Rediscovering "In Congress, July 4th, 1776"

[We are pleased to announce that our book, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, is now available online at Amazon and at Barnes and Noble. The following article is based on the precepts of our book.]

"Patriotism in its simplest, clearest and most indubitable meaning is nothing but an instrument for the attainment of the government’s ambitious and mercenary aims, and a renunciation of human dignity, common sense, and conscience by the governed, and a slavish submission to those who hold power. That is what is really preached wherever patriotism is championed. Patriotism is slavery." —Leo Tolstoy, Patriotism and Christianity, 1894

“The essence of all slavery consists in taking the product of another's labor by force. It is immaterial whether this force be founded upon ownership of the slave or ownership of the money that he must get to live.” —Leo Tolstoy, What Shall We Do Then?, 1885

While the powers-that-be leverage the Fourth of July to instill blind patriotism—"My country right or wrong"; or, "I was just following orders!"¹—true patriots today, like many of the founders, should be seeking a new social contract, one which restores and expands the rights of the people, because according to the terms of the Declaration of Independence, the original contract between the people living in these United States of America and the federal government—which has become nothing more than a public sector subsidiary of the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel and its corporations—is irretrievably broken.

Colonies declaring themselves to be sovereign states

Between July 2, 1776 and August 2, 1776, what we now consider the official document (the one in the National Archives) known as the Declaration of Independence was approved and signed. Essentially, it declared that the thirteen former American colonies of the Kingdom of Great Britain were now united (in a confederation) but sovereign independent states (E pluribus unum). They listed grievances that served as the justifications for severing ties with the Kingdom of Great Britain, and declared that their ability to create a new social contract was a natural as well as God-given right. This declaration (below) regarding the nature of the social contracts is echoed in various state constitutions that followed.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

—Thomas Jefferson, for the committee of the whole

Sovereign states allowing limited power to a federal body

In addition to writing and approving the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress wrote and approved the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union between July, 1776, and November, 1777. The body operated provisionally under these Articles during the Revolutionary War, though the Articles did not formally come into force until March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all 13 states. A guiding principle of the Articles was to preserve the independence and sovereignty of the states. The federal government received only those powers which the colonies had recognized as previously belonging to king and parliament. This was what was revolutionary about the document: it shifted power from a constitutional monarchy to sovereign, confederated states, but many of the limitations that existed under the monarchies of Europe were continued; for example, slavery, the subjugation of women, and the superior rights of property owners.

Federal body granted specific (expressed) powers, and denied all unexpressed powers

In short order, however, many states saw shortcomings in the Articles and were calling for changes, and another constitutional convention was held. It became apparent that simply amending the Articles would not take care of the changes being called for. On March 4, 1789, the government under the Articles was replaced with the federal government under the Constitution, although only eleven states had approved it. The ratification by all thirteen states was not completed until May 29, 1790. The new Constitution provided for a much stronger federal government by establishing a chief executive (the President), courts, and taxing powers.

Much of what has been written about the requirements for a new constitution, and the federal government's need to generate revenue is contentious, as the banking cartel that controlled Britain, and which had counterfeited and speculated in the Continental Congress' money (the Continental), was setting the stage for what would eventually result in a coup d'état, with the United States of America hijacked by foreign financial interests.

Sovereign states add protections for citizens

Despite the enactment of the First Bank of the United States (see the next section below), which would enable European financial powers to regain a semblance of power over their former colonies, Congress saw its way to institute the Bill of Rights (ratified on December 15, 1791 as the first ten amendments to the Constitution) to address the objections raised by those opposed to a federal government (Anti-Federalists), by adding to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear limitations on the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and explicit declarations that all powers not specifically delegated to Congress by the Constitution are reserved for the states or the people.

