flag
News Americans Will Never Hear
On Monday, 2 November, the largest ever nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize took place with fourteen Parliamentarians from eleven different European nations nominating US President Donald Trump. It was led by the Sweden Democrats and stated that the President was nominated ‘…for his courage and commitment to the cause of peace in the Middle East, the Balkans, and on the Korean Peninsula’.
Specifically mentioned accomplishments included:
·        Abraham Accords: Normalization of relations between Israel,
UAE, Bahrain and Sudan. Morocco joined in December
and other regional nations are expected to follow
·        The Serbia – Kosovo economic partnership
·        The President’s efforts to bring peace to the Korean Peninsula
The group stated ‘…bringing a warm peace to the Balkans, a brighter future of hope in the Middle East, and first steps to reconciliation on the Korean peninsula, few world leaders have done more to build a better world for the Twenty-First Century. President Trump has shown the world that peace is not only possible, but within reach.’
These goals were part of the President’s 2016 campaign and once again it appears, ‘promises made, promises kept’ holds true.
The parliamentarians included:
Swedish MPs Mattias Karlsson, Björn Söder, Tobias Andersson, Sweden Democrats (SWE)
Andrew Rosindell, Conservative Party (UK)
Thierry Baudet, Party Leader & MP, Forum for Democracy (NL)
Iván Espinosa de los Monteros, MP, VOX (ESP)
Søren Espersen, Danish People’s Party (DK)
Sammy Wilson MP, Conservatives (NIR)
Zsolt Csenger-Zalán, Fidesz (HU)
Grzegorz Bierecki, Law & Justice (PL)
Uldis Budriķis MP, New Conservative Party (LV)
Ulf Isak Leirstein, MP, Independent (NO)
Sebastian Tynkkynen & Vilhelm Junnila, MP, True Fins (FI)
Additionally:
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa
A group of Australian law professors also backed Trump for the award
So, how much of this have you heard discussed on the news? Probably none unless it was in ridicule by opponents of the President. Meanwhile, former President Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for… absolutely nothing. Director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, Geir Lundestad, told the AP news agency that the committee hoped the award would strengthen Mr Obama but even within the US, many people argued he had done nothing worthy of the award. This is exactly the point. Liberals were so intoxicated with Mr Obama that they gave him one of the most prestigious awards in the world in hopes he might do something great. It is safe to say we were more than disappointed. Mr Lundestad continued ‘Even many of Obama’s supporters believed that the prize was a mistake… in that sense the committee didn’t achieve what it had hoped for’.
Stay in contact with American Sovereignty Network via our webpage: www.americansovereigntynetwork.org
The Tyranny of Money
One could certainly be excused for thinking the title ‘Tyranny of Money’ would most likely apply to people who are destitute and do not have any money. Perhaps a more thoughtful person might postulate that it represents a deeper concept recognizing those who are living paycheck to paycheck and cannot get ahead. However, few think of a cashless or petty cash only scenario. For example, in the USA, the $500, $1000, $5000 and $10000 banknotes were ordered by the Nixon Administration to be removed from circulation in 1969. Most remaining bills of these denominations are held by collectors but if one should arrive at a bank, it will not be reissued. Moving forward to 2018, the 500 Euro note no longer will be printed and in 2019 India eliminated all high denomination bank notes which led to a temporary shortage of currency as citizens were required to exchange their large notes for smaller denominations. China is moving towards a cashless society and now is linking their electronic payment systems such as WeChat and AliPay to their ‘social credit’ policy which rewards or restricts citizens for being obedient to the government’s decrees. Your ability to use airports, high speed rail or enter certain venues are already restricted by the government’s policies. In short, it is the cutting edge methodology of how to control behavior en masse. Recall the infamous quote attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild ‘Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws’. At least by this measure, China is leading the way and disturbingly, many globalists see China as the role model for their vision of global governance.
The justification behind these currency disappearances is not hard to discern. Who carries stacks of large denomination currency around instead of a safer alternative such as a cashier’s cheque or promissory note? Most people will answer that with ‘drug dealers’, ‘criminals’ etc. but the point here is this is an issue of privacy. I am not denying large bills have been used for illicit transactions but just because something can be used to break the law should not justify its lack of availability to law abiding citizens. I can go to the local Chevrolet dealer and buy a Corvette which can attain speeds over 320kph/200mph but just because the vehicle can go that fast does not guarantee that I will use it for that purpose.
