, more and more people are questioning it. The “multiplier effect” would still work, but perhaps the banks should be made more responsible for both the positive and negative aspects of it. Having to “insure” bank accounts is not something that should be necessary. If the banking system were more honest with the public about how it actually operates, I think the public would support it – especially if it resulted in real economic growth at the local level. Right now something is suppressing that growth. Questionable ethics levels in the banking community does not help matters any. The banking system has a lot of power to do good in society. Or harm. It is not currently demonstrating the good side of that power.

The Election

7 November 2016

The sites I follow are buzzing about this U.S. election.

Here is my take on it at this point:

Hillary stands for business-as-usual; a predictable outcome.

Trump stands for disruptive changes; he seems unpredictable at this point.

No one in the race stands for planned change based on ethical principles and workable management processes, implemented in an organized manner. Such a being would be the only one deserving a place of leadership at this time.

Is there a higher struggle?

The media, the pundits, and academics for the most part, dismiss the idea that a lot is going on in secret; that these candidates are merely proxies for power groups that wish to remain hidden and unidentified.

The alternative news sources that I follow, on the other hand, see this as the obvious truth of the situation and openly mock anyone who refuses to see it and deal with it.

The problem is that the alternative sources don’t have it right, either. And it’s my guess that this is because they rely too heavily for data on “insiders.”

For instance, Veterans Today thinks Hillary is being supported by the more moderate power groups who ultimately oppose the extremists who are supporting Trump. Their editor Gordon Duff accuses the FBI of being full of conspiracy theorists and protectors of criminals. Odd he’d say that, as Gordon is one of the biggest conspiracy theorists on the planet. And I don’t use that term derogatorily.

Meanwhile, over in England Simon Parkes is telling us that the FBI is made up mostly of people who are trying to do the right thing and don’t want a known pedophile working as our President. While Trump’s not much better, he stands for change and change is what is needed.

Julian Assange in a recent interview said he thinks Trump will not be allowed to serve in office even if he overwhelmingly wins the popular vote. However, he also said that Hillary’s accusations that Russia is behind the most recent release of documents is totally ridiculous.

I also ran across an October video from Clif High, a Seattle software genius who data mines the internet to find “data sets” that indicate the most desired (and probable) future. He finds a landslide popular win for Trump which the rest of the world reacts to with total disgust. Almost all countries holding U.S. debt contracts try to dump them, precipitating tremendous inflation here in the U.S. Meanwhile, U.S. officials refuse to allow Trump to take office, but Hillary has disappeared and cannot be located.

The best-organized group wins

Here is a key datum about politics:

“A small group thoroughly organized can conquer the disorganized billions.”

L. Ron Hubbard, ORGANIZATION AND MORALE, 1 Nov 1970.

If you want to figure out what group is really running this planet these days (if there is just one) then look for that group that is extremely well-organized. In human groups this has often meant a group beaten into being organized. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really matter exactly how the group maintains and defends its organization; it just has to be very well-organized. A group that depends on constant threats of violence to maintain organization will eventually falter, as the most brilliant beings will usually leave it. But this basic datum still holds.

And the most organized group I am aware of – at least it used to be extremely tightly organized per reports – is the one running our secret space programs. Descriptions of it come from Corey Goode, William Tompkins, Sean David Morton, Steven Greer and other researchers and past insiders.

Per Tompkins and some others, this particular group is part of a longer lineage of powerful groups that get created due to rivalries between various ET groups regarding Earth. One ET alliance prefers an invasion approach to expansion, mirrored on Earth by groups currently centered in Europe. Another alliance prefers a more peaceful approach based on free trade. They are both interested in Earth at this time, and have had some interest for many centuries into the past. But now Earth is set up to go Space Opera, and the number of ET groups now interested in Earth has multiplied.

Of course there is another large body of ET communities that would prefer to just be left alone. But they are, almost by definition, less well-organized. So in this universe, they are very likely to get run over (or be overrun).

Need of Change

Masses of people in the U.S., to say nothing of other areas on the planet, really want change. They need something to break loose and reveal a path forward. Most of them have no idea of exactly what that path should be. Thus, at this point they are revolutionaries, or nearly at that point, as there is a minimum of planning and organization amongst them as a whole. They are very numerous, but:

“Revolution never produces anything. Throwing something out of gear momentarily, the vast inertia of a people closes in again and patches it all up.

“Evolution can be fairly fast, but evolution is on a level of the people, not on the level of the government.

“You have to change the people to change the government.”

— L. Ron Hubbard (From a lecture of 10 November 1952.)

Here he makes a distinction between “people” (disorganized) and “government” (organized) long before he became immersed in the study of organizing and management that he undertook when he managed Saint Hill as the first advanced Scientology organization on the planet in the 1960s.

Take a look at the American Revolution for example (this analysis based only on my current understanding). It was instigated by professional people and businessmen who also functioned as academics and politicians. Thus, it was built on idealism more than on organization. They were aided against Britain by France – which was itself going down an anti-aristocracy path at the time.

But just as Napoleon effectively killed, or usurped, the French Revolution in the early 1800s, so Britain re-invaded the U.S. during the War of 1812. The French had basically given all of the Midwest to the U.S. in 1803, which freaked out the British Empire, thinking it still had large amounts of leverage over the rebel colonies. But instead of re-invading, the British were apparently convinced to approach the problem differently.

With the help of the Louisiana Purchase, the U.S. established a very strong foothold in the Americas over the next 100 years, but by the end of that time, Europe had arranged a new control structure in the form of its network of Central Banks.

Who has the upper hand?

In 1967, Hubbard identified a small group based in the City of London which controlled most English-language news outlets and was tightly connected to certain banking and industrial interests, as well as psychiatry as represented by groups like the Tavistock Institute.

This group was believed to be behind the shellacking that Scientology was getting in the press in those years.

At the time, it was a big revelation for all of us. But LRH never said that this was the only secret power group in existence on Earth; or that it had no rivals; or exactly how ET might be involved. So I resort to other sources for clues:

The “invader alliance” is commonly identified as composed of Draco, Reptilians and some human types – not all individuals of these descriptions, though – and is usually identified with the European Royals and the Vatican, along with their bankers, who are related to Zionism and are Earth’s warmongers.

The other ET group attempted to influence technological and spiritual thinking in Germany in the early 1900s, but that did not go well. They have continued to make various contact attempts, such as those reported by Tompkins in his interviews and first book. As a result of this the military-industrial complex has apparently remained factionalized along lines that I think of as Group Tone Level. Some factions prefer a more conservative approach to politics, preferring persuasion, negotiation, and even convincing PR stunts, rather than constantly resorting to war. Other factions live on war and wouldn’t know what to do without it. Those groups are clearly insane, while the others are only irritatingly neurotic.

Some think the Clintons are in the conservative camp, while others are quite sure they are totally insane. Some think Trump is firmly dominated by criminals and warmongers, while others feel he might actually be in slightly better condition, mentally, than Hillary. How am I supposed to know who’s right, beyond just looking into their faces when they talk and reading the signs?

I think they are both crazy, as what other personality type would run for U.S. President at this time (who had a serious possibility of getting into office)?

Whether this election results in “business-as-usual” or unpredictable changes, I think we still have a lot to learn about people, about politics, and about ourselves. Ultimately, until a being can look at a situation and just know the truth of it, he doesn’t know the truth of it. So let’s work at developing that ability rather than playing around trying to second-guess each other.

SpaceX snafu and other news

3 September 2016

snafu: American slang popularly thought to originate during WWII, but possibly derived from an abbreviation used earlier by Morse code operators on telegraph circuits. “Situation Normal; All Fouled (Fucked) Up” has a sarcasm attached to it which may have not been originally intended, but certainly contributes to the modern meaning of “snafu.”

The first of September was an interesting day…

Many were attracted to the explosion at the SpaceX launch site in Florida. An article run by Veterans Today suggested that an “attacking” object was detected in the video of the event in the frames immediately prior to the beginning of the fireball.

I downloaded and looked at the video from about 0:50 to 1:12 in slow-motion and frame-by-frame (a hidden feature of Microsoft Media Player) and saw anomalous fast-moving objects three different times directly before and in the fist second or so of the explosion. The first time, an object seems to launch from behind the middle tower, curve up toward the rocket, then away to the right. The second appearance spans only about six frames and shows an object pass all the way across the scene, just behind the rocket. The explosion starts when the object is about 1/2 way to the rocket. Very soon after the explosion starts, another object (or the same one) appears in the lower left and swiftly moves towards the upper right.

Thus, we definitely have one or more “UFOs” associated with this event and perhaps causing the explosion.

Some think the Israeli payload was not as “humanitarian” as it was made out to be, and that someone with the ways and means knew this and decided to terminate the launch.

Simon Parkes appears with Kerry Cassidy

Kerry didn’t know about the SpaceX explosion when she called Simon for an interview focusing on upcoming events. He told her about it. But they did not discuss it much as it had just occurred at that time. Kerry had suspected that something might happen to a SpaceX project based on Courtney Brown’s “Time Cross Project” results for August, which predicted some sort of explosion resulting from an object falling from the sky. The August event seen by the Remote Viewers matched much better with a Russian cruise missile attack on targets in Aleppo, Syria.

What the Remote Viewers have been noticing in events such as this one is evidence of things being deliberately caused which are presented to the public as “accidents.”

But in this interview Simon spent most of his time on his main theme, which is that an old power faction centered in the City of London (the same one, basically, named by LRH in his 1967 Ron’s Journal talk) is becoming desperate because it is losing control. Several other commentators are telling this same story. It is unclear exactly who or what is pushing them out of power. Some think this is basically the BRICS block. But because of ET involvement in all this, the situation is probably not that simple.

In any case, Simon says he is putting away some extra food and water and does not plan to travel in October. He thinks a disruption of the electronic banking system may occur quite soon, and that we should all prepare for it.

Time Cross for September is released

Meanwhile, Courtney has released the Time Cross Project sessions (done mid-August) relating to September. All the viewers saw various forms of civil unrest. The location appears to be the Middle East, and that would be no great surprise, as civil unrest there is the new normal. However, Dick Allgire saw events that he thought would have world-wide repercussions.

These sessions include 4 viewers, two young and two older. The first younger viewer calls herself “PrinCess Jeaneé” and the second is Aziz Brown (Courtney’s son). It’s great to see some younger viewers take on these targets. They are not easy targets!

What chance for the ways of peace?

As I mentioned in my series on Battlefield Earth, peace is not a subject often dealt with in literature. It is, perhaps, seen as boring. What LRH tried to make a case for in Battlefield Earth was that peace could be exciting. I believe history has demonstrated that societies prosper in times of peace. This would be one huge reason why Suppressive Persons would prefer continuous war. We are all hoping that those who take over from the City of London see things differently. It would be great for Earth to calm down a bit, as our challenges are far from over, and we could use more time to prepare for them. Our next great challenge, as I see it, is ET.

The ETs I am concerned with (and so are many others) are basically biological societies that have developed an array of assistive technologies that boost their abilities to use force to control others. Although they have deadly weapons, we are assuming they are thinking in terms of using psychological and physical force here on Earth towards the goal of enslaving us – perhaps without our being totally aware of the situation. Similar techniques which have “worked” for the SPs of Earth come under the heading of Covert Hostility. We might assume that ET is better at these techniques than our SP Earth brothers are.

So the challenge becomes to spot these techniques and defeat them before they “work” on us. This requires training and is the principal reason we need more time. We will probably not get as much time as we would like. Fortunately, this training program is already well underway. Perhaps there will be enough trained people to move the situation in our favor. If you want to help, go to our Volunteer Ministers website and get started.