Federal body creates a privately owned central bank

Facing debts incurred from the Revolutionary War, including 600,000 pounds sterling "reparations" to Britain (which lost the war!), approved by the Senate (a clear indication of why the founders sought to exclude members of the BAR from American citizenship—see the next section below), the new government debated how best to address repayment. Alexander Hamilton offered a multifaceted plan that included creating the First Bank of the United States, for which the government would be a minority (20%) stockholder, with foreign bankers holding 80% of the stock. This plan was opposed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who held it to be unconstitutional, as Article I, Section 8, states quite specifically that only Congress could create money. However, opinions presented by others supporting Hamilton's elitist point of view convinced President Washington to proceed, by signing the bill. By 1796, the government owed the bank $6,200,000 and was forced to sell its shares, and by 1802, the U.S. government owned no stock in the First Bank of the United States.

“And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” —Letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, May 28,1816 (10:31), from the Monticello archives

“Bank-paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium must be restored to the nation to whom it belongs.” —Letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, September 11, 1813 (PTJ:RS, 6:494), from the Monticello archives

When the charter came up for renewal in 1811, President Madison refused to sign it, and Britain, at the behest of the banks that controlled it, began the War of 1812. A series of attacks on American merchant ships and other aggressions organized by the British bankers, as well as the internal needs of the fledgling nation, along with the usual "persuasion" of Congress by the British bankers, resulted in the charter of the Second Bank of the United States.

Sovereign states forbid members of the BAR from serving in Congress; Central bankers suppress the law

In 1819, the cartel's plans were further threatened by the original (ratified and never repealed) 13th Amendment,² which gave teeth to the Constitutional provision (Article I, Section 9.8) that forbade anyone with a foreign title from holding office. This means that it is unconstitutional for any lawyer who is a member of the BAR (i.e., who has been awarded the title of Esquire from the International BAR [British Accredited Registry], controlled by the central bankers who run the independent City of London financial district) from holding office.

Following re-publication of the Virginia Civil Code on March 12, 1819, which signifies that the Constitutional amendment was officially ratified, as three-quarters of the states had now approved it, word quickly spread, with eleven different states and territories printing the Amendment in twenty separate publications over forty-one years (with more editions sure to be discovered). Essentially, the original 13th Amendment means is that any laws passed by Congress where the majority was dependent on the votes of BAR members are invalid. This is true and unassailable, regardless of the enforcement of 13th Amendment, which gives teeth to Article I, Section 9.8, where the prohibition of titles of nobility for American citizens remains the law of the land.

The suppression of the 13th Amendment is both seditious and treasonous, and should be prosecuted by a common law grand jury (of the people), since, obviously, if the Supreme Court were an honest body, it would have to recuse itself from hearing this case.

Jackson draws the line

When the charter for the Second Bank of the United States came up for renewal in 1832, President Andrew Jackson insisted that the bank was corrupt and unconstitutional, and refused to renew its charter, resulting in a depression as promised by the bank's executive Nicholas Biddle. At least six assassination attempts followed on Jackson's life. (Even today, the financial interests in New York continue to assassinate Jackson's character, while making the traitor Hamilton out to be a hero.)

Responding to this setback, the European banking cartel worked ceaselessly to regain financial and political power over the U.S.A. During this period, the banks worked hard at putting public entities into debt via large bond issues. Another attempt at creating a privately owned central bank met resistance from President Zachary Taylor, who died from poisoning in 1850.

Confederacy financed by foreign banks

Another tactic employed by the cartel was to split the union by funding the Confederacy and drawing the nation into the Civil War, where each side would amass large debts. This is the same strategy the cartel used in Europe to destroy sovereignty. Louisiana Senator Judah P. Benjamin, QC (Queen’s counsel), was an English agent serving as a Confederate cabinet member, doing the bidding of the banking cartel that controlled Britain.

Union issues Greenbacks

It appears that the banking cartel thought that Lincoln would have no choice but to borrow capital at a diabolical interest rate between 24 to 36 percent; however, Lincoln and his advisers understood money and the Constitution (Article I, Section 8) better than the bankers anticipated, and chose to issue sovereign dollars (Greenbacks)—on which the nation did not pay principal or interest—to outfit and underwrite the Union Army.

