Ignorance is bliss,

but knowledge is power.

- Anonymous

This is a must read for all.








This should be standard reading for all U.S. citizens.
SURPRISE. YOUR GOVERNMENT LIES.
This is why no matter what they ever say or do, you should not trust
them completely.
Its why I can't get over the 9/11 conspiracies totally.
Its funny how people can see this shit and just say, "Fuck
conspiracy theorists"
No. Fuck you.
There is a difference between just utter bullshit and really plausible
events that HAVE happened.
The unfortunate thing is that people aren't even aware of the stuff
thats in public domain and how utterly crazy it is before they can
assess what is going on.
Operation Northwoods?
The Informant named "Curveball" who lied about WMDs in Iraq?
Testimony of Nayirah?
Operation Black Eagle
Operation Mockingbird
The Special Collection Service
Project MKULTRA
Operation Paperclip
Downing Street Memo
Room 641A
Gulf of Tonkin Incident
COINTELPRO
Project MKDELTA
Rex 84 Plan
Project Artichoke
Project MKOFTEN
Operation Dormouse
Operation Ajax
The Plot to kill FDR...by BANKERS
CIA Front Companies
Stuxnet
Project Merrimac
Project Resistence
The Rendon Group that exports PR and Propaganda
In-Q-Tel...the CIA's front company Venture Capital arm...that is
heavily invested in Google
Operation Chaos
Project SHAMROCK
The FISA Court (secret)
Russell Welch who tried to expose drug ops at Mena, AK...also
poisoned with Anthrax
Gerry Droller
The School of the Americas
Journalist/Report Gary Webb
Operation Charly
Operation 40
Operation Midnight Climax
Operation Washtub
Acoustic Kitty
Amalgam Virgo
Project FUBELT
Stargate Project
Tepper Aviation
The Church Committee
Family Jewels
The Pentagon Papers
Operation Gladio

Now consider this and put this in context.
Most of these are incidents that happened 30 years ago.
Few of what I've mentioned was with in the last 10 or so years.
Imagine what WILL be uncovered?
Imagine the lengths they're going through to prevent revealing
anything?
These are all Wikipedia sites...and this is the information they're
LETTING you have.
Imagine all the shit you have NO CLUE about.
And don't think that since this stuff is exposed that they just...gave it
up.
The NSA employs more people than the FBI and CIA...combined.
I'm not telling you to start making shit up...but lets be real, there is a
LOT of stuff going on and them making this available to us is just a
way for even the few people that know about it to be distracted.
I don't think there is an "Illuminati"
I don't think there is a secret society.
I just know that there are people with power.
People with money.
And people with neither.
If you're not in the first two, then you're in the third one and you're
getting fucked.











ESSAY ON THE FEDERAL RESERVE

Imagine a post-American world where the worlds economy has
failed, people are killing and stealing just to survive, and the country
is in turmoil. This is a realistic outcome to the tailing of the American
dollar, and the Federal Reserve is going to be responsible for this. The
Federal Reserve is responsible for the mass amounts of inflation on
not only the American Dollar, but most other countries in the world
that have a central bank controlling monetary policy.
The Federal Reserve, also known as a Central Banking system, a
private company that controls interest rates and a countries monetary
policy. It was created in 1913 to help stabilize our economy. This,
however, has not been the case. Since 1913, the United States
economy suffered through the Great Depression and several
recessions. The Fed creates economic instability by artificially
controlling our interest rates, and lowering them at the stroke of a
pen When interest rates are lowered, banks extend credit because the
demand for loans increases The extended credit is just fake money
and soon ends in a misallocation of resources, or not enough
resources to complete projects that were invested in, and thus caused
the Great Depression by destabilizing the economy.
According to Congressman Ron Paul, in the last three years, the
Federal Reserve has created over $4 trillions in new money. The
massive printing of frat currencies is never-ending inflation. Inflation
is when prices of products rise and the purchasing power of the dollar
drop. This is an unsustainable system that will destroy our economy it
we do not stop it soon. Our entire financial system is based on a
deception. We spend more than we earn, we consume more than we
produce, we borrow more than we save, and we all believe for some
reason we believe that this can go on forever. The Federal Reserve is
indirectly responsible for the financial crisis. It was caused by
promoting home ownership to those who were bad credit risks and
hailing out institutions that tailed because they took on excessive risk.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-institutionalized
companies who buy mortgage from banks and sell them to
homeowners. These companies are took very high credit risks by
giving money to people who could not pay them back. This creates a
government induced moral hazard, that urges the company to have
risky behavior, When these private companies make risky economic
decisions they expect to be bailed out by the Federal Reserve, Which
is exactly what happened Fractional Reserve banking is a banking
system now universal, that has the principle of only reserving a
fraction of all deposits the people make. The money that they do not
reserve, they put up for loans. These loans are then given to someone
else, who spends the loan, and whoever gets that money now deposits
it and the bank uses the fractional banking system over and over
again. This creates fake wealth and hurts our inflation rate, but
conveniently does not harm the bankers. The "money" you have in the
bank, or at least most of it, is simply an IOU.
The money being created is not real in the slightest because
bankers are gambling with deposits. An argument for the Federal
Reserve is that it plays an important rote in regulating the economy
through expertise in macroeconomics. Including banking practice,
financial instruments, banking organizations and their operations
and practices. It is intended to identify and address vulnerabilities to,
and posed by, capital and other markets.
The issue with this claim is that no supreme bank is necessary
for controlling the economy. Private business owners control the
economy in a capitalistic system, which means that the entire
economy is planned through spontaneous order. or also known as
"self-organization." The private sector organizes itself to the economy
and works best left alone, therefore without a Central Bank. In
support of a Federal Reserve's existence states that the Federal
Reserve halted, or stopped another Great Depression by pumping
liquidity into the system, meaning high increases in the money
supply. Zero-percent interest rate, and multi-trillion dollar lending
facilities, but by increasing the money supply it just caused
hyperinflation, or high amounts of inflation and zero-percent interest
rates created more extended credit in the banking system, and
therefore fake money was being created, which as previously stated, is
just fake money created through lowered interest rates.
Ending the Federal Reserve would drastically help our
economy, because of the inflation and moral hazards created by it in
the first place. If we do not, our economy will not last, this is a
unsustainable system that cannot survive much longer. If everyone
could see the dangers created by central banking, nobody would
support it. The only way to save our economy is by stopping the
bankers.





























FEMINISM AND ITS MYTHS:

Okay, let me correct this fucking shit.