So, the question can be asked ‘Who is advocating for a cashless or petty cash only society and why?’ Recently, Democrats in the US House of Representatives have introduced a bill which would create a ‘digital dollar’ managed by the Federal Reserve with the justification being it could be used to make payments during the era of coronavirus. This digital dollar is defined as ‘a balance expressed as a dollar value consisting of digital ledger entries that are recorded as liabilities in the accounts of any Federal Reserve bank; or an electronic unit of value, redeemable by an eligible financial institution’. However, upon closer examination, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell had been planning this long before coronavirus was an issue so we can now observe that cashless aspirations have previously been in existence for the purpose of control. Whether it is the current Democrat proposed digital dollar or another digital money method under creation known as FedNow, the result is the same; when electronic payment is made there is absolutely no privacy. Whether your transaction is completely legal or not, there will always be a digital record.
FedNow will be centered upon the creation of digital money and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve web page says the system will be ready by 2023 or 2024. The Fed is rationalizing is proposal because the current Automatic Clearing House (ACH) system is not instantaneous and one of the target groups of people are those the Fed called ‘unbanked’ which simply means they have no account with a financial institution. Usually these people fall at the bottom of the financial ladder and depend upon electronic payments such as EBT, SNAP or other social welfare programs. The new system will give each household an electronic account where instant transfer can take place. Certainly, the same would be true for a business who receives Fed monies. The Federal Reserve is an unaudited pseudo-governmental institution and its members are totally unaccountable to the citizens. This is not what we want controlling our commerce.
Additionally, and more frightening is the power that digital money will give to institutions that control it. The government, financial institutions and businesses like PayPal, Square or ApplePay will be empowered because they can control what purchases people make or do not make. All of the afore mentioned payment platforms ban their use for the purchase of legal firearms. Once again, if you can ban one legal purchase, why not more? In the near future you could be banned from legal purchases with the justification being you should pay off a credit card or debt instead. You could be banned from using a platform if you hold views or participate in activities the system operator disapproves of. This has already happened with Patreon and PayPal who banned various political groups who did not match their ideology. If this seems unlikely to you, consider how many political groups have been deplatformed from YouTube, Twitter, Facebook etc just for disseminating viewpoints they do not agree with. When that draconian system is applied to monetary transactions, it should become frightening. Add to this that your entire purchase history will be archived and you can also discern that records of what you buy can and will be used against you. This could easily result in a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ system where suspicious of ‘unapproved’ transactions will be all that is necessary to freeze someone’s ability to use their financial resources. If this happens, virtually all freedom is lost. The threat of being ‘deplatformed’ from your money should be enough to wake people up.
The Obama Administration already has abused this power in what was called Operation Chokepoint where banks were pressured to withhold services from firearms dealers as well as high interest payday lenders. For the record, both are legal enterprises, but these businesses found themselves locked out of the financial world as their banking rights were terminated without trial and with no immediate redress. Needless to say, if this system is implemented, many ‘decisions’ will actually be made by computer algorithms which further the difficulty in restoring one’s rights to control one’s own assets. In this case it should not matter if you approve of the Obama Administration’s decision, it should serve as a clarion call that electronic money can and has already been used as a political weapon.
It should not take a financial genius to see this power grab. The power to print and coin money was given to Congress in Article One Section Eight of the US Constitution and it was Unconstitutionally given to the Fed when it was created slyly in 1913 while many members of Congress were not in Washington. If FedNow is allowed into operation, the Fed can create and distribute money without Congressional votes on stimulus or other financial proposals such as the concept of Universal Basic Income which is popular with some on the political left as well as certain billionaires whose status will be least likely to suffer under the resulting inflation. This would be a power grab of unprecedented proportions and Congress would be powerless to stop it and the Fed could create an unlimited supply which can only end in currency debasement. Fed distribution of funds would be welcomed by many people who do not understand the impact of printing or in this case digitizing unlimited cash but the same people will be equally perplexed when their money no longer buys a loaf of bread. To make it simple, how much money you have means little, what the money buys means everything. As with many other financial policies, those at the top will fare well while 95% will suffer a lower standard of living and a total loss of privacy. We must resist the cashless or petty cash only society.

james bauman


james bauman

Forum Categories

Share your thoughts

Leave a Comment





This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.