As the London Times noted in response to Lincoln's issuance of public fiat sovereign currency:

“If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.” —Hazard Circular, London Times, 1865

Congress, Esq., rescinds Greenbacks

In response to Lincoln's initiative, the bankers commanded and bribed the Esquires and others in Congress to pass the next big unconstitutional breakthroughs in their conquest of the U.S.A: the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864, giving the cartel control over the money supply, by requiring the federal government to issue bonds, and pay principal and interest on those bonds, in order to receive private bank notes, which had become by default, in the absence of any further issuance of Lincoln's Greenbacks (now prohibited by the National Banking Acts), the unofficial legal tender for all debts public and private. President Lincoln vowed to reinstitute Greenbacks and was assassinated (1865). Evidence shows that the banking cartel funded the assassins.³ Essentially, the Civil War was not won by the North or the South, but by the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel, which split the union, put it into debt, deleted the original 13th Amendment, and successfully created a mythological history of the U.S. that is still believed by the majority of Americans.

Demonetization of silver

By 1866, the cartel’s relentless murderous methods and bribes in pursuit of power managed to re-establish the gold standard,⁴, causing a drastic shrinking of the money supply and depression throughout the land, which continued to get worse.

Finally, in 1871, the cartel literally rewrote history by passing "The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871," otherwise known as the Act of 1871, creating a corporation in the District of Columbia called the United States of America. The act revoked prior legislation relative to the district’s municipal charter and, most egregiously, led to adoption of a fraudulent constitution in which the original Thirteenth Amendment was omitted. Following this, the cartel set about destroying documentation of the 13th Amendment and pretending it was never ratified. Thus, the Amendment still stands despite the faux legal structure under which we are ruled by the private banking regime.

That same year, riots broke out across the country, with many voters calling for the use of Greenbacks and silver. The bankers clearly felt threatened, and responded with even more severe measures, including the demonetization of silver in 1873 (one of the subjects in the allegory, The Wizard of Oz, by monetary reformer L. Frank Baum) and the use of loans as blackmail, as evidenced in this letter distributed to all members of the American Bankers Association:

"It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent daily and weekly newspapers, especially the Agricultural and Religious Press, as will oppose the greenback issue of paper money and that you will also withhold patronage from all applicants who are not willing to oppose the government issue of money. To repeal the Act creating bank notes, or to restore to circulation the government issue of money will be to provide the people with money and will therefore seriously affect our individual profits as bankers and lenders. See your congressman at once and engage him to support our interest that we may control legislation." —James Buel, Secretary, American Bankers Association, 1877

That same year saw one of the largest uprisings by labor in history, suppressed ruthlessly by monopoly capital (and here). Using the ruse of "sound money," that is, currency supposedly backed by gold, the bankers continued to alternately expand and choke the money supply and steal the assets built by labor.

Plutocrats arrogantly declare their intentions

In the Gilded Age of the Robber Barons, arrogance was fashionable and forthcoming, revealing the financiers' true intentions:

“On Sept 1st, 1894, we will not renew our loans under any consideration. On Sept 1st, we will demand our money. We will foreclose and become mortgagees in possession. We can take two-thirds of the farms west of the Mississippi, and thousands of them east of the Mississippi as well, at our own price ... Then the farmers will become tenants as in England ...” —1891, American Bankers Association, as printed in the Congressional Record of April 29, 1913

In the throes of this criminal scam, William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic candidate for President in 1896, sought to loosen the bankers grip on money creation by re-monetizing silver:

"We will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."

Part of the bankers’ strategy against Bryan was to instruct factory bosses to tell their workers that the business would shut down and everyone would lose their jobs if Bryan was elected. Bryan was narrowly defeated and ran again in 1900 and 1908, also coming up short.

