Redress for Pedophilia

(Copyright notice: to lawfully reproduce all or part of this article, the following attribution must be included: “Natural-law copyright by Anthony Hargis,”

Follow: To follow this website (to receive e-mail with each new post), click “Follow” at bottom/right of page.  Thanks for visiting, Anthony

Happiness is the final end; while we may choose honor, reason and every other virtue for itself, they invariably lead to happiness – and are the only means to happiness.

See Aristotle, N. E., I, 7, 1097a, 34.

Come away, O human child! / To the waters and the wild / With a faery, hand in hand, / For the world’s more full of weeping than ye can understand.

Stolen Child, William Butler Yeats,

Performed by Loreena McKennitt

It was Aristotle who first described the proper end for man: his own happiness.  He also explained how best to achieve it: to discover facts of reality, and how best to use them.  That is, how to properly use those facts of reality for the benefit of man – both the individual and his society.  A man knows he has lived properly when he becomes more useful, more competent and more knowledgeable with each passing year – and to do so with the attitude and innocence of a child.

If we accept this as the proper end of man, we have to look at his story, from the first opening page of his chronicles, and wonder how badly he has strayed from the promise that should have accompanied his birth; for, a large majority of children fall victim to the crime that ranges from an inappropriate hand on a young thigh to kidnapping and torture, mutilation and murder.

What makes the grievance so heinous is that it makes impossible the fulfillment of that promise that makes life worth living.

My task here is not to give examples of it; but to show how to put an end to it, according to historically-proven law and procedures.

Pederasty is a pervasive practice both in geographical breadth and thru time: archeologists have found evidence of it dating back at least 5,000 years on every continent of the globe.  Originally it appears to have been the privilege of kings and priests, feudal lords and tax takers.

As man became civilized and less tolerant of the practice, it did not cease – it only went underground and became an effective control mechanism for merchants and bankers to manipulate kings and priests, feudal lords and tax takers.  Early priests invented a god and made it offer pederasty as a privilege to those who obeyed its (the god’s) commandments.  We find this early declaration at Exodus, xx, 5-6 where “the iniquity of the fathers [is visited] upon the children to the third and fourth generation.”  This was before the invention of central banking, which provides for visiting iniquities of men upon following generations to the end of time.  It is so pervasive that now, there is probably not a country in the world that is not ruled by pederasts.

Indeed, it is the engine of collectivism – by whatever name it is given… feudalism, socialism, communism, nationalism…  It is the nature of collectivism that it produces boat-loads and boat-loads of orphans and widows; which makes it easier for pederasts to staff their child harems.

It is even acknowledged by the United States government, which rules a feudalist nation if ever there was a thousand.  It acknowledged indirectly, of course.  In a rather famous show trial that “justified” the Social Security Act, the Supreme Court and US Justice Department both agreed: loss of employment leads to the “breakdown of family,” adversely affects “health” and increases “crime and vagrancy”; that “Disaster to the breadwinner is disaster to his wife and children… [and subtracts from] the general welfare.”  Here, you may replace “Disaster to” with “Taxes imposed on”, and you’ll see the real meaning.

They justified the SS Act on the basis that it gave money to unemployed people.  That is, if the government gives money to the unemployed, it “will meet” or counteract the breakdown of family, improve health and reduce crime and vagrancy.

But no one seems to have understood what was said here.  Before money can be given to one man, it must be taken from others: if giving money to a man adds to his general welfare, it is equally true that taking money from a man subtracts from his general welfare; it leads to the breakdown of his family, to their ill health, and drives him to crime or vagrancy.

What is it that justifies the taking of money from one man and giving it to another?  The answer is simple: the one is employed, which prevents a child from the status of orphan; the other man is not employed which adds to the role of orphans.  The one must be punished for frustrating the aim of collectivism, the other, rewarded.

This punishment of labor and reward of indolence never happens on a one to one ratio – there are too many sticky hands between the taking and the giving of taxes.  Just as the tourist is duly awed and fascinated by the splendor of the castles of Europe but never sees the ten thousand peasants who had to be ruined, plundered and murdered to make such castles possible, so, collectivists will sanctimoniously tell you of the one man who is saved from unemployment, but never tell you about the fifty other men who had to be ruined, plundered or murdered on the way to an indolent’s paradise.

Pederasty appears in several forms in today’s world – apart from the frequent, senseless and pervasive beatings suffered by children at the hands of their care givers.

First: there is the financial cannibalism of following generations of Americans scheduled to occur any year now.  Its evidence and measure is governmental debt, at all levels.  There is currently enough such debt to cannibalize following generations of Americans to the end of time, literally; and people from a former comptroller of the United States to several professional economists and financial advisers recognize the magnitude.  It is mandated by Congress thru authorizations of such debt and the creation of the Federal Reserve, which facilitates the pending catastrophe by monetizing such debt.  This monetization does not eliminate the debt; it only delays the laying of taxes on our children and grandchildren needed to redeem the debt.  Despite the facts that this debt cannot be collected for several practical and constitutional reasons, the Federal Reserve, in recent years, has monetized staggering and unprecedented amounts of government debt, which guarantees a financial catastrophe of equal proportions – on a world-wide scale.

Second: then there is the problem of ordinary child neglect and abandonment – both by indolence and by government mandate (it is a lesson of history that taxes and regulations fall most heavily on the weakest members of society, which includes children and yet-to-be born).  About twenty years ago, I attended a piano recital by my daughter.  After the recital, the husband of the teacher told me that he just retired from the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office.  He had worked in the child support section; he reported that, when he left the office, there were 600, 000 open cases pertaining to child support.  A few weeks later, I called the Orange County DA’s office to ask equivalent numbers for their office: 105,000 open cases.  I estimated that such numbers represented one in three child-rearing families in LA County and one in six for Orange County.  Each one of these open cases represented a family in crisis; at least one child for each family that will go without proper nurturing, without normal companionship with parents, with a faulty compass to steer it thru the vicissitudes and obstacles of life.  I began to wonder, ‘What proportion of families in crisis would constitute a catastrophe relative to the continuation of the society in question?’  ‘Would a failure rate of one in twenty guarantee the failure of that society?’

I do not know the rate that would guarantee such failure – but I do know that ‘one in six’ is well beyond that rate.

Orange County is relatively affluent; LA County is a hodgepodge of immigrants – complete with their diseases and pests, apathy and collectivist indoctrination … probably extremes that embrace every county in the nation…  From these numbers, I estimate that there are some 20,000,000 open cases nationwide pertaining to child support.  These numbers and the booked government debt herald the approach of a dark age from which America – and the world – will never rise.

Third: and then there is the kind of child destruction known as pederasty.

Several years ago I was requested to serve as a trustee for a legal defense fund for a husband and wife (Kevin and Patricia) who were sheltering a mother (Donna Washburn) with four children (ages 3 thru 9) from a molesting father.  During this ordeal, we learned that a ring of pedophiles had infiltrated and controlled the FBI, the IRS, federal and state courts in Southeast United States, and many law enforcement and child services agencies in the same area.

The mother had discovered her children were routinely molested by the father, uncles, grandfather and numerous non-family members.  She took her complaint to the police; initially, the children freely gave testimony; then, a particular policeman walked into the interrogation room and the children wouldn’t say another word.  Kevin learned later why the children fell silent.  They were forced to participate in the murder of various infants and told that, if they told anyone about what was done to them, they (the children) would suffer the same fate.  Molesters would obtain infants for this ritual murder from local government child services agencies.  Members of a child molesting ring, who were employed by a child services agency, would be on the lookout for infants who had no known relatives; the infant, and related records, would then disappear; and by a bloody ritual assure silence of the children – and a degree of relative protection for pederasts.

Despite the refusal of the children to testify, the mother persisted: she took her children to several professionals who specialized in child care (doctor, lawyer, child psychiatrist).  When the case got to court, all these professionals declared that something serious had happened to those children.  The judge, accordingly, ruled the children should be returned to the father.

The mother, instead of complying with a court order, decided to make a run for it, ending up in the care of Kevin and Patricia.  There, the mother and four children lived for nearly a year in a benevolent surrounding they had never known. (the year 1989, plus or minus a year).

But it was not to last.

One Saturday morning at 7 am, Kevin and Patricia were awakened by a sheriff’s deputy and FBI agent.  They had gained entry by smashing down the kitchen door.  They were part of a 40-man SWAT team (about 30 local law, 10 FBI), along with a helicopter gun ship and FBI armed with assault rifles.  At first, Kevin wasn’t sure of their identity; he picked up a gun, rolled out of bed, pointed the gun at the floor, and demanded production of a search warrant.

The sheriff pulled his gun and pointed it at Kevin, beginning a two or three minute Mexican duel: ‘put the gun down’, ‘let me see a search warrant’ (single quotation marks because I can’t guarantee exact words).

Finally, the sheriff tossed a paper on the bed, Patricia read it and said it looked valid.  Kevin laid his gun on the floor, and began to walk with the deputy and FBI agent into his living room.

At this point, Kevin heard screams of the children as they and their mother were wrestled into custody.  During this wrestling match, the FBI contingent went to shooting posture pointing their assault rifles at the mother and children.  Their supervisor leapt between his agents and mother and frantically waved his arms to stop this budding massacre.  Fortunately – or, maybe, unfortunately – his agents lowered their rifles.  Unfortunately, because, once children have been molested so horribly, it would have been better had they never been born… and a massacre would have saved them a lifetime of torment.

Because of the children’s screams, Kevin felt that he was losing control.  He told the deputy, “You had better cuff me, I’ve got other guns in the house.”

The deputy responded, ‘Now, now, it’s not that bad, it’ll be over in a few minutes.’  And, with his hand on Kevin’s shoulder, said, ‘Let’s go into the kitchen and have a cup of coffee.’

Kevin began to follow the deputy; but violent thots ran thru his head, ‘I can’t sit down and share time with these Nazis.’  He leaned his forehead against the door frame and said, “It’s not working.  You’d better cuff me.”

The sheriff’s deputy declined.

The FBI agent said, ‘I’ll cuff you’, and did so.

When arrest of the mother and children was completed, the sheriff’s deputy started to remove Kevin’s cuffs.

The FBI agent said, ‘Oh no you don’t’, to the deputy.  To Kevin, he said, ‘You’re under arrest for insulting a federal officer.’  A few minutes earlier, Kevin had remarked that he saw little difference between Nazi storm-troopers and what was happening on his property.

At Kevin’s arraignment, the judge initially decided to release Kevin on his own recognizance.  At this point, the court clerk accused Kevin of whispering under his breath, “son of a bitch” while the FBI agent was spinning lies on the witness stand.  Kevin denies he made the remark.  No matter, the judge then proclaimed jail for insulting a federal officer, to go along with a bail of $450,000; a very convenient amount, since it corresponded to the net value of Kevin’s sixty-nine acre “ranch”.  It also indicates the judge had knowledge of Kevin’s property.

Kevin later met a man in jail, accused of murder, whose bail was set at $15,000.  There seems to be something odd here… something about priorities…

Considering what we learned later – that is, evidence of the near total infiltration and control of local, state and federal agencies by a ring(s) of pedophiles – I suspect the court clerk was a member of one of such rings.  When he, or she, saw Kevin about to go free with hardly a slap on the wrist, he, or she, falsely accused Kevin of insulting the FBI agent, knowing it would prompt the judge to a more punishing attitude.

After release from jail, Kevin decided it would be wise to make sure his tax filings were in order and instructed his accountant accordingly.

Six weeks later, about mid-October, 1989, Kevin’s tax filings were brought current.

But the IRS had other ideas: about mid-November the same year, the IRS levied a jeopardy assessment against Kevin and Patricia in the amount of $450,000, another very convenient number.

With a normal assessment, a taxpayer has 90 days to contest it in tax court, the assessment having no force in the meantime, nor while tax court litigation is under way.  With a jeopardy assessment, the 90-days feature is bypassed and the IRS can lien or seize at any time.  Such assessments are usually “justified” by a threat to flee the country.  In a search of Kevin’s house, the FBI found an Argentine banknote with a value equal to a first-class postage stamp.  This was used to prove that Kevin was a threat to flee the country.

A few days later, the IRS delivered to the local media information regarding this levy.  This produced headline news a day or two later.  Kevin’s trial regarding his arrest was scheduled a week later (early December).  He suggests the IRS was trying to “poison” the jury pool with the headlines.

At Kevin’s trial, the jury initially appeared to be favoring the government’s side; but when real details of the arrest scene were presented, the jury’s attitude became almost open hostility toward the government.  The jury subsequently acquitted Kevin of all charges.  After the trial newspapers quoted the FBI agent in question, “I guess the jury doesn’t care about law and order.”

Three months later, the IRS spontaneously cut the assessment against Kevin in half.  This sort of verifies Kevin’s claim that the IRS attempted to poison the jury pool with an unlawful amount and jeopardy assessment.

Sometime after Kevin’s trial, he went to the FBI with his story about the mother and four children to learn if the agency could do anything about the situation.  Kevin reported that the FBI agent that interviewed Kevin was very “nervous” the whole time, mainly because he kept squirming in his chair the whole interview.  Needless to say, the FBI declined to do anything.

Kevin also interviewed a local lawyer about some kind of legal effort to rescue the children.  The lawyer seemed sympathetic and offered his services; but he also told Kevin that Kevin’s money would be wasted because the local (Georgia and South Carolina) legal system was infested with pedophiles, and they wouldn’t let Kevin’s lawsuit produce any positive results.

A few months after I began serving as Kevin’s trustee for a West Coast legal defense fund, I received a visit from two well-dressed men; they introduced themselves as doctors, and that they were interested in Kevin’s case.  In particular, they wanted to know if I would notify them if I learned about any pedophiles on the West Coast.  They explained that they would pay the person a visit and that the person in question would find his penis attached to his forehead the next morning.  I reflected on this a moment and replied that I could easily work with such projects.

Unfortunately, I had neither the time nor the needed knowledge to properly work such situations.  Now I have the knowledge but not the time.  The former consists of knowledge of the power of First-Amendment assemblies; to cure the problem of time, I need several persons to come forward: some with money, some with labor and all with a sense of justice.  The location where this work would be done is immaterial.  As noted, the problem blankets the country.  I suggest that people redress this grievance on a local level: you initially want to turn your own neighborhood right side up; then, gradually turn your attention to a wider field.

Of the three kinds of child destruction, I suggest a focus on the third – and leave the other two for another day.  Regarding the first (financial cannibalism): the whole nation has grown addicted to the benefits of cannibalizing their children, and hardly one in a thousand (it seems) has the strength or ethics to forego free handouts and privileges dispensed by American governments. As to the second (child abandonment): too many people (between ‘one-in-three’ and ‘one in six’) are guilty of this neglect and would rather run for the door than take responsibility for what they have done.

But the third form of child destruction should offer a much better chance of success; for, probably no other grievance generates more outrage and willing activists – if only someone would offer a redress that promises reasonable results.

And, what better redress could be offered than one that is historically proven… and was last used by American Founders?

What could we do with this combination of grievance, knowledge and sense of justice?

First, we notice that a properly established assembly is the means by which men exercise sovereignty; the American Revolution was powered by a large network of town, county, state and federal assemblies.

Second, we acknowledge that American and world governments are dominated by pedophiles; as I learned with my experience with Kevin and from the story told by David McGowan (see below), pedophiles dominate governments from Europe to America, at least.

Third, we notice that no issue garners more outrage than pedophilia.  In the 1990’s, Belgian police began to find bodies of dead children that had been buried in backyards and basements, and that they had been tortured and horribly murdered.  Such discoveries triggered Belgian courts and prosecutorial organs to go into high gear to protect those accused of such crimes.  This enraged the populace so much that:

On October 20, [1998?] 350,000 citizens of the tiny nation took to the streets of Brussels dressed all in white, demanding the reform of a system so corrupt that it would protect the abusers, rapists, torturers, and killers of children. The political fallout from the case would ultimately bring about the resignation of Belgium’s State Police Chief, Interior Minister, and Justice Minister – likely sacrificial lambs tossed to the outraged masses to avoid what could easily have exploded into a full-scale insurrection by the people, particularly after police ‘incompetence’ allowed Dutroux [one of the accused] to escape and remain at large for a brief time in April of 1998. (From Part 1 of David McKowan’s article Pedophocracy [Brackets added].)

Fourth, we have to accept the fact that nothing will be done about this rule by pedophiles as long as we depend on pedophiles to investigate, prosecute or judge themselves.  We have to take matters into our own hands, as American Founders did.

The first step toward this end is for several men to form an assembly for their area.  It will be several months before each assembly can engage in the activity of sovereignty in general, redress in particular.  Before this can be done, members have to learn each others’ minds, skills, and resources; setup internal security measures (to guard against saboteurs); and learn the history, law and procedures of redress.  As I’ve noted elsewhere, the work of redress is the World Series of human activity.  It makes the difference between civilized society and barbarism.  We do not send a person with Little League skills and experience to pinch-hit for Babe Ruth.  This work will not be easy nor quick; but it will be an adventure like no other.

When a properly-established assembly decides to take up the grievance of pedophilia, it will have to a) collect evidence (this will necessitate providing protection for everyone involved in this redress); b) provide incentive for witnesses to come forward; c) conduct trials according to due process; d) locate and lien/seize property of those properly convicted; e) raise money to finance its operations until the assembly collects plunder taken by pedophiles; f) establish trading networks for friends and boycotts for enemies; g) form alliances with other people and organizations active in opposing child molestation. [All these are explained at some length in The Lost Right.

Collection of evidence: there are a lot of people who have very solid evidence but who are reluctant to disclose it because of the real threat of reprisal by perpetrators.  Government employees have access to such evidence but are fearful to come forward for fear of loss of job or pension.  If we are to gain their cooperation, we have to compensate them for their losses.  The aim of what I suggest is not to arrest or hang those convicted of pedophilia.  The former is really no punishment at all; it is, instead a punishment against taxpayers who are charged $30,000 to $50,000 per year to lodge, feed and entertain felons in relative country clubs surrounded, sometimes, with fences.  The latter puts them out of their misery too quickly.  Instead of jail or death, I recommend seizure of all their booty – no matter where in the world they, or their booty, are found.  From this collection of plunder, restitution will be paid to victims and compensation paid to those who make it happen.  In this, as in all other matters, assemblies will follow my suggestions completely, partly or none of it.

Incentives: if assemblies aim to seize the booty collected by pedophiles (there might be, for example, a dozen or so congressmen and a few hundred bureaucrats who are not pedophiles and who have not squirreled away millions in foreign bank accounts), it would be entirely proper to offer finders’ fees to those who provide useful information.  Records sitting in government offices would probably be sufficient to convict large numbers of pedophiles and locate their booty; the same could apply to foreign and domestic banks.  The promise of financial reward would induce many government and bank employees to risk providing needed evidence, and reduce the fear of loss of pay (or retirement) check or even life.  Once an assembly has demonstrated an ability and determination to protect witnesses and victims, and to collect booty, it should see a flood of evidence coming thru its doors.

In the meantime, I suggest that those who have access to such evidence do absolutely nothing with it until they can gain protection from an assembly.  To such people, in other words, I think it best that they keep their eyes and ears open, their mouths shut and their e-mail bland.

Due Process: the essence of a free society is due process of law, the system of jurisprudence where no man shall be deprived of life, liberty or property except by a judgment of his peers.  If we aim to redress grievances, we must do everything possible to assure that we do not create grievances, and due process is the path to that assurance.

Not only should an assembly be as certain as possible of guilt, it also should make certain it is not duped by false accusations.

Recovery of plunder: the object here is to mainly provide victims with some kind of restitution for their losses – along with compensating (and protecting) those who make it possible (investigators, witnesses, investors among others).

How will such seizures be done?  If the property in question lies within the jurisdiction of an assembly (or within the jurisdiction of a cooperating assembly), the seizure will occur just like it does today, but with a different authority.  If the property in question lies outside an assembly’s jurisdiction, collection will occur by imposing tariffs on goods imported from non-cooperating jurisdictions.

What happens when a perpetrator does not have sufficient resources to provide restitution to his victims or compensation for expenses of redress?  In a case like this, we need to resurrect a section from the code of Hammurabi: when a thief is unable to provide restitution to his victim – or, cannot be found, the community shall be held responsible.

The overwhelming majority of people uncritically accept lessons given by their care-givers and prevailing propaganda organs.  These include parents and teachers, priests and bureaucrats, journalists and playwrights, judges and legislators.  In a civilized society, it is their duty to guide others to ethical behavior.  When people go wrong, it is because so-called care-givers failed in their duty; and, because of weakness on the part of perpetrators of grievances.

It will be up to each assembly to determine the proportion that each of these reasons contributes to the grievance in question, and to properly assign blame.  For example, when a man goes wrong, it is usually owing to weakness of mind, which leads to ineptitude – he is unable – and, eventually, unwilling – to earn his bread.  He imagines – owing to propaganda extolling indolence, drugs and perverted sex – that society owes him comforts of wealth.  Since ineptitude will not satisfy his wants, he resorts to theft to provide for them, and injures countless people in the process.

Who is to blame… and to what degree?

Weak mindedness is a condition of birth… it is a birth defect.  Birth defects are a result of poor diet on the part of the mother.  It takes up to three months for the brain of a fetus to fully develop.  Where the mother’s diet is deficient, the fetus’ brain does not develop to its full potential; and the fetus is born with kind of idiocy and, probably, along with physical defects.  These conditions, effectively, constitute a lifetime punishment on the child for the failure of his care givers.

Who is to blame?  Was it the mother?  Were she and her husband subjected to such taxes as to make it impossible to properly feed themselves?  Were sanctions imposed against the country that caused food shortages?  Did her care-givers fail to properly educate her with regard to proper diet?

With a little examination, blame can be found far and wide.

I would suggest starting with the main culprits, ‘What were the governments, churches and schools that influenced – or should have properly influenced – the person in question?’  It won’t be necessary to examine policies of these care givers; whatever they were doesn’t matter.  The only points to determine are a) that the person in question has gone wrong, b) that he was subject (either voluntarily or by coercion (statutory penalty or damnation)) to the care giver and c) what amount is each care giver required to pay as restitution.

Financing: Like any other startup situation, assemblies will need seed money until it starts collecting plunder from those who perpetrate grievances.  I see at least three sources for this money: shares purchased by people to become members of an assembly; shares sold by contractual companies to deal with a grievance; and donations or advertising.

I suggest that each assembly, very early in its existence, establish qualifications that must be met before an applicant can become a member.  The assembly would then make a single share available to those qualified for membership (suggested par value, 10 grams of gold).  Money raised from these shares should generally be used for basic functions of an assembly, including the expense to determine if it should take on the task of redressing a particular grievance.

If a particular grievance is accepted for redress, the next step would be to establish a committee organized as a contractual company (equivalent to a “business trust”).  Shares and notes issued by this company would be used exclusively for the redress of the grievance in question.  When the grievance is redressed, the company could be liquidated, or assigned another grievance to redress.

Trading Networks and Boycotts: another source of financing (and means of protection) lies in the establishment of trading networks for friends and boycotts for non-friends.  Here, each assembly could send representatives into the local business community to sell advertising.  Part of the money raised would be applied to expenses of redress and the other part to a campaign to encourage members to patronize these advertisers.

I regard trading networks as absolutely necessary for the functioning of an assembly.  However, with regard to boycotts of non-friends, I’m a bit ambivalent.  Apathetic people have their own problems ranging from secretly admiring perpetrators of grievances, to lack of resources, to simple weakness.  Punishing them for supporting evil certainly has its appeal; for weakness, a bit cruel.

I suppose the policy here is to conduct some kind of investigation to determine why a person chooses to be a non-friend, and then proceed accordingly; that is, if resources are available for such an investigation.

Alliances: no matter what your grievance (events of 9/11, USS Liberty; Operation Keelhaul), you will need a large number of people and resources to effect any kind of redress.  As noted, nothing arouses more outrage than the issue of pedophilia; the trilogy, Girl with a Dragon Tattoo, deals with the issue and has become an international best seller – and is worth watching.

As with any other pursuit, it is a kind of stupidity to attempt to re-invent the wheel.  There are plenty of people in all walks of life who are already active in trying to bring justice to pedophiles; Hollywood personalities, professional athletes, teachers, police, journalists, firemen, among many others.  They are relatively impotent because they do not have the knowledge available in my book, The Lost Right.

My task is to stick with what I do best: research and writing.  If my work is to amount to anything more than symbols on paper or screen, they will require resources, hands and brains of other people.  Unfortunately, I cannot specialize in two or three dozen disciplines, nor can I be in 500 places at one time.

When a Child is Born


Comments: All comments will be moderated.  Unfortunately, I am dealing with a number of difficult situations and it may take up to two weeks to approve your comment.  Please be patient.  Thanks, ALH

Pages of interest

Turn Back the Clock. While others speak of SLOWING the ageing process, I actually REVERSE it as much as 50 years. How better to validate it than to hit a 117 or a 121 mph fastball. These speeds are derived from a frame by frame count of each video.

Building an American Schutzstaffel: What do French committees of terror (1792-4), the Judeo-Bolshevik Cheka, The Nazi Schutzstaffