Alex Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh at the time of America's birth, wrote a warning to America in 1787. He observed that the average age of the world's greatest civilizations was about 200 years, during which they inevitably progressed through the following sequence:
Century one:
from bondage to faith,
from faith to courage,
from courage to liberty,
from liberty to abundance,
Century two:
from abundance to complacency,
from complacency to apathy,
from apathy to dependence,
from dependence back to bondage.
In 1776 the declaration of Independence was signed. Here we are coming up on our 233rd year as a country. Articles are popping up around us like one I recently ran across called "
TARP, The Criminal Enterprise".
Then there's a radio interview I mentioned previously in my blog, describing what's happening between the government and the bankers. Describing it as a "Fraud of unparalleled magnitude." (
click here to listen).
This got me thinking about the conspiracy theorists out there that speak of a "New world order" and that say that the bankers are playing the world to their own benefit as if it was a chess game. They even claim that the federal reserve banking system which the world has been convinced is a necessary and helpful part of our government, is actually a privately owned business, made to look and sound like it's a government institution.
This got me wondering, who exactly are these people who would make such, seemingly, ridiculous accusations.
So I did a little looking around and found some names that, I must say, surprised me.
President Woodrow Wilson (After signing the Federal banking system into law in 1913): "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world 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.
President James A. Garfield: "Whoever controls the money in any country is absolute master of industry [legislation] and commerce".
President Thomas Jefferson: "I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution - taking from the Federal government their power of borrowing." he also said "I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies."
President Lincoln: “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.”
President Andrew Jackson: "The Bank is trying to kill me - but I will kill it!" Later he said "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning..." Also .. "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."
So here we have five presidents of the United States warning about the dangers of having the money supply of a nation LOANED to the government and its people by central banks, who charge interest on every penny in circulation.
Here is a
short 8 minute video for more clarity on the central banks relationship to our country.
OK. So it sounds like the conspiracy theorists have a few good names on their petition, so to speak. But then they take things a step further and try to make us believe that The Federal Reserve System (and its counterparts around the world) are driven by more than simple greed. They would have us believe that money is not enough, but world domination, in the guise of a new world order is their true intent. Sounds a bit coo-coo-for-coco-puffs to me. I've always considered myself too savvy and balanced for extremist mentality. I'm the guy who can see a scam a mile away. I've always found the truth somewhere between the pendulum swings. I sold my condo at the top of the housing bubble because I could feel the bubble in my gut.
I think about this gut feeling. I think about Obama, and how much everyone loves him. He always has the right thing to say. His sleeves are rolled up. He's having a beer at the game. He's picking his favorite sports teams. He's making everyone comfortable. He's making everyone smile and excited. He's a perfect, calming, influence amidst an underlying upheaval of society.
Incredible amounts of money are moving to the wealthiest of people, while the working class are being sucked dry to the bone, as unemployment continues its spread across the nation.
Then I catch myself "But wait a minute, why would the fed loan all this money to the banks via government bailouts?" If they were a greedy institution they would keep the money for themselves and say screw the banks. At the same moment that I believe my sanity to be returning, rumblings arise once again from realities around me. Rumblings that some of these bank owners are also owners of the federal reserve bank.
Then a light bulb goes off in my head. They say they are trying to save the banks, yet delayed stress tests have begun to leak into the public consciousness that most of these banks are actually insolvent. I ask myself why would I believe these leaks to be true? Answer: Because if good news was coming, the government would not delay it. They're buying time for a reason.
So maybe this "saving the banks" is just a front. Everyone knows the banks are going to fall. All this is really about is getting the cash into the executives pockets. They don't really care if the businesses fall. Once they have all that cold hard cash stashed away. The banks can fall around them. Big deal!
Yet when the banks do fall, how are We The People affected? do we not have to pay our debt to them anymore? We'll just go bankrupt, right? So we'll be fine. OK, so we go bankrupt. But does that really take the weight of all that debt off our shoulders? Or does it just transfer the debt from personal to national debt. The former, we can go bankrupt to save ourselves, the latter, well, good luck not paying your taxes. I mean, I don't recall signing the loan app, but apparently I'm responsible for the billions I borrowed to give to the billionaires. But it's all good, super Obam's got my back!
Forgive me. I've digressed. So "New World Order?" Let's take a look at some other statements made in our history's past to see if there may be any validity to this concept.
Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild international banking dynasty 1790: "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes the laws"
Abraham Lincoln: "Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
President Woodrow Wilson: "If monopoly persists, monopoly will always sit at the helm of government. I do not expect monopoly to restrain itself. If there are men in this country big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it."
Congressman Louis T. McFadden, 1934: "The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International Bankers."
Senator John Danforth: "I have never seen more Senators express discontent with their jobs ... I think the major cause is that, deep down in our hearts, we have been accomplices in doing something terrible and unforgivable to our wonderful country. Deep down in our heart, we know that we have given our children a legacy of bankruptcy. We have defrauded our country to get ourselves elected."
James Paul Warburg before the Senate on Feb. 7, 1950: "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."
David Rockefeller 1994: "This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order"
Interesting to note here "All we need is the right major crisis." Why do you imagine they need a major crisis to get people to march toward a new world order. Could it be that crisis has been the best way in history to create fear in the citizens of a country. And that when a major crisis occurs, the citizens are more than willing to give up their freedoms for the sake of safety.
Also interesting to note that we talk about fighting terrorism. Wikipedia describes terrorism as "an act which is intended to create fear (terror), and is perpetrated for an ideological goal." If the ideological goal is to create this new world order, and a "major crisis" is a necessary ingredient to this goal. Would it be so far fetched to say that those intent on bringing forth the goal, are in support of the one ingredient that is necessary to bring it about? Does this not invite and support an act of terrorism? Just asking. Let's read further.
David Rockefeller to a Trilateral Commission June of 1991: "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 the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries"
Woh! That last one was both, the most recent, and spooky. So Mr. David Rockefeller what you are saying is you have been discussing behind closed doors, for about 40 years now, and in secrecy, your intention to create a new world order?
I like the statement "But, the world is now more sophisticated" That's very complimentary. But I really have to wonder if that is what David Rockefeller really means. Two things come to mind.
In Century one of our nations existence a central banking system snaked its way into our nation twice, which lasted about 20 years each time before being pushed out by the intelligence, wisdom, and courage of its people. But in the second century of our country, we have not had such luck, the third bank (The Federal Reserve) has lasted much longer, about one hundred years now.
I think about that, then I think about Tylers 200 year sequences that I listed at the beginning of this article. Of the eight sequences within a country's existence, the first one hundred years is marked by a people with faith, courage, liberty, ending with abundance. It was within this framework that the central banking system was subdued, not once but twice.
Tylers next four sequences (or second century sequence) denote a laxadasical tone, complacency, apathy, dependence, ending in bondage. Bringing to mind philosopher George Santayana's "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It seems to be the natural progression of a nation to forget that which made them great, and to trust the powers that be to make everything better.
Do you really believe that we are "more sophisticated" Mr. Rockefeller? Or does the very next sentence in your statement show what you really think? "The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries." So if you paint yourself as capable of running this planet do to your intellectual superiority, does that not clearly infer that it is not my growing "sophistication" that causes me to fall in line with your plans? For if I was "more sophisticated" than in times past, would that not put me on a more equal plain with you? Clearly in your statement you don't think of me as equal. Even less than that, you find me incapable planning my own way in life. You appear to see me as the mouse running around the maze in the cage, looking for the cheese. While yourself, the god above, musing at my antics.
When power becomes unchecked, it tends to become corrupt. And how interesting to note that the conspiracy theories, as well as the plans of the elite, end in a new world order, while Tylers model ends with "bondage".
The question now is, where are we in the Tyler cycle?
It's really our choice. We can sit still in the seat of complacency, and allow bondage to bind us completely. Or we can say "this bondage will continue no more!"
Let yesterday be the bondage.
Let today be beginning of courage, that tommorrow will be the liberty it once was. Let every man have the power to determine his own way in life, and to discover and follow his passions.
Let today be the day of faith and courage, of standing up, broad shouldered, square jawed, eyes piercing through BS and manipulations. Let those who THINK they have conquered, see the masses stop in their tracks, stand tall, and turn the tides of this current corruption.
Abolish the Federal Reserve.