The false flag of economic depression once again provides an excuse

The next major orchestrated contraction was in 1907, with the central bankers, behind J.P. Morgan, printing $200 million to loan to the illiquid banks. Woodrow Wilson was fooled just like most Americans:

"All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven men like J.P. Morgan to handle the affairs of our country."

Not everyone fell for the scam:

"Those not favorable to the Money Trust could be squeezed out of business and the people frightened into demanding changes in the banking and currency laws which the Money Trust would frame." —Rep. Charles A. Lindbergh (R-MN)

The unconstitutional and treasonous Federal Reserve Act

Nevertheless, on December 23rd, 1913, with a significant share of Congress already in recess, the Senate passed the Federal Reserve Act via a technicality (the Senate had not properly adjourned). Despite this, Wilson signed the act, over the objections of a few brave men:

"The financial system has been turned over to ... the federal reserve board. That board administers the finance system by authority of ... a purely profiteering group. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money." —Rep Charles A, Lindbergh (R-MN)

"We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board ... This evil institution has impoverished ... the people of the United States ... and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through ... the corrupt practice of the moneyed vultures who control it." —Rep. Louis T, McFadden (R-PA)

Wilson later regretted his actions:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." —Woodrow Wilson, 1919, quoted from The American Mercury, George Jean Nathan and H.L. Mencken, 1924, p. 56.

After 1913, with the cartel now in control of the central bank (the Federal Reserve System), which was selling private bank notes to the U.S.—and after the establishment of a federal income tax and the Internal Revenue Service, to pay the interest for the use of the cartel’s private paper—the focus for bankrupting the U.S. shifted from the issuance of a single national private bank note (achieved) to maximizing the debt owed by the U.S., and its newly conjured taxpayers, to the cartel.

And what better way to achieve this than creating the First World War?

The vampire squid and its tendrils

As, noted, wars are a tried and true tactic of the cartel for quickly driving up debt. Government "leaders" are either on board with this program, or they are deposed and disposed.

Following the First World War, the Roaring Twenties—fueled by low margins (20% for purchasing securities)—ran up private personal and commercial debt, all the while creating a surfeit of collateralized assets, which were later acquired for mills on the dollar, when the cartel crashed the system and imposed the Great Depression on the planet (as verified by former Fed chief, Ben Bernanke).

During this severe contraction of the money supply, the federal government was in need of massive funds to rebuild the nation, while navigating between the cartel-manufactured twin terrors of fascism and "communism."⁵ There was only one entity that possessed the license to print the requisite bank notes needed to pay for the New Deal, and that was the cartel, behind its pseudo-legal sanctification of the Fed as the central bank of the U.S., and Federal Reserve Notes as "legal tender."

Thus, FDR was at the helm of an insolvent public sector subsidiary corporation, now legally known as the U.S. There could be no other explanation, since the U.S. was not sovereign, by virtue of: 1) losing the right to print its own money in 1863 and 1864, and 2) having its currency formally usurped in 1913. The U.S. was thereby forced into a form of national bankruptcy that was presented as the only viable solution, with the international banking cartel gaining effective receivership ("mortgagees in possession," as the American Bankers Association called it in 1913) over the federal government. Whether or not this was a formal and legal receivership is beside the point, since it was the culmination of various criminal actions down through the centuries ("fruit of the poisonous tree"); but, nevertheless, it was, operationally, a receivership.

Beginning with the Emergency Banking Act, on March 9, 1933, which was followed by Executive Order 6102—criminalizing the possession of monetary gold by any individual, partnership, association, or corporation, with Congress passing a similar resolution in June 1933—the cartel was given carte blanche to loan to the U.S. whatever amount necessary to re-establish a banking system that guaranteed customers’ bank deposits and put the nation’s labor force back to work. In the process, all gold money (other than collectibles) was to be turned over to the U.S. Thus, the faux currency of the U.S. (Federal Reserve Notes) took another step in detaching itself from gold, even as the cartel was stealing the gold it collected in the name of economic necessity. How could this be? Because monetized gold was, by edict, removed from the marketplace.

As a result of these "laws," a permanent debt relationship was established between the "too big to fail" (TBTF) banks that own the Federal Reserve—by virtue of their capitalization and control over the voting members of each Federal Reserve District (see report of the 1976 House of Representatives Committee on Banking and here)—and the legal entity of the U.S. (the federal government).

Bretton Woods and the World Reserve Currency

Despite the legerdemain of their fancy Wall Street lawyers attempting to hide the tentacles of ownership, the above-linked studies show that the original handful of families who created the Fed still control the printing press for so-called "U.S. dollars" (actually, private "Federal" Reserve Notes), which, following the Bretton Woods conference of June 1944, became the world’s reserve currency in the early 1950s.

Forty-seven years after the Bretton Woods Conference set up Federal Reserve Notes to become the world reserve currency, David Rockefeller declared that the self-described "New World Order" (NWO) had sewn up control over the planet.

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. We would have found it quite impossible to develop our global project if we had been subject to the public spotlight during these years. But, the world has grown more sophisticated and willing to move towards a global government that no longer knows war, but only peace and prosperity for all of humanity. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national self-determination practiced in past centuries."⁶ —David Rockefeller

Leveraging the spoils of this heinous crime, these families and their accessory "subcontractors" have manipulated the money supply and other markets to gain control over most of the key economic assets on this planet and enslave most of the world’s population through debt, as confirmed by a recent study by Princeton and Northwestern university researchers.⁷

The privatization of the biosphere

Now, 105 years after the passage of the treasonous and unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act, the ravages of the financiers' strategy are transparent: All resources on this planet—animal, vegetable, and mineral—are valued only according to their profitability. This means everything, including water and "human capital."

A new social contract

Clearly, the social contract—"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"—has been totally inverted by those who have hijacked our government, as their agenda—Power, profit, propaganda, and population reduction—makes crystal clear.

Thus, on this anniversary of a nation "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal," we must declare a new social contract—independent of the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel—by which such tyranny shall not be tolerated. An initial list of grievances can be found at the Declaration of Accountability.

Let us begin the 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation.

# # #

Footnotes:
¹ This is the so-called "Nuremberg defense," used by various Nazi officers as an excuse for committing crimes against humanity. Nuremberg Principle IV speaks of "a moral choice" as being just as important as "legal" decisions: It states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders#Israeli_law_since_1956
² Deleted 13th Amendment: "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."
³ A detailed reading of the testimony at the trial of the conspirators indicates that the banking cartel was behind the assassination. Gerald G. McGeer, The Conquest of Poverty, Chapter V, "Lincoln, the Practical Economist," The Garden City Press, Gardenvale, Quebec, 1935.
⁴ The banking cartel's justification for destroying sovereign currency is found in "Brief History of the Gold Standard in the United States," Craig K. Elwell, Specialist in Macroeconomic Policy, June 23, 2011, Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress, p. 6: "After the war was over, Congress determined to return to the metallic standard at the same parity that existed before the war. To do this, the market exchange rate of greenbacks for gold had to be brought back to its old level. This was accomplished by slowly removing the greenbacks from circulation." An act to strengthen the public credit, 15 stat. 1, March 1869; an act to provide for the resumption of specie payments, 18 Stat. 296, January 1875, known as "The Resumption Act."
⁵ The Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel funded both Hitler's and Lenin's rise to power.
⁶ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10769041/The-US-is-an-oligarchy-study-concludes.html
⁷ In an address to the Bilderberger meeting in Baden Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton), as reported and translated from the September, 1991, issue of the Monte Carlo-based Hilaire du Berrier Report (also reported elsewhere in the French press, including Minutes, June 19, 1991 and Lectures Francaises, July/August, 1991). Mr. Du Berrier closely followed and chronicled the activities of Bilderberg and its overlapping groups, for over four decades.

[We are pleased to announce that our book, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, is now available online at Amazon and at Barnes and Noble. The foregoing article is based on the precepts of our book. ]