Pay Inequality:

Yes, women are paid 23% less than men in the same LINE OF WORK.
For this example we will use medicine.
Many female doctors are paid less than males, enough to affect the
statistics, but why? Well, if you actually did some study on it, youd
learn that women are far more likely to choose lower paying
specialties such as pediatrics or family medicine, than the more
paying cardiology or anesthesiology.
Furthermore, women who work full-time on basis work about 7%
fewer hours less than men, and are far more likely to take long leaves
of absence.
If you take these facts into consideration then the wage gap is pretty
much non-existent.
Think about it, cunts. What employer would be STUPID enough to
hire men, if you could just hire women and save 23% and enjoy that
huge market advantage?
If a woman did the same job as men, just as good and stable but are
almost 1/4th cheaper, then male unemployment would go through
the roof.

Men get the same pay with C grades as women with As:

Well, I dont think that your grades dictate your pay. Look at the
wealthiest people in the world. A lot of them didnt even graduate.
It doesnt really matter what your grades are if you end up getting the
same job.
If a woman gets an A and a man gets a C but they both end up
working at Wal-Mart for minimum wage, then its the woman being
dumb for not fucking choosing a higher-paying career.

1/5 women will be sexually assaulted or raped:

Well This statistic is a grey area, because no one really knows how
many people are raped or assaulted. A lot of people are afraid of
telling the police, some people just lives in fear because they might
know the assaulter, while other on the contrary make false
accusations as seen hundreds if not thousands of times.

Also: society cant stop rape.

Rape is already illegal, so theres not really that more to do. If it
happens, it happens. Of course its sad, but having a protest or
making new laws when its already illegal, or making stop rape
adverts will NOT make people who already defy the rules/laws about
rape inclined to follow any movements preventing rape.
You cant teach men not to rape, as its not a thing, which only men
do. Women rape too, and isnt it funny how no one thinks that its
serious when men get raped?
My problem here is just that already when this argument is brought
up, men are stereotyped as these hypersexual, uncontrollable sex-
addicts who cant control themselves, while in reality most men arent
that fucking twisted.
Also, teaching not to rape is basically saying, Rape is wrong, dont do
that shit but we already do that, yet it happens. Teaching rapists
not to rape is not going to solve the problem.

Victim Blaming:

Ah, this is a shitty argument.
Ill happily sound like a complete cock to everyone to defend saying,
Maybe consider your outfit.
Its common fucking sense. If you wear neo-Nazi clothes in town,
youre looking to get your face kicked the fuck in.
Think about this: a rapist leaves his house in the morning and enters
the city, he then sees a lot of different women, there are some who
arent really that sexually attractive, and then theres that one woman
who is wearing a sexy, red and revealing dress. Isnt it obvious that
hell rape (or at least try to) the woman who he finds the most
attractive?

Im not saying rape is right or justifiable, Im saying that by dressing
sexy, youre making yourself a more probable target for the rapist as
youll be attractive, so you DO need to consider your outfit instead of
putting on revealing clothes, because then you will be the first
priority. If I had a choice to have sex with Susan Boyle or Mila Kunis,
Id pick Mila any day. Simple fucking biology.

Walking to the car without fear:

Either youre just really paranoid or anxious, or youve got serious
issues.
I dont believe women are more afraid of walking around in town in
fear of getting raped, than men are for getting mugged or attacked.

Be pretty:

Where does society (and what part of society? Its like the cunts who
come home and tells mommy that people are being dumb, mom then
asks who? and she just says people because there arent really
a person who is being dumb, its just a delusion) teaches that butts
and tits is more important than brains? I genuinely want to know.
Because last time I checked, people call girls whore or slut if they
focus on their ass or tits as their primary asset. Music today is
controversial, why? Because its so fucking sexualized.
Miley Cyrus is an amazing singer, its just sad that she oversexualizes
everything by twerking, showing ass, riding lolita dolls and giving
blowjobs to dildos on stage as a way of making her show an adult
thing.
I think shes a great artist in the terms that she can sing and she can
write songs, yet I despise her acts due to the oversexualization, just
like any other artist like Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Nicki Minaj, etc.

Summary:
So what is feminism?

Feminism to me is bigotry; Feminism is one side of a sexist coin.
Where on the other side you have male chauvinism/masculinism. Its
both political ideologies focusing solely on social/political issues on
their respective side of a gender specific spectrum, rather than
focusing on equality and perhaps the issues that dont involve
themselves.

Its not equality, its fucking sexism.
If you want equality, go with humanism, or egalitarianism. Stupid
cunts.

-And women have fucking fundamental rights, just too sad that
feminists are spinning a narrative to turn the focus away from that.
Women are capable of getting the exact same pay as men, just do the
same job, for the same amount of time, and in the same department
of work, instead of saying I slam a kids knees with a hammer and
expect same pay as a guy performing heart surgery

checking privilege:
checking
checking
privilege checked.
Category: Shitlord.
























THE U.S. PETROL DOLLAR AND WHAT IT MEANS
TO EVERYTHING TODAY.

1) The petrol dollar is the currency used to buy oil worldwide.

2) The petrol dollar is the currency used to back up the U.S. dollar
since former president Nixon got rid of the gold standard.

3) It started off with the Saudis and continued getting the rest of
OPEC in and locking the U.S. in the Middle East for as long as
we have it.
1


4) So, as you gather all of this information, you finally start to
understand what the Petrol dollar is and how much value it has.
Now this is where it plays into our economy:


5) As you see above it explains it all perfectly. The petrol dollar
creates a huge demand for the dollar and it is what makes our
economy grow fast. However, this isnt good.

6) Anyone threatening the dollar past and present also lead to this
photo.







1
Petrodollar
7) This is where it gets good. We are so deep in debt but constantly
borrow money. What people also dont know is we borrow so
much at so little interest.

Future Of The Dollar As World Reserve Currency

8) Youve just read the Forbes article on the U.S. being the world
reserve dollar. That is one thing that was good about the petrol
dollar because it creates a high demand for the U.S. dollar.
However, this creates dependency on foreign countries
especially the Middle East making sure oil is sold in our dollar.

9) I hope you can reasonably understand how important this is as
so far Ive explained. Now lets talk about current events.

10) The last two people to get rid of the petrol dollar were Saddam
in Iraq and Gaddafi in Libya*. The U.S. is also going after Iran
and Syria currently. Why, you ask?

11) Read some of this, (Notice Iran)

12) Watch this: "The Fall of Iraq - What You Aren't Being Told"
(Explains Iraq perfectly).

13) I'm also going to show you why the U.S got involved with Libya
and why they took Gaddafi out.

14) Think Im a crazy conspiracy theorist? Why don't you watch this
video?

15) Which president could have fixed this? Why did no presidents
including Reagan and Clinton fix it? How much power does a
president actually have besides being controlled by the Federal
Reserve who are involved in all of this? The U.S. is in debt to oil
whether you accept it or not. Intervention will always happen as
excuses are made to topple anyone threatening the dollar.


* Gaddafi was planning to set up a central bank that would rival
the dollar as Saddam was converting it to Euros

Now you read this, I hope I've changed some of your minds. 9/11 was
an excuse to go into the Middle East where Congress didnt even
declare war.

- They used WMDs in Iraq as an excuse for Saddam who got rid
of the Petrodollar.
- They used Gaddafi as a dictator to get rid of him for the
Petrodollar.
- The U.S. created ISIS, as an excuse to go into Syria, so Iran is
helpless.

The troops are pawns in this corporate political agenda because not
many people know the truth.

























FOUR WIDELY ACCEPTED MISCONCEPTIONS
ABOUT THE GREAT DEPRESSION:

1. Free market capitalism caused the Great Depression.

Most of us probably learned that unfettered and
unregulated capitalism in the 1920s led to the Great Depression.
Some have similarly blamed capitalism for the current economic
crisis. But just like today, there was not pure free market capitalism in
the 1920s

The Federal Reserve, the central bank of the U.S., was created
in 1913. Not only did the Federal Reserve fail to prevent the Great
Depression, but it was also primarily responsible for its length and
severity. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply and would
never exist in a true free market economy.

As Murray Rothbard explains in Americas Great Depression,
the Federal Reserve creates boom and bust cycles that destabilize the
economy. The Federal Reserve created an unsustainable boom in the
1920s by lowering interest rates. Rothbard estimated that the money
supply had increased by 61.8% between 1921 and 1929. The inevitable
stock market crash was a symptom of the inflationary boom.

Economist Henry Hazlitt once wrote that worse than the slump
itself may be the public delusion that the slump has been caused, not
by the previous inflation, but by the inherent defects of capitalism.
The blame for the Great Depression should be placed on the Federal
Reserve, not free market capitalism.

2. Herbert Hoover was a laissez-faire president.

Many history teachers claim that Herbert Hoover was a do-
nothing passive president who allowed the Great Depression to
happen. Quite the opposite is true. Far from being an advocate of
laissez-faire, Hoover was an extremely interventionist president.
Hoover actually intervened in the economy more than any prior
president.

Herbert Hoovers interventionist policies prolonged the Great
Depression. He doubled federal spending in real terms in just four
years. One of Hoovers first acts as president was to prohibit business
leaders from cutting wages. He also launched huge public works
projects such as the San Francisco Bay Bridge, Los Angeles Aqueduct,
and the Hoover Dam. Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley tariff into law
in June 1930, which raised taxes on over 20000 imported goods to
record levels. He raised the top income tax rate from 25% to 63% and
the lowest income tax rate from 1.1% to 4% in 1932. Despite what
most of us have been taught, there was nothing laissez-faire about
Hoover.

In the 1932 election, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (whom I will
now refer to as FDR) criticized his opponent Hoover of presiding over
the greatest spending administration in all of history.

His statements are seen as a bit hypocritical in hindsight since
Roosevelt continued and expanded Hoovers big government policies.
Many of the New Deal programs were based on policies already
enacted by the Hoover administration. It could be said that Hoover
was the real father of the New Deal.

3. FDRs New Deal ended the Great Depression.

The New deal is widely perceived to have ended the Great
Depression but it actually made the economic situation worse. The
series of economic packages implemented between in the 1930s
hampered economic growth and prolonged the Great Depression.
Roosevelt imposed excise taxes, harmful regulations on businesses,
increased the top tax rate to 79%, doubled government spending
between 1932 and 1940, and artificially raised wages and prices.

The New Deal created many public works projects. Contrary to
what most of us were taught, public works projects do not boost the
economy. It is the classic case of the seen versus the unseenwe can
all visibly see the jobs created by New Deal spending, but it is more
difficult to see the jobs destroyed by the high taxes needed to pay for
the New Deal programs. Of course, taking money away from
entrepreneurs in the private sector will only hurt economic growth.

In 1931, a year before FDR was elected President, the
unemployment rate was an unprecedented 16.3%. By 1939, nearly two
terms into the Roosevelt administration, the employment rate had
present to 17.2%. The New Deal clearly he didnt lower
unemployment like most of us were taught. In the May 1939,
Treasury Secretary Henry J. Morgenthau foul Junior stated that, we
are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not
work I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as
much unemployment as when we started And an enormous debt to
boot.

The depression would have been much shorter without the New
Deal.

4. World War II ended the Great Depression.

The facts tell a different story. As Ludwig von Mises once wrote,
war prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague
brings. WWII did stimulate certain sectors of the economy. Men and
women worked in factories to build tanks, helicopters , ships, and
other war supplies. But it is important to look at the overall picture,
not just one sector of the economy. We can visibly see the weapon
production jobs created by government spending, but it is more
difficult to see the jobs destroyed by taxing the private economy.

From a purely economic standpoint, the war made consumers
worse off because it was often difficult or impossible to purchase the
goods they needed. The weapon factories were not producing goods
and services that Americans could enjoy. The federal government had
forbidden the production of new cars, houses, and major appliances.
Due to government rationing, it was difficult to buy many goods such
as chocolate, meat, gasoline, sugar, and tires.

So what did end the great Depression? Huge government
spending cuts after the war did. From 1944 to 1948, the U.S.
government cut spending by $72 billion a 75% reduction. In 1945,
the deficit was 21.5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Two years
later, the budget surplus was 1.7% of GDP. The dramatically spending
cuts and slight tax reductions boosted economic growth. Between
September 1945 and December 1948, the average unemployment rate
was only 3.5%.

Likewise, the only way to get out of the current economic crisis is to
drastically cut government spending and taxes.



































SUPPORT THE TROOPS STATEMENT IS
PROPAGANDA

Let me explain to you why this statement is propaganda. I do
not support the troops, and am called an asshole for being
disrespectful to the people giving their lives to protect our freedom.
I do not support the troops, just like I do not support the U.S.
government.

First of all, support the troops is a very ambiguous and vague
statement in itself. It was purposely phrased like this so you wouldnt
question the logic behind it, and if you think about it, there is no logic
behind it.

Now lets get technical. Troops are part of the government, too.
It goes like this:

TroopsMilitaryExecutive branchGovernment.

Troops are just pawns of the United States Government. Yes that is
correct. The troops are controlled by the politicians you despise and
criticize on a regular basis. Saying that you support the troops but not
the government is like saying in 1945 you support the Nazi soldiers
but not the Adolf Hitler.

If you actually cared about the individual lives of the troops,
you would want them to come back to their homes instead of risking
their lives every day, living in fear knowing that it might be their last,
their families stressed to the point of breaking down. If you really
cared about the troops, you wouldnt want them to be fighting in a
rich mans war. You wouldnt want them to be in combat. Many
people are oblivious to this fact, but supporting the troops is
supporting the government.

The point of slogans like support our troops is that they dont mean
anything Thats the whole point of good propaganda. You want to
create a slogan that nobodys going to be against, and everybodys
going to be for. Nobody knows what it means, because it doesnt
mean anything. Its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from
a question that does mean something: Do you support our policy?
Thats the one you're not allowed to talk about.
- Noam Comsky























What Anarchy Looks Like:

You have been taught that anarchy means all of these things,
and it does. But the word anarchy has multiple meanings. One is
chaos; the other is no rulers. These meanings are separate,
though the media and government would like you to think that they
are the same, and having no rulers implies chaos.

These photographs do depict anarchy in the first sense, but
there is more to it. They all depict events occurring within states.

This is what statism looks like. Statism is chaos.









SEXISM AGAINST MEN:



When a man and a woman commit the same
crime, the man is given a longer sentence than
the woman.



Men receive custody of their children in about
10% of divorce cases.



Female genital mutilation is considered
disgusting, but male genital mutilation is still a
common practice.



When a woman is hit by a man, society thinks of
that man as a monster. But when a man is hit by a
woman, society thinks of that woman as brave
and strong, and society calls the man weak.






Percentage of Men vs. Women

Combat Deaths: 97% Men 3% Women

Homicide Victims: 76% Men 24% Women

Industrial Deaths/Accidents: 93% Men 7% Women

Suicides: 80% Men 20% Women

Winner of Custody: 16% Men 84% Women

Average sentence by gender: Men 51.52 months
Women 18.51 months

Sources:
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/female.aspx
http://www.defense.gov/news/casualty.pdf
http://hatsrcool.com/pages/america-s-major-wars
http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/psychiatric_disorders/
suicidal_behavior/suicidal_behavior.html?qt=&sc=&alt=/
http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p60-225.pdf
http://ncfm.org/2011/04/issues/criminal-sentencing/
http://www.terry.uga.edu/~mustard/sentencing.pdf/
http://www.cdc.gov/injury/index.html/












1971 Nixon declares War on Drugs
o Since then incarceration has risen 2.1 million
o Incarcerated Americans = 2.6 million
Prison Population by country (per 100000 adult citizens)
o U.S.: 753
o U.K.: 153
o S. Korea: 97
o France: 96
o Germany: 90
o Japan: 63
Population Growth since 1970
o U.S. population 33%
o Incarcerated population 350%
Just 8.5% of federal prison inmates have committed violent
offenses

THIS IS CAUSED BY THE WAR ON DRUGS

As of 2012, drug offenders make up 25% of the prison
population
o As opposed to in 1980, where it only made up 10% of the
prison population.
Every year, 1.7 million Americans are arrested on drug charged
o Triple the amount of violent crime arrests
4 of 5 drug arrests are for simple possession
As incarceration rates go up, private prisons rake in profits
o Total number of prison inmates: +16%
o Total number of people in private federal prisons: +120%
o Inmates in private prisons cost taxpayers $1600
o At the same time, paying them 23 cents/hour
Corrupt judges in Pennsylvania received 2.6 million to put 5000
kids in private detention centers.
California spends more on prisons than education
o California Spending in 2011
Prisons: $9.6 billion
UC System and State colleges: $5.7 billion
Federal, state, and local governments spend $75 billion a year
in taxpayer money on incarceration.
o Lifetime cost per prisoner: $1.2 million
HOW SCHOOLS BRAINWASH STUDENTS:

All the higher institutions like high school and college start early. This
can slow and weaken the brain, and can also break their will.

Next the institutions use promises like getting a better chance to work
for pieces of paper to give them motivation to work their lives away.

Instead of free thinking, todays school system prefers more
concrete knowledge like Mathematics, censored History, slightly
censored Science, and English.

Although the students completely outnumber the teacher, they all still
fear the teacher and follow their orders obediently.

As long as each student works, each student gets a letter on a piece of
paper. Promoting the illusion of rewards.

You are taught that intelligence is measurable, while its actually
immeasurable and subjective.

You are taught that obeying is patriotism. An example is the Pledge of
Allegiance. In the morning you are obligated to comply to do it.
Sometimes it is actually a rule that you must comply.

In economics classes, you are taught how amazing capitalism, and
how the economy is horrible because of foreign influence. They also
never mention the Federal Reserves role in the economy.

If you were to ask a student in their final years of high school and
their years in college, a lot of them would say they are miserable at
school, dont pay attention to classes, and some sleep in class. Does
this seem like the fundamental curiosity you were born with?

My main point is that the current education system indoctrinates
children ruining peoples thirst for knowledge, breaking their souls,
and rebuilding them into faithful, harmonic drones. Some people
know this, but refuse to accept it. To those people, please stop your
denial. It only shows your level of apathy towards the world, and
apathetic rhymes with pathetic (lel).
Why do we still blame White men for slavery that
happened 200 years ago?


Why dont we still blame the Japanese for the atrocities they
committed in World War II against the Chinese?

Why dont we shun the Russians for raping and murdering
thousands upon thousands of German women during the invasion of
the Red Army?

Why do we not blame the Muslims for 9/11?

Why do we not shun Blacks for enslaving and selling their own
brethren?


Blaming anybody for the actions of their ancestors, or the
actions of some of their particular race, culture, or religion, is in itself
racism. To blame any of the previous races and cultures for the
several occurrences that their particular culture perpetrated, White
people included, is unacceptable. We cannot move forward as a
society by blaming others.

















StormCloudsGathering:

http://youtu.be/oMjXbuj7BPI
http://youtu.be/RNcbsB1Pizg
http://youtu.be/tQLjI-N1h0E
http://youtu.be/1_uLwHFR2aA

Ron Paul:

http://youtu.be/1YjBoHAzhiU
http://youtu.be/-aVpaUMK2oA
http://youtu.be/o_WBo4sfmi4
http://youtu.be/TGcNVTfJ-XE

Other links for reference:

www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/
www.voluntaryismfaq.wikispaces.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_schools_of_thought
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
http://www.mises.org/
http://liberty.me/
www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/
http://ifunny.co/Anarcho_Capitalism













EVIDENCE EXPOSING WHO PUT ISIS IN POWER,
AND HOW IT WAS DONE. - http://youtu.be/oMjXbuj7BPI

The Islamic militant group ISIS, formerly known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq,
and recently rebranded as the so-called Islamic State, is the stuff of
nightmares. They are ruthless, fanatical, killers, on a mission, and
that mission is to wipe out anyone and everyone, from any religion or
belief system and to impose Shari'ah law. The mass executions,
beheadings and even crucifixions that they are committing as they
work towards this goal are flaunted like badges of pride, video taped
and uploaded for the whole world to see. This is the new face of evil.
Would it interest you to know who helped these psychopaths rise to
power? Would it interest you to know who armed them, funded them
and trained them? Would it interest you to know why?
This story makes more sense if we start in the middle, so we'll begin
with the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
The Libyan revolution was Obama's first major foreign intervention.
It was portrayed as an extension of the Arab Spring, and NATO
involvement was framed in humanitarian terms.
The fact that the CIA was actively working to help the Libyan rebels
topple Gaddafi was no secret, nor were the airstrikes that Obama
ordered against the Libyan government. However, little was said
about the identity or the ideological leanings of these Libyan rebels.
Not surprising, considering the fact that the leader of the Libyan
rebels later admitted that his fighters included Al-Qaeda linked
jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq.
These jihadist militants from Iraq were part of what national security
analysts commonly referred to as Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Remember Al-
Qaeda in Iraq was ISIS before it was rebranded.
With the assistance of U.S. and NATO intelligence and air support,
the Libyan rebels captured Gaddafi and summarily executed him in
the street, all the while enthusiastically chanting "Allah Akbar". For
many of those who had bought the official line about how these rebels
were freedom fighters aiming to establish a liberal democracy in
Libya, this was the beginning of the end of their illusions.
Prior to the U.S. and NATO backed intervention, Libya had the
highest standard of living of any country in Africa. This according to
the U.N.'s Human Development Index rankings for 2010. However in
the years following the coup, the country descended into chaos, with
extremism and violence running rampant. Libya is now widely
regarded as failed state (of course those who were naive enough to
buy into the propaganda leading up to the war get defensive when this
is said).
Now after Gaddafi was overthrown, the Libyan armories were looted,
and massive quantities of weapons were sent by the Libyan rebels to
Syria. The weapons, which included anti-tank and anti-aircraft
missiles were smuggled into Syria through Turkey, a NATO ally. The
times of London reported on the arrival of the shipment on
September 14th, 2012. (Secondary confirmation in this NYT article)
This was just three days after Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by
the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi. Chris Stevens had served
as the U.S. government's liaison to the Libyan rebels since April of
2011.
While a great deal media attention has focused on the fact that the
State Department did not provide adequate security at the consulate,
and was slow to send assistance when the attack started, Pulitzer
Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh released an article in April of
2014 which exposed a classified agreement between the CIA, Turkey
and the Syrian rebels to create what was referred to as a "rat line".
The "rat line" was covert network used to channel weapons and
ammunition from Libya, through southern turkey and across the
Syrian border. Funding was provided by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and
Qatar.
With Stevens dead any direct U.S. involvement in that arms shipment
was buried, and Washington would continue to claim that they had
not sent heavy weaponry into Syria.
It was at this time that jihadist fighters from Libya began flooding
into Syria as well. And not just low level militants. Many were
experienced commanders who had fought in multiple theaters.
The U.S. and its allies were now fully focused on taking down Assad's
government in Syria. As in Libya this regime change was to be framed
in terms of human rights, and now overt support began to
supplement the backdoor channels. The growing jihadist presence
was swept under the rug and covered up.
However as the rebels gained strength, the reports of war crimes and
atrocities that they were committing began to create a bit of a public
relations problem for Washington. It then became standard policy to
insist that U.S. support was only being given to what they referred to
as "moderate" rebel forces.
This distinction, however, had no basis in reality.
In an interview given in April of 2014, FSA commander Jamal
Maarouf admitted that his fighters regularly conduct joint operations
with Al-Nusra. Al-Nusra is the official Al-Qaida branch in Syria. This
statement is further validated by an interview given in June of 2013
by Colonel Abdel Basset Al-Tawil, commander of the FSA's Northern
Front. In this interview he openly discusses his ties with Al-Nusra,
and expresses his desire to see Syria ruled by sharia law. (You can
verify the identities of these two commanders here in this document
from The Institute for the Study of War)
Moderate rebels? Well it's complicated. Not that this should really
come as any surprise. Reuters had reported in 2012 that the FSA's
command was dominated by Islamic extremists, and the New York
Times had reported that same year that the majority of the weapons
that Washington were sending into Syria was ending up in the hands
Jihadists. For two years the U.S. government knew that this was
happening, but they kept doing it.
And the FSA's ties to Al-Nusra are just the beginning. In June of 2014
Al-Nusra merged with ISIS at the border between Iraq and Syria.
So to review, the FSA is working with Al-Nusra, Al-Nusra is working
with ISIS, and the U.S. has been sending money and weapons to the
FSA even though they've known since 2012 that most of these
weapons were ending up in the hands of extremists. You do the math.
[UPDATE 9.03.14]: Retired Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney admits: We
Helped Build ISIS:
Note that the first version of this video I uploaded (here) was quickly
taken down. To insure that this clip does not disappear we have
provided a secondary download link here. So if the video below isn't
playing then use that link and upload it elsewhere.
Syria, we backed I believe, in some cases some of the wrong people
and not in the right part of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) that's a little
confusing to people. So I've always maintained, and go back quite
some time that we were backing the wrong types. I think it's going to
turn out maybe this weekend in a new special that Brett Baer is going
to have Friday that's going to show some of those weapons from
Benghazi ended up in the hands of ISIS. So we helped build ISIS.
By the way, this also explains why Washington then decided to target
Russia next.
This threat was made on June 10th, 2013. In what can only be
described as an amazing coincidence, just nine days later, the rebels
received their first official shipment of heavy weapons in Aleppo.
After the second sarin gas fiasco, which was also exposed and
therefore failed to garner public support for airstrikes, the U.S.
continued to increase its the training and support for the rebels.
In February of 2014, Haaretz reported that the U.S. and its allies in
the region, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel, were in the process of
helping the Syrian rebels plan and prepare for a massive attack in the
south. According to Haaretz Israel had also provided direct assistance
in military operations against Assad four months prior (you can
access a free cached version of the page here).
Then in May of 2014 PBS ran a report in which they interviewed
rebels who were trained by the U.S. in Qatar. According to those
rebels they were being trained to finish off soldiers who survived
attacks.
"They trained us to ambush regime or enemy vehicles and cut off the
road, said the fighter, who is identified only as "Hussein." "They also
trained us on how to attack a vehicle, raid it, retrieve information or
weapons and munitions, and how to finish off soldiers still alive after
an ambush."
This is a blatant violation of the Geneva conventions. It also runs
contrary to conventional military strategy. In conventional military
strategy soldiers are better off left wounded, because this ends up
costing the enemy more resources. Executing captured enemy
soldiers is the kind of tactic used when you want to strike terror in the
hearts of the enemy. It also just happens to be standard operating
procedure for ISIS.
One month after this report, in June of 2014, ISIS made its dramatic
entry, crossing over the Syrian border into Iraq, capturing Mosul,
Baiji and almost reaching Baghdad. The internet was suddenly
flooded with footage of drive by shootings, large-scale death marches,
and mass graves. And of course any Iraqi soldier that was captured
was executed.
Massive quantities of American military equipment were seized
during that operation. ISIS took entire truckloads of humvees, they
took helicopters, tanks, and artillery. They photographed and video
taped themselves and advertised what they were doing on social
media, and yet for some reason Washington didn't even TRY to stop
them.
U.S. military doctrine clearly calls for the destruction of military
equipment and supplies when friendly forces cannot prevent them
from falling into enemy hands, but that didn't happen here. ISIS was
allowed to carry this equipment out of Iraq and into Syria unimpeded.
The U.S. military had the means to strike these convoys, but they
didn't lift a finger, even though they had been launching drone strikes
in Pakistan that same week.
Why would they do that?
Though Obama plays the role of a weak, indecisive, liberal president,
and while pundits from the right have had a lot of fun with that
image, this is just a facade. Some presidents, like George W. Bush,
rely primarily on overt military aggression. Obama gets the same job
done, but he prefers covert means. Not really surprising considering
the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski was his mentor.
Those who know their history will remember that Zbigniew
Brzezinski was directly involved in the funding and arming the
Islamic extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan in order to weaken
the Soviets.
By the way Osama bin Laden was one of these anti-Soviet "freedom
fighters" the U.S. was funding and arming.
This operation is no secret at this point, nor are the unintended side
effects.
Officially the U.S. government's arming and funding of the
Mujahideen was a response to the Soviet invasion in December of
1979, however in his memoir entitled "From the Shadows" Robert
Gates, director of the CIA under Ronald Reagan and George Bush
Senior, and Secretary of Defense under both George W. Bush and
Barack Obama, revealed that the U.S. actually began the covert
operation 6 months prior, with the express intention of luring the
Soviets into a quagmire. (You can preview the relevant text here on
google books)
The strategy worked. The Soviets invaded, and the ten years of war
that followed are considered by many historians as being one of the
primary causes of the fall of the USSR.
This example doesn't just establish precedent, what we're seeing
happen in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria right now is actually a
continuation of a old story. Al-Nusra and ISIS are ideological and
organizational decedents of these extremist elements that the U.S.
government made use of thirty years ago.
The U.S. the went on to create a breeding ground for these extremists
by invading Iraq in 2003. Had it not been for the vacuum of power
left by the removal and execution of Saddam, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, aka
ISIS, would not exist. And had it not been for Washington's attempt
at toppling Assad by arming, funding and training shadowy militant
groups in Syria, there is no way that ISIS would have been capable of
storming into Iraq in June of 2014.
On every level, no matter how you cut it, ISIS is a product of U.S.
government's twisted and decrepit foreign policy.
Now all of this may seem contradictory to you as you watch the drums
of war against ISIS begin to beat louder and the air strikes against
them are gradually widened
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/08/president-obama-considers-
possible-...). Why would the U.S. help a terrorist organization get
established, only to attack them later?
Well why did the CIA put Saddam Hussein in power in 1963?, Why
did the U.S. government back Saddam in 1980 when he launched a
war of aggression against Iran, even though they knew that he was
using chemical weapons? Why did the U.S. fund and arm Islamic
extremists in Afghanistan against the Soviets?
There's a pattern here if you look closely. This is a tried and true
geopolitical strategy.
Step 1: Build up a dictator or extremist group, which can then be used
to wage proxy wars against opponents. During this stage any crimes
committed by these proxies are swept under the rug. [Problem]
Step 2: When these nasty characters have outlived their usefulness,
that's when it's time to pull out all that dirt from under the rug and
start publicizing it 24/7. This obviously works best when the public
has no idea how these bad guys came to power. [Reaction]
Step 3: Finally, when the public practically begging for the
government to do something, a solution is proposed. Usually the
solution involves military intervention, the loss of certain liberties, or
both. [Solution]
ISIS is extremely useful. They have essentially done Washington dirty
work by weakening Assad. In 2014, while the news cycle has focused
almost exclusively on Ukraine and Russia, ISIS made major headway
in Syria, and as of August they already controlled 35% of the country.
Since ISIS largely based in Syria, this gives the U.S. a pretext to move
into Syria. Sooner or later the U.S. will extend the airstrikes into
Assad's backyard, and when they do U.S. officials are already making
it clear that both ISIS and the Syrian government will be targeted.
That, after all, is the whole point. Washington may allow ISIS to
capture a bit more territory first, but the writing is on the wall, and
has been for some time now.
The Obama administration has repeatedly insisted that this will never
lead to boots on the ground, however, the truth of the matter is that
anyone who understands anything about military tactics knows full
well that ISIS cannot be defeated by airstrikes alone. In response to
airstrikes ISIS will merely disperse and conceal their forces. ISIS isn't
an established state power, which can be destroyed by knocking out
key government buildings and infrastructure. These are guerrilla
fighters who cut their teeth in urban warfare.
To significantly weaken them, the war will have to involve ground
troops, but even this is a lost cause. U.S. troops could certainly route
ISIS in street-to-street battles for some time, and they might even
succeed in fully occupying Syria and Iraq for a number of years, but
eventually they will have to leave, and when they do, it should be
obvious what will come next.
The puppets that the U.S. government has installed in the various
countries that they have brought down in recent years have without
exception proven to be utterly incompetent and corrupt. No one that
Washington places in power will be capable of maintaining stability in
Syria. Period.
Right now, Assad is the last bastion of stability in the region. He is the
last chance they have for a moderate non-sectarian government and
he is the only hope of anything even remotely resembling democracy
for the foreseeable future. If Assad falls, Islamic extremist will take
the helm, they will impose shari'ah law, and they will do everything in
their power to continue spreading their ideology as far and wide as
they can.
If the world truly wants to stop ISIS, there is only one way to do it:
1. First and foremost, the U.S. government and its allies must be
heavily pressured to cut all support to the rebels who are attempting
to topple Assad. Even if these rebels that the U.S. is arming and
funding were moderate, and they're not, the fact that they are forcing
Assad to fight a war on multiple fronts, only strengthens ISIS. This is
lunacy.
2. The Syrian government should be provided with financial support,
equipment, training and intelligence to enable them to turn the tide
against ISIS. This is their territory; they should be the ones to reclaim
it.
Now obviously this support isn't going to come from the U.S. or any
NATO country, but there are a number of nations who have a
strategic interest in preventing another regime change and chaotic
aftermath. If these countries respond promptly, as in right now, they
could preempt a U.S. intervention, and as long this support does not
include the presence of foreign troops, doing so will greatly reduce the
likelihood of a major confrontation down the road.
3. The U.S. government and its allies should be aggressively
condemned for their failed regime change policies and the individuals
behind these decisions should be charged for war crimes. This would
have to be done on a nation-by-nation level since the U.N. has done
nothing but enable NATO aggression. While this may not
immediately result in these criminals being arrested, it would send a
message. This can be done. Malaysia has already proven this by
convicting the Bush administration of war crimes in abstentia.
Now you might be thinking: "This all sounds fine and good, but what
does this have to do with me? I can't influence this situation."
That perspective is quite common, and for most people, it's
paralyzing, but the truth of the matter is that we can influence this.
We've done it before, and we can do it again.
I'll be honest with you though, this isn't going to be easy. To succeed
we have to start thinking strategically. Like it or not, this is a chess
game. If we really want to rock the boat, we have to start reaching out
to people in positions of influence. This can mean talking to
broadcasters at your local radio station, newspaper, or TV. Station, or
it can mean contacting influential bloggers, celebrities, business
figures or government officials. Reaching out to current serving
military and young people who may be considering joining up is also
important. But even if it's just your neighbor, or your coworker, every
single person we can reach brings us closer to critical mass. The most
important step is to start trying.
THE BEST KEPT SECRETS OF THE DOLLAR -
http://youtu.be/1_uLwHFR2aA
At this point in history virtually every human on this planet is
enslaved whether they know it or not. This is not the crude and
primitive slavery of ancient times, it does not rely on whips and
shackles to keep the oppressed in their place. These tools have been
rendered obsolete by much more sophisticated methods.

That most of the enslaved are unaware of their condition and would
in fact argue fiercely that they are free is a testament to the
effectiveness of these invisible chains.

You've heard the expression "Money makes the world go round".
There's truth in that.

Money is the prime motive for human labor in modern civilization. If
you want food, shelter and clothing you must have money, and unless
you are part of the tiny minority who have more money than they
could ever spend in their lifetime, then you must work, beg or steal
for that money. That's why you get up in the morning to go to work
even if you hate your job, and that's why the specter of unemployment
is more terrifying for most people than the prospect of spending 50
years of their life performing menial tasks within the confines of a
florescent lit cubicle.

Of course in western countries some are fortunate enough to have
pulled away from the brink and do not live in fear that their basic
needs will be met, at least for now, yet they keep spinning the hamster
wheel. Why? Because money and the bling it buys have become
symbols of status and prestige. Money offers an illusory form of social
validation, but even those who are not caught up in distinguishing
themselves by how much they accumulate still must acknowledge the
social stigma that comes with poverty.

The combination of these primal motivators: the need for food,
shelter, clothing, and social validation, is a very powerful force. It's
enough to drive humans to engage in all forms of activity, even to the
point of harming themselves or others in the process. The
accumulation of money is therefore an accumulation of social and
psychological power, and those who control the creation of money
control this power at its source.

So who controls the creation of money? Well in the case of the U.S.
dollar, it's not the government. This shouldn't be an earth shattering
revelation. The fact that the Federal Reserve is a private institution
owned by a cartel of the world's most powerful banks is quickly
becoming common knowledge; even the mainstream media doesn't
deny it at this point.

However the full extent of what this means is only clear when you
understand how the banking system really works, and unfortunately
this is something we aren't taught in school. Once you have it
explained to you in simple terms you'll understand why.

Every dollar in circulation is loaned into existence by a bank. The
process begins with the Federal reserve when they loan out money to
the U.S. government and to other entities. You've probably heard this
talked about before, especially in regards to the interest rate on these
loans which the Federal Reserve raises and lowers depending on
economic conditions, but what is never talked about in the
mainstream is the fact that the Fed isn't actually loaning out money
that they have, they are merely typing those dollars into existence on
a computer. You may be inclined to believe that this money is based
on some physical backing like gold, but you would be mistaken. The
Federal Reserve hasn't owned any gold since the 1930s.

When the Federal Reserve loans money to the U.S. government, the
U.S. government gives the Federal Reserve government bonds in
exchange. These bonds are simply written promises to pay back the
money that was loaned to them with interest through taxation. So to
be clear here, the government is taking out a loan from a bank that is
creating the money out of thin air, and they're expecting you the tax
payer to cover that loan. The absurdity of this arrangement is even
more obvious when you realize that up until 1913 the U.S.
government created its own money, and had no need for a bank to
play the part of a middle man.

That new money loaned out by the Federal Reserve enters circulation
through banks, accumulates in banks, and in the end the banks end
up holding all of the cards, but not necessarily for the reasons you
may imagine. Contrary to popular belief the majority of money in
circulation isn't actually created by the Federal Reserve, but rather by
the ordinary banks that businesses and individuals use for their
checking, savings, and mortgages. How is this possible? Well, like the
Federal Reserve, ordinary banks are allowed to loan out money they
don't have. There are of course restrictions. Banks are only allowed to
loan 10 times the amount that they actually have. So if Wells Fargo
has 1000 dollars they can loan you 10,000 dollars, and they expect
you to pay back that 10,000 dollars plus interest. This is called
fractional reserve banking; 75% of all money in circulation is created
in this manner.

Now as bad as this may seem it's really only the tip of the iceberg.
Most banks structure payment plans so that for many years you are
paying almost nothing but interest and only start paying down the
principle gradually. The result of this strategy is that in most cases
you pay far more in interest when you purchase a house than the
house itself is worth.

So here's the real question: If all money is created through loans,
where does the money come from for to pay for the interest? Let's say
we reset the system to zero, loan 1000 dollars into existence and
charge 7% interest. We now have 1000 dollars in the system but we
owe 1000 dollars plus interest and that's more.

The money to pay the interest doesn't exist, never has, never will. This
would be obvious if there were only one loan being issued to one
person in this manner, but when performed on a global scale the
reality is hidden, and is transformed into a game of musical chairs
where the person ending up without a seat faces bankruptcy and
financial ruin. The interest insures that there is always more debt
than money in circulation.

Because every dollar in existence is tied to a debt this creates an
unseen force that draws those dollars back to the banks, like gravity
attracts a physical object to earth. The catch here is that it is the work
of the people that moves that money.

Every hour that you work to pay back a loan or to keep the
government from throwing you in jail over income taxes is an hour
worked for the banks. The total receipts from personal income taxes
just barely covers the interest on the national debt, and even the
principle on that debt all ends up back in the hands of the banks.
Once you understand that the money that the banks loans out isn't
actually an asset, but is in fact a piece of legal fiction it should be clear
that you are working for these banks for free. This is a cleverly
disguised form of slavery.

If you manage to maintain your monthly payments then you are a
successful slave, and you are allowed to keep the material comforts
that come with that status, but if for some reason you fail to make
your monthly payments then the bank or the IRS comes takes your
house, your car and anything else you have of value. If somehow even
with this enormous financial advantage the banks still manage to get
themselves into trouble you the taxpayer will be forced to bail them
out. No matter what the banks win. To say the game is rigged is an
understatement.

You might be inclined to think that if you live outside the United
States and don't use dollars then this situation has no bearing on your
life, but you would be wrong. The dollar is both the world reserve
currency and the only currency in which oil is sold on the global
markets (this is often referred to as the petrodollar status). This
means that where ever you live, whether your country is an oil
exporter or an oil importer you are affected.

If your country is an oil importer you are effected by the fact that in
order to keep your country running you have to acquire dollars. To
acquire those dollars you have to send goods and services to the
United States or to someone else who did. You too are a slave to the
bankers.

Likewise if your country is an oil exporter you are affected by the fact
that you send your oil to the U.S. in exchange for this debt based
money. You are exchanging something of real and tangible value for
digits on a screen. If for some reason the leadership of your country
grows tired of this arrangement and tries to pull off of the dollar you'll
quickly find the United States military at your doorstep ready to open
up a can of democracy on you. Iraq learned this the hard way when
they switched their oil sales to Euros in 2000 and Libya when they
tried to organize a gold based currency for Africa.

Debt based money is a masterpiece of social engineering, the ultimate
tool of the ruling elite, and yet in reality the whole thing is nothing
more than a construct of belief.

Our chains are chains of the mind, and the path to freedom must also
begin in the mind. If we want a better future for our children and
grandchildren we must work right now to reach a critical mass of
awakening.

THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND FRACTIONAL
RESERVE BANKING

What is the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve is a privately owned banking institution
that was created on December 23, 1913, when President Woodrow
Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law. Yes, as previously
stated, the Fed is in fact privately owned. It is not a part of the U.S.
Government. Why am I stressing this point? Because this is very
important to understand, it is very important to acknowledge the
implications of a privately owned central bank controlling the
creation of money in our economy. This essay will try to explain how
it works in simple terms, because I (and many others) see it as a
problem we are currently facing the United States.

How does Fractional Reserve Banking work?

This is a bit difficult to explain. So, refer to the diagram. Say you
take $1000 out of a bank. You then spend this money. The seller now
has the $1000, which he puts into his personal banking account. Is
that the end of this? Unfortunately, no. Its a little more complex that
that. So, what really happens? Well, the bank actually doubles the
$1000. Putting $900 of the newly created money into loanable
money. The other $100 goes into a reserve. So the bank essentially
created $900 out of thin air. They can then loan out this $900 to
more people and the cycle continues. Money can be created out of
nothing. Now imagine if it werent just $1000, what if it were $10000
or $50000 and so on. Imagine the massive amounts of debt and
inflation this creates.










How does the Federal Reserve create money in the first
place?

This is a seemingly simple question, but do many people
actually question the creation of money? Not usually. So how does it
work? Well, the government doesnt create it, the Fed does. Since the
government doesnt create the money, it must be borrowed from the
Fed at an interest rate. So, what the government does is create
Promissory Notes. These notes are basically a promise that the U.S.
government will pay the Fed back all that it borrows, plus interest. So,
why is this frightening? Well, Ill ask you this question, where is the
money that will pay off the interest? It doesnt exist. It never will.
There will always be more debt than there is currency in circulation.
How? Where are you going to get the money to pay it off? Are you
going to get it from the Fed? Well, the money used to pay off the
interest, has interest.

Money is created out of debt.

Debt = Money Money = Debt








If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldnt be any
money.
- Marriner Eccles, Governor of the Federal Reserve
September 30, 1941








FAQS ABOUT ANARCHY BY STATISTS

Q: Who will build/repair the roads?

A: People will. Cities will still exist, and the city will work
together to do what is needed to maintain it. Private
funding.

Q: What will stop people from killing each other?

A: This could be answered in two ways, a moral answer, or
the law answer.

1. If the only thing stopping you from killing someone
is a law and fear of consequence you need to re-
think your morals.
2. If the law and fear of consequence stop people from
killing each other, then why do people ignore them
and kill? A law won't stop people from killing each
other. Its unfortunate but it will always happen.
Also people would follow the Non-Aggression
Principle (NAP).

Q: But anarchy is disorder and chaos!

A: Wrong. Anarchy has two meanings. First is disorder,
second is a political theory that simply means without
rulers. In the second definition, there are two sub-
definitions. This is a matter of debate, particularly from
left-anarchists. The word anarchism has two main
definitions in a political context:

1. Opposition to the state and involuntary rule;
statelessness

2. Opposition to all hierarchy in the conduct of human
relationships

These two definitions are incompatible, hence the debate.
The anarcho- in anarcho-capitalism refers to the first
definition, whereas most forms of left-anarchism use the
second. Some prefer to use other terms to avoid this
confusion, including voluntaryism, autarchy, and
stateless capitalism.

Q: Who will stop other countries from invading?

A: First of all, anarchy applies to world anarchy. For a
scenario well say a few countries turned anarchist. In this
case, it is subjective to what type of anarchy you're
arguing against. In an Anarcho-Capitalist society, there
would be privately funded militias and armies. In broader
terms, the people would be in charge of the defense.

Q: Who will regulate pollution, our food, money, etc.?

A: The government already does a poor job of doing this,
and in an Ancap society, you could sue. Since basically
everything is private property, if someone caused
pollution and it got in your property, you could sue.

Q: Who will stop another government from forming?

A: A group of people with guns
















HOW TO BEAT AN ANTI-GUN ADVOCATE IN A
DEBATE

We need more gun laws, because crime in the U.S. is too
high.













Well the U.K. has strict gun
control, and they have low
crime rate.











America has a mass
shooting problem; we need
better background checks.




Okay, but you dont need a high powered assault weapon
with high capacity
magazine clips.













Well, citizens weren't even meant to have guns. The 2
nd

Amendment says a well regulated militia





















Why aren't guns illegal in America?

Because the police kill people on a regular basis.

Because guns are overwhelmingly used more for self-
defense than for homicide.

Because guns are necessary to survival in certain parts of
the country.

Because being able to defend yourself is a human right.

And most of all:

Because Americans have spines and won't give them up
like the weak masses of other countries.













I dont care what race, religion, or culture you are,
if you are living in America, you respect that flag. It
is what represents the freedom that allows you to
practice whatever religion you want, say what you
want, etc. Respect it or get out.

Freedom to be arrested without proof.

Freedom to not be able to use your own property how you want.

Freedom to be forced to pay your taxes and let politicians spend it on
funding on arming drug cartels and ISIS.

Freedom to have militarized police show up and disrupt peaceful
protests and no-knock raids.

The freedom to have libtards and neocons ban everything they dont
like.

The freedom to be fined and have your farm destroyed if your plants
cross breed with Monsanto, a process I have no control over.

The freedom to have NSA spying on you.

The freedom to have other countries bombed and be forced to support
it or get called a hippie.

The freedom to be forced to pay for Israels murder of Palestinians
and theft of their land.

The freedom to be arrested if I start a simple business without
bureaucratic intervention.

The freedom to have a fake currency backed by oil.

The freedom to be called unappreciative when I speak out even
though I also care for those who have less because of the government.

The freedom to be arrested if I expose U.S. government war crimes.

The freedom to be brainwashed by government education/biased
media.

Stop kidding yourself, neocons and libtards. Your flag no longer
represents freedom. Time to use the last rights you have its too late.