Washington State Primary

2 August 2016

Got an email yesterday from a political group reminding me to vote in the primary! Thought I had more time…I was planning to actually research the candidates, but it was too late. I filled out the ballot, sealed it up, and took it downtown to deposit it in a metal drop box near City Hall.

Sending a message

You can participate in a democratic process for at least two reasons: To help someone get elected or to send a message to the “front runners.” Though using voting for the second reason is not an organized activity at this point, it well could become so. I am not happy with either of the major parties. But I found out there are a lot of candidates for state offices who identify with alternative parties like the Libertarians or the Independents. I don’t know if any of these parties ever get their people elected. But by organizing and running they are trying to send a message to the major parties that there is a section of the population which is not happy with the Republicans or the Democrats. So by voting for candidates from alternative parties, you help them send this message.

Aren’t the Asses and the Dumbos actually opposing each other?

The media and the candidates themselves try to portray themselves as political opponents. But that’s not what I see. In 1963 the Democrats lost a president under mysterious circumstances. Why haven’t they ever gone after that issue? Or the 9/11 loss, which happened while a Republican President was in office?

Ike, upon retiring from the Presidency, warned us about the “military-industrial complex.” It is very real. Why don’t the politicians or the press ever mention it? Could it be that it rose to become all their masters, as Ike warned it might? That’s the theory most of us in the “alternative community” now operate on.

So by “sending a message” of non-support through the voting process, this is the power group we are ultimately communicating to.

Are politicians really necessary?

Many in my circles have argued that the importance of politics in life – especially in modern life – is extremely over-stated by the media and the politicians. Ultimately, I think that’s true.

But it would be unwise to think that just because most people, most communities, are perfectly able to take care of themselves and make their own best decisions, that this leaves no place for politics or politicians. The problem is to find that place and put those people in that place, and keep them there. In other words, government has a purpose. Most people just don’t know what it is.

Awareness of what is

The essence of politics is probably leadership. It’s secondary purpose is management. When an individual in a group rises to help that group through some challenge, and is successful at that, the group tends to look at that individual as “powerful.” The truth is that we are all powerful, but under those circumstances that individual was more aware of something than the others, and was able to communicate it in a way that got the group to work together to get something done that needed to be accomplished.

Probably that leader’s ideal scene would be to bring everyone in the group up to his own level of awareness, so they could all share equally in the responsibilities that accompany being more aware. But most leaders don’t know how to do that, or see their “power” as something they can use to their own personal advantage.

We should never forget, though, that “power” derives from an awareness of what is – some more basic truth of existence – and concentrates into the hands of a few individuals only when they are successful in keeping those awarenesses a secret from everyone else. If you can learn to become more aware of what is, you will become more free from the control of powerful elites, but you will also carry the responsibility of that increased awareness with you and feel the need to act on it, first by sharing that awareness, or that ability to be aware, as broadly as you can. You either join one of the power elites, or you “fight” them in that manner.

How divided is America?

11 July 2016

The on-screen news ticker in our mess hall (known to others as the “break room” or the “auditorium”) proclaimed today (among many other things) that Obama had said something about the US not being that divided.

The actual quote, from a video of a 9 July press conference in Poland was, “I firmly believe that America is NOT as divided as some have suggested.”
(The US President, by long tradition, refers to US citizens as “Americans” and the US as “America.”)

So, I thought, how divided is America?

I went about looking up some opinion poll results that might tell me something about this. Most of the polls I found are not that current. Apparently it still takes a good bit of time to create, organize, carry out and report on a large poll across a country or a planet. The sample has to be adequately randomized and all that…

Before I give you any figures, let’s go over some theory.

I suppose that most sociologists think that a person’s opinion about something is determined mostly by 1) his training and education and 2) a set of shared qualities often spoken of as “human nature.”

Point 1 is important without question. But what is point 2, really? You’ll have to figure out the Psychology explanations for yourself. My (far from complete) Scientology training, though, bears mentioning. The model, as you may be already aware, starts with a being. We can suppose that this being started out totally free to be, do and have anything it wanted. What we have today in “human nature” is the result of trillions of years of experience living with other beings, never totally aware of what they were or what oneself was. Humans find themselves today on a Tone Scale, where they are more or less free to move up or down. This scale was derived from observation, not dogma. It is workable when used to predict behavior and attitudes.

From the Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation, let’s take column Q, “Command over Environment” where political attitudes are mentioned. At high on the scale, 4.0, we have “dislikes to control people.” At 3.5 we have “Liberal.” At 3.0 we have, “Allows rights to others. Democratic.” At 2.5 we have “Does not desire ownership of much.” At 2.0 we have “Desires command in order to injure.” So at this point the being is taking a turn for the worse.

At 1.5 we have the Fascist. At 1.1 we have the Communist (cold-war style, sneaky, loves hypnotism as a control method, otherwise known as a “true criminal”). And at 0.1 we have the suicide.

When I speak of “suppression” I am referring in particular to one person or group trying to push another person or group DOWN this scale. The 1.1 likes to push people down to 0.1. The 1.5 likes to kill people outright. The 2.0 likes a good fight, content for the adversary to survive for another day. The higher tones are also ready to fight, but with increasing levels of selectivity (and often, effectiveness).

These are the social tones. The being itself, quite normally being unaware of itself, sleeps at a lower tone level. Wake it up, and it can do some very strange things until it gets a grip on its new sense of self-awareness. But for the purposes of this discussion, we are talking about the social tones of humans.

Most of us were raised with a “liberal” education. The majority of us fell lower subsequently, seeing Liberal values as ideals to be worked for. Democracy is seen as a safe, sensible approach to achieving those ideals. However, you have to fight for democracy! Or, do you really have to enforce it? Or, perhaps, trick people into accepting it?

All these attitudes and influences went into the creation and subsequent marketing of our “global government” the United Nations. Included in the marketing plan for this body was a document entitled the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was unveiled 10 December of 1948 in Paris. It is embraced by my church, as the right to worship freely is included in it.

The concept of human rights is not, strictly, “Liberal.” As the history of the subject reflects, human rights can be seen as much as a sensible approach than as pie-in-the-sky idealism. Cyrus the Great – 539 BC – is noted as an early proponent of this approach. However, Cyrus was, first and foremost, an emperor. And, strictly speaking, his empire only lasted 200 years. You can earn the respect of vast populations by respecting them. At least the Emperor should be able to afford to do this!

Be all that as it may, the attitude surveys I found deal mostly with the most basic human rights. These include the old Liberal rights of thought, speech and worship and the newer “socialist” (communist?) rights to food, clothing, shelter, health care, education. It should be noted here that Public Education, and many of these other “humanitarian” programs, are not ancient traditions in most lands of Earth. But on Earth, strong central governments are also a rather recent development, made possible in part by technological progress in fields like communication, transport, agriculture, medicine – oh – and, war.

The bell curve of the tone scale

Does the distribution of tone levels on earth actually fit a “bell” shaped distribution? I have no firm data on this. But imagine for a moment that you were totally free to move around on this scale as you wished and to confront or experience life at the tone that seemed the most appropriate at the time. Where on the scale would you spend most of your time? At the middle, 2.0? Perhaps down below that a bit, in pain? Or above the middle a bit, bored?

Think of all the people you know that spend most of their time somewhere between pain and boredom. Could be quite a few. Or maybe at 1.5 as an angry Fascist? Seems that might shorten one’s life span!

It has been put forward by Hubbard that about 2.5% of the population manage to secretly hang out around 1.1. It would be charitable to put the bulk of the population as high as 3.0 (Conservative), but in the reasonably calm situation of answering opinion poll questions, we can imagine many would try their best to assume that viewpoint, or higher, up into Liberalism, if their education demanded it.

But you can see the problem with these polls, and with Presidential statements regarding “divisions.” Sufficient suppression can plunge a nation down into hatred and war. Sufficient relief can allow it to surge up into a peaceful Liberalism. But real education about real life could in theory stabilize a nation at a high level that it could not be pushed down from. In these polls concerning attitudes, people are not much divided, though their ideas display a range from Liberal on down. In polls concerning things that are theoretically provable certainties, we often see more even splits. Thus, the suppression of the truth has left in question facts that should be totally knowable. This is troubling, as people need certainty, and if the certainty of something is not plain to the face, beliefs and propaganda will be used to fill in the blank spots.

The Polls

Pew (Pew Research Center) has a project called the Religious Landscape Study. Data points for this study exist for 2007 and 2014. The results for 2014 were published late in 2015.

The Council on Foreign Relations must employ a lot of researchers, because it has published reports on various global studies concerning attitudes on human rights, among other issues. The latest reports I found date from December of 2011.

I fill in some odd bits from other sources.

Attitudes

What we see from these studies is a consistent percentage spread across related issues.

Support for the traditional human rights hovers around 3/4 of those polled, both US and global.

It goes way down for freedom of the press. The press is notorious for its misbehavior. When the question is reworded to ask about the freedom of the press “to report the news truthfully,” support for this concept goes up to 70% in the US, with a low of 41% in India, where “truth” and “the press” are probably seen by most as opposites.

Support for the “socialistic” or “nanny state” human rights of more modern times shows a bit more variation in societies. We can see education and propaganda at work here.

In China 98% support the right to a basic education, with similar numbers for health care and food.

In the US, 83% supported government responsibility for basic education, 77% health care, 74% food and 70% supported government responsibility for taking care of the poor.

These are still large majorities – you could almost say, consensus for all the basic human rights.

Similar support for “Liberal/Democratic” values are seen for questions asking about “equal treatment.”

From the Pew Religions Landscape Study, for example, we find 70% of religious people agreeing that all religions should be tolerated.

Beliefs about “fact”

Now let’s swing over into the subject of belief, and in particular, belief about how things “really are.” We know for a fact (not surveyed, though) that it’s often hard to discern basic, underlying cause. If the cause of an event or situation is a criminal that wants to keep itself a secret, it may very well be successful in doing so.

Spiritual and mental technologies like Remote Viewing and Scientology auditing are beginning to get around those old barriers of perception limitations and uncertainty. But most people still rely on belief, or “someone who knows” for the last word on many “facts.” The Bible, for example, remains a very widely-read book! And it’s not even easy to read (at least I don’t think so).

90% of US adults say they believe in God. That is an amazing consensus from such a diverse country! But of course, by most counts this one doesn’t matter, because this is entirely a question of faith. The implication, though, is that if science or my favorite expert doesn’t have an answer, I’ll take God’s answer.

Here’s an interesting question they asked: Do you feel a deep sense of wonder about the universe? 46% said Yes in the most recent study. What about the others?

Evolutionism versus Creationism was covered in this study, but not well. This is a subject that should be, at some point, 100% knowable. At some point. But only a little over 60% are convinced that “humans” have actually changed that much during their time on earth. This question is still very much up in the air! Only a third of US adults totally believe that Darwinian Natural Selection explains human development on earth. (A testimony to how bad a theory it is!)

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=6902

Here we have a more recent poll conducted by Ipsos (a European marketing research company) and released on Monday, June 29, 2015: 56% of Americans believe UFOs are real. Good that only leaves 44% to go. But only 45% believe ETs have visited Earth. Oh boy!

79% believe life on other planets is plausible. But that’s a terribly-worded question. Same figures as above for Evolution.

The accuracy of the survey is estimated to be +/- 3.5%.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/conspiracy-theory-poll-results-.html

And here we have a “Conspiracy Theory Poll,” results released April 2, 2013. This is only of US voters. Poorly-worded questions, but:

37% think global warming is a hoax.
21% believe there was a cover-up of the UFO crash at Roswell (an absolute certain fact). This one shows how well certain groups have been able to keep the lid on this data.
44% think Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq (another total fact).
And 25% of US voters still think Oswald acted alone in killing JFK. For all intents and purposes it has been demonstrated that Oswald didn’t even point a gun at the President that day. But the US population is almost evenly divided on this question of fact, per this poll.

So you see that we are divided about facts that should be provable, but have not yet, in many’s eyes, been proven, while we are united in our desire for peace, tolerance, and taking responsibility for those less fortunate.

Where we are really being divided is in our perception of the truth. Suppression has failed almost totally to educate us out of our basic humanity. Though we are told every day that we are just animals, most people around the world believe we were created by the Divine, and probably always will believe so.

Where suppression on earth is working is in disconnecting us from factual data that should make certain truths quite obvious. Amazingly, many have connected with that data anyway. But it is too few!

Obama said nothing profound two days ago. But oh, has he failed to tell us so much that we really do deserve to know! Thus, he will be perceived by most as a liar. Better alive than truthful? I guess each must make that decision for themselves. I hope it is clear what side of that question I favor.

Latest news from the Alternative Media

20 March 2016

Note: WordPress has changed its “backend” app a bit, and I am using it for the first time. I usually write in “HTML” mode but today I’m trying WYSIWYG, called “visual” mode.

I thought it was time to share some data and thoughts about what’s been going on at the sites I follow the most. I’m not really ready to say anything really profound or lucid, but I may never be ready, and it’s time to say something.

Mention of these topics have been included in the two most recent posts. Let’s review what’s been going on at some of these sites:

Jean Haines‘ site, here https://jhaines6a.wordpress.com/, has been going through some changes. Jean has lost some of the enthusiasm she once had for collecting up interesting articles from various sources and presenting them in full on her own blog. She had a good community of followers who cared about many of her favorite topics and wanted to offer their own 2 cents or solutions. I tried to make my comments from the perspective of a Scientologist without being overly critical of other viewpoints, though sometimes I couldn’t help myself. More recently she has taken to just posting groups of links, which makes it more difficult to focus on particular stories.

She also told us not too long ago that she had been undergoing some sort of spiritual therapy which included contacting incidents involving her mother’s attempts to abort her. Hubbard described many such incidents in his first book, Dianetics, so this has been known about since the 1950s. Such incidents can be quite aberrative. She also told us that she felt her website was being attacked. These two situations together have led her to reduce the amount of time she is spending on her website. That’s probably a good thing.

She has been very interested in the story of Thomas Deegan, a man in West Virginia who has been accused of threatening terrorist acts. What he was really trying to do was replace what he feels are illegal state institutions with legal ones. I have not been following this issue, but Jean found it fascinating.

Another story she was following was the Oregon ranchers situation at the wildlife refuge. This resulted in the murder of a man about my age, Lavoy Finicum, by the Oregon State Police and/or the FBI at a roadblock that had been set up to stop his car from going to a meeting with a local Sheriff. This story also involved issues of the legality of government agencies and their actions.

Jean has also been interested in global politics, the relative merits of a leader like Putin versus one like Obama, and various esoteric matters concerning who is really pulling the strings and who knows what the real secrets are. The issue of “false flag events” such as 9/11 has also been a recurring theme.

On the more spiritual side, she has been swayed by the “New Age” teachings of people like Drunvalo Melchizedek (a man who used to be named Bernard Perona, a UC Berkeley graduate who experienced a “walk in ” in 1972). He has been telling people that a kind of “ascension” will occur at some point in the not-too-distant future that will involve a big spiritual upgrade for everybody.

David Wilcock

David is another “ascension dude.” He is younger, only 43 now. He has been very interested for many years in finding scientific studies that demonstrate (he says “prove”) spiritual principles, like sacred geometry, and the importance of light in communicating what most of us think of as genetic information. He has intensively researched many “esoteric” subjects, has connections with people like Richard Hoagland, Pete Peterson (not an internet personality), Project Camelot, Ben Fulford, and most recently Corey Goode. He also has various confidential contacts he refers to as “sources.”

David had not written anything on his site since December of last year, then on 6 March posted a new article. He had recently finished three presentations at the Conscious Life Expo in Los Angeles (he lives in that area) totaling about 11 hours and has otherwise been very busy writing, making videos, and getting sick.

He continues to work on his own view of what “ascension” is, but sees it as somewhat tied to “disclosure,” the process of releasing all sorts of information kept secret for many decades, and concerning in particular ET and its role in the history of Earth. Corey Goode just sort of “showed up” with a huge load of information on these topics, and David has helped Corey make all this public. The central subject of Corey’s data is the secret space program, which apparently is the main reason that the military-industrial complex exists.

Other players

There are a lot of people out there trying to get various secrets uncovered.

Dr. Steven Greer ( a medical doctor from North Carolina and just a few months younger than me) has amassed all sorts of data about ETs and our political and technology ties to them. He gave a 4 hour talk about this in Washington D.C. at the end of November last year.

Catherine Austin Fitts has a lot of knowledge about the “black budget” and ideas about how communities can take back control of their financial wealth. She is willing to look at data about ET involvement but is skeptical. She thinks some major financial adjustments must happen soon, but believes that violent changes are not in the interest of most of the secret managers.

Veterans Today runs articles by a variety of “insiders” but has too many ads for my liking. They have heavily covered the Syria and Ukraine conflicts, and other similar past ones. Their writers include some who just rant and others who are a little more circumspect about their information.

There are many, many others contributing to these stories.

The general theme is that the individuals and groups who most of us have seen as national or global leaders are mere puppets under the control of individuals and groups that have always been secretive and that have an uncanny ability to corrupt and take over once-independent institutions.

How this all fits into what I have been studying

What Hubbard discovered, and which functions as a vessel – if not creator – of tons of information which most of us are not even aware of, is the source of life. He calls it “theta” as a generalization, and individual instances of it “thetans.” The symbol – θ – is a Greek letter associated with death in their culture and with the soul in some earlier cultures. It has numerous technical meanings, as do most of the other Greek letters.

This brings us to an interesting question: Did theta want its creatures or creations to remain unaware of it, in a similar way that the real managers of Earth wish to remain a secret?

It turns out that this question doesn’t make much sense. Theta is the only thing capable of being aware. So the proper way to ask the question is: Did individuals choose to “dumb themselves down” on purpose? And the answer seems to be, YES. If you were all-knowing, could read minds, see through or around any barrier, how would you go about making life a little more interesting? And the answer is, apparently, by forgetting – or hiding – some of the things you are – or could be – aware of.

Hubbard’s firm belief is that we took this approach way too far. It’s OK to pretend, but to completely forget? Something was coaxing us to become less aware than was really good for us. In 1952 he was blaming this problem on the physical universe itself. But even then he was realizing that certain individuals seemed to be particularly active in this regard. Later on he began to call the most active among these “suppressive persons.” These are roughly equivalent to what more enlightened psychologists call “psychopaths” and what I have come to call “true criminals.” It is theorized that such persons were at one time more or less like the rest of us, but at some point got caught up in one or more incidents that convinced them that everyone else was out to get them – a kind of universal fear. The “solution” to this fear for most of these people is some form of psychopathy. The trick to stay well and happy in an environment where such people exist is to be able to spot them and handle them so they stay out of your life and the lives of as many others as possible. If most of the criminal justice system weren’t already under the influence of such people, its main job would presumably be to assist communities in spotting and handling such people. The most successful handling for such people seems to be to “confine” them to an area where there is lots of space. All that space helps dispel the fear. I’m really not sure what such a facility would look like. LRH recommended using a desert area.

One big point that Hubbard contributed to this subject concerns the question of how long this whole process has been going on. His research subjects could “date locate” incidents as far back as 76 trillion “years.” Though a year must be considered a subjective interval of time in this type of research, he says his results were pretty consistent.

Per people like David Wilcock, the histories of the oldest-known ET civilizations go back millions of years, if not much longer. This is consistent with Hubbard’s findings. He also found that most of us have not been on this planet very long – maybe a few thousand years. No other researcher I am aware of has been able to figure that out. Without the skilled use of Hubbard’s techniques, you are as blind as a bat about who was where when doing what.

Other “confirmed facts” of history

There are at least two areas of deep history that most in the alternative realities community agree on at this point: Atlantis and Maldek. Maldek has other names, and Atlantis is also understood to have been just one of at least two if not more population centers on Earth in our “pre-history.” Maldek was a planet in our solar system that was destroyed and became the Asteroid Belt. Most think this happened, in rough numbers, about 1/2 a million years ago. Hubbard and many others think the destruction was caused by war.

Atlantis also destroyed itself somehow. In fact, this may have occurred several times on earth, to different colonizers. War has been a fact of life for a long time. It is quite capable of killing an entire biosphere (planet). The realization that we could do this to Earth is one reason Hubbard and many others have been trying to do something effective to prevent it.

It is also agreed by most that a similar thing happened to Mars. By some accounts, Mars was once a moon of Maldek. Many moons in this solar system were, or are still, inhabited. Many of them, including our Moon, are thought to be artificial bodies disguised to look like small lifeless planets. According to Corey Goode (and he’s not the only one by any means) many groups have bases on our Moon, on Mars, and at other locations in this solar system. Hubbard also identified the Moon and Mars as locations for ancient control bases.

Secrets

Everyone would like to have enough control to feel safe and comfortable in familiar surroundings. But psychopaths don’t feel safe and comfortable until everyone else is dead. And so the need for secrets.

The operation(s) that resulted in Earth as we know it today was a secret in the societies that most of us came from, and may still be. It was an operation designed to get rid of all the dissenters and non-conformists and put them somewhere “safe.” This is per Hubbard’s research.

Part of the operation was to make us forget past lives and give us short body lives to slow down our re-development. Apparently the major group running this operation got bored with it after a while and wandered off. While they were away, we remembered a few things, including atomic weapons. So, someone came back. Is it the same group that was trying to keep us captive here thousands of years ago? I don’t know that answer. But they have been, evidently, just as secretive.

Their approach, apparently, was to locate some “ruling” groups on earth who could keep secrets, and tell them a story that hopefully they would believe. They found the military and the multinational corporations (multinationals have been around since the 1600s and operated as political states in the old days). Corey Goode says that some of these modern contacts started before the 2nd World War, mostly with the Germans. Those old German groups were to form the core of what later became the secret space program, which is basically a global activity.

Meanwhile, there are the groups that have been hiding for millions of years in deep subterranean caverns. I have never run across anything from LRH about these people. Well, they have been hiding from us, so he could have missed them. But there is something suspicious about this story. According to Corey Goode they are very technologically advanced. They would have to be to survive so long underground. The extent of their settlements is unknown at this time. It is probably not that great. Yet, because they are telepathic, they have had a great influence on surface humanity, according to Corey. The story is that in their contacts they pretend to be ETs. If they let us know where they are hiding, they’d be wiped out!

“Modern” political strategies

There is ample evidence that the most modern secret management groups on earth use strategies learned (or remembered) from ETs such as the ones who imprisoned us here. This seems to be a combination of PR and propaganda, backed up by a bunch of tough guys who do their jobs because they believe the PR/propaganda they are receiving.

The basic strategy is to prevent all the various human groups from getting too big and well-organized to threaten the control of the secret managers. This involves breaking them down into different audiences (that’s PR) and telling the different audiences substantially different stories (that’s propaganda – in other words, they’re lying). You do the same thing to the operatives who are doing this to the public. No one needs to know what’s really going on, and if anyone important gets out of line or squeals, they are silenced.

Hubbard found similar operations – though many more technically sophisticated – in the memories of the cases he researched. One place had things called “thought towers” that could tell what you were thinking. Well, that’s what everyone was supposed to believe. It was a nice control operation. The towers actually did nothing.

Origins of the need for control

Why can’t people leave each other alone? What’s all this control all about?

I’ve already discussed the criminal mind. Apparently it fits together roughly like this: Only one type of being could really be effective at exposing a criminal. That would be a “free” being, a being that could operate (think and act, including run machines) without a body of any kind. Such beings were already somewhat rare by the time of the great Space Opera societies. They were very good at commanding space ships – when you could get them to agree to. They otherwise tended to be rather unserious beings who preferred the great expanses of unsettled territories. However, the criminals saw them as a huge threat, so programs were launched whenever a criminal was able to influence local management, to trap or hunt down all free beings and force them into bodies, and to make arrangements to discourage anyone from ever wishing they could have that kind of freedom.

With the “help” of degraded beings who are mortally afraid of spiritual freedom, managers throughout the universe have apparently been convinced that it’s a really bad thing and should be criminalized, guarded against and suppressed. And thus the existence of mammoth, wasteful control systems that accomplish nothing except the protection of criminals. And though ordinary people hate most criminals and would like them all to disappear, they are convinced that free beings are even worse, and unwittingly help the criminals to police the universe for the sole purpose of protecting the criminals from free beings.

What’s happening now

Most ETs can read minds, or at least have convinced humans they can. That’s a free being ability. This puts the Earth-bound criminals in a tight spot. Their biggest threat now is ET, but ET is in control. ET seems to be willing to keep its distance as long as nothing too outrageous is going on down here. So the criminals of Earth have to make it appear they are on top of things, all the while they’re pissing their pants about ET up there.

For those of us who would prefer a sensible life on a sensible planet, things on Earth don’t look too great right now. The militarization efforts of the Cold War period have resulted in a world-wide near police state. Most of those efforts were secretly meant to protect “us” from ET. But regardless of the fine work of many Hollywood screenwriters to convince us that ET is ready to attack at any minute, that doesn’t seem to be the plan. ET is playing a different game. It’s basically just another criminal operation, but a lot smoother and more polished than what we’re used to on earth. So much so that it almost seems preferable.

The “ascension” group sees ET as part of the solution, not part of the problem. There’s nothing wrong with ET they say. Or, at least there are some “good” ETs that will protect us from the “bad” ones. It could be true. But it could just be a story ET cooked up to make some friends on Earth.

From what I can tell, the whole “ascension” paradigm is a myth; a myth pushed by ET with the help of numerous minions here on earth who probably believe it. Maybe something bad will happen here – physically bad – but I wouldn’t count on it. Supposedly that’s part of “ascension.” Sounds more like a cheap scare tactic to me.

Most of the churning I see in the alternative realities community right now is on this subject. Most people on earth still aren’t sure about ET. They need to come up to speed. But the first thing that will hit most of them when they try to look into the subject will be: All the half-true stories about ET created with the help of – guess who? – ET!

Next there is the whole question of who is on which side of the various secret management factions and what they are all doing, and if any of them are “better” than the others. The average alternative community commentator has no clue. They would have to know the basics about the suppressive personality, as contained in Hubbard’s work, to get even close. Most of them still can’t separate the manipulators from the puppets. The puppets are so much more visible than the manipulators!

There is another whole group that thinks we can somehow “get smart” enough to restore the Rule of Law – Donald Trump style – without figuring out any of these other issues. I wish them well. I doubt they’ll do well. They mostly end up killing each other, like happened to LaVoy. Men should live by laws. But most of the time they live by force and agreements – laws are too fickle.

The group I am most appalled at – the one I came from – are the professionals and other college-educated people who just can’t confront any of this and wish it would go away. This has become an elephant-in-the-room situation at this point. This is another group that needs to come up to speed. They have agreed by the positions they have assumed in society that they should take responsibility in such situations. A very few of them are, but the general condition of college-educated people these days leads me to question the efficacy of that whole system of preparing the “more gifted” to be community leaders. I’m just not seeing it.

My own group is working hard to make free beings in spite of everything. In some ways the fact that we aren’t taken seriously helps us; we aren’t being seriously targeted, either. I think that most of our members are small business people. They want to be successful, but they want to stay independent. They have the guts and determination to join a group that is misunderstood – even disliked by some – in exchange for the advantages that gives them. Within their own group, at least, the most successful are very well respected. And many of them have achieved broader popularity regardless of – but probably with the help of – their interest in Hubbard’s work. None of us is totally sure how this will all work out. We all wish for a ride that’s not too bumpy, but that’s not what LRH told us to expect. We are trying to do something that’s impossible. It’s an interesting experience.

Brazil Color Revolution: Corruption, Dilma, Lula, Zika and 2016 Olympics. Lada Ray Report and Predictions

15 March 2016

#foradilma #foraPT: “Out Dilma!” “Out PT! So, ‘Brazil Spring’ is on, color revolution is in progress! Ah, and don’t say I haven’t warned you about that!  …

Source: Brazil Color Revolution: Corruption, Dilma, Lula, Zika and 2016 Olympics. Lada Ray Report and Predictions

I don’t really know how accurate Lada’s data ultimately is, but she seems sincere and independent; someone really trying to make sense of what is going on. I recommend her posts.

First Step to Handling our Economic and Political Problems

17 November 2015

I got this idea a few minutes ago while taking a shower.

It concerns politics and the economy in the U.S.

Let’s start at 1913:

In 1913 the United States federal government finalized two major political and economic shifts: Federal income tax was made constitutional by the 16th Amendment, and the Federal Reserve Act was passed on 23 December. Both these actions were pushed onto the American people and their duly-elected representatives by European banking interests on false pretenses. Threat of force was also used to obtain compliance to these plans.

Since then, European banking interests have been creating wars and other economic and political calamities and getting the United States involved using lies and propaganda. The United States then borrows money to pay for these things from the Federal Reserve, and the interest and some principal is paid back using Income Tax.

Later, following another created economic catastrophe (the Great Depression and Dust Bowl), Social Security was introduced (1935) in order to “force” people to save for their old age. But the Social Security Trust funds as well as many pension funds, have been stolen from in order to finance the aforementioned illegal expenses.

On top of all this, it has been discovered that the United States of America is actually a private corporation not owned or operated by the American people.

Thus it is apparent that the “national debt” is not a debt owed by the American people, but a debt incurred illegally by the U.S.A. and owed TO the American people, as they paid for it with their income taxes, their hard work, and their lives (in the case of soldiers dying in war, etc.).

We as a people have a perfect right to cut the U.S.A. (federal government) loose from us, stop paying all Federal Income Tax, and demand reparations. They can start figuring out how to raise the funds to pay their debts in some other way. They already take a cut from the drug cartels for protecting their overseas and domestic operations, and have a Secret Space Program that reportedly trades goods with 900 off-world civilizations.

So: Bye guys, you’re on your own!

A very short history of coups d’état in the U.S.

6 October 2013

It is time for me to put in my 2 cents on this matter, as the political scene continues to be quite extreme.

It is common in history to think of political coups as being accomplished by killing (assassinating) the existing government leader.

For some reason, this line of reasoning is not followed in the United States. All assassins were lone nuts or extremists, not associated with any political opposition group. This seems to me to be highly silly.

In this, I follow the analysis of Bill Still in his 2010 documentary “The Secret of OZ.” Many other researchers in this line have come to the same conclusions, and include the Kennedy assassination in the same group as the others. The attempted assassination of Andrew Jackson in 1835 is also usually included in this list, as it was overtly political. The only presidential assassination which does not fit this pattern was the William McKinley shooting, but it definitely is part of this subject.

Four Presidents killed; one political issue.

The attempt on Jackson’s life was made on 30 Jan 1835.

Lincoln was taken out on 14 April 1865.

Garfield was wounded on 2 July 1881 and died of complications about a week later.

William McKinley was shot by an anarchist on 6 Sept 1901 and died a week later.

Teddy Roosevelt was wounded by a man who claimed to be avenging the death of McKinley on 14 Oct 1912.

And Kennedy was taken down on 22 Nov 1963.

What is the issue that ties all these deaths and attempts together?

Who controls the money supply?

It can be established that public (government) control of the money supply can lead to a prosperous economy that grows stably.

Still’s film cites Roman coinage, English tally sticks, and Colonial Scrip as examples of government-issued money that fostered economic growth and general prosperity.

The Founding Fathers were aware of the usefulness of Colonial Scrip, and started the Revolution majorly on demands from England that all debts be paid in gold, which was scarce in the colonies.

During the conflict, the colonies printed “Continentals,” a paper money, to get by during the war. This was undermined by massive English counterfeiting. When time came to write the Constitution, the rampant inflation caused by the counterfeit Continentals was still on everyone’s mind, and the Constitution only allowed the federal government to mint coins, not print paper money.

From that time until today, a largely unpublicized political battle has raged over what body would be allowed to issue paper money in the U.S.

Timeline of the Money Wars

The early Congress was persuaded to create a private bank in 1782 to issue paper money. This bank, the Bank of North America, inflated the money supply, so Congress killed it in 1785.

The next privately-owned bank allowed to issue money was chartered for 20 years in 1791. Thomas Jefferson (among others) didn’t like the idea. As time went on, it become more and more clear that it was a bad idea. After Congress refused to renew the charter in 1811, the British attacked Washington D.C. in 1812.

This pressure eventually resulted in a new private central bank being chartered for 20 years in 1816. During this period, Congress came under the thumb of private banking interests, and renewed the bank’s charter in 1836. However, Andrew Jackson vetoed the renewal.

So the bankers secretly declared war on the American people. When they could not get a new private central bank, they started the Civil War, hoping to divide the new nation and thus defeat its will to be financially independent. Lincoln printed “greenbacks” during the war, and intended to continue this practice. When it was clear the war would not divide the country, Lincoln was taken out in the spring of 1865.

After this, Congress, still firmly in the pockets of the banking interests, was persuaded to reduce the money supply in the United States, causing a depression. The Coinage Act of 1873 was passed to take silver coins out of circulation. In response to this suppression, a “greenbacker” movement was born, and also a “free silver” movement. Garfield supported these causes.

He was taken out on 2 July 1881 after being in office only a few months.

European banks continued the pressure by again demanding payment in gold, as England had done prior to the revolution. This resulted in a “panic” in 1893, and massive loss of wealth by small banks and farmers.

In 1896, William Jennings Bryan ran on an anti-banker platform. The bankers defeated him with a rumor-mongering campaign. This allowed them to pass the Gold Standard Act of 1900.

But the populace was still anti-banker and supported Teddy Roosevelt. He was shot in October of 1912 but survived.

However, Woodrow Wilson was pushed into signing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and we still have that system today. (The Federal Reserve is a private bank that issues all paper money in the United States.)

It is believed that Kennedy had plans to change this system. Since he was taken out, no President has seriously talked about it, though it is obvious to the public that the banking sector remains largely corrupt.

Coup D’état: Accomplished

For all intents and purposes, the banking interests won in the United States in 1913. They consolidated their power with the Kennedy assassination in 1963.

There has been much written and said about who these people really are, where they come from, what they want, and to what extent their power reaches. I just call them “criminals.” That’s basically all they are. They want to get rich without working, because they can’t work, they can’t invent, they can’t dream of anything bright or beautiful. They are locked in cages of their own designing; they have no business running a nation or a bank. The sooner we learn to handle them, the better our futures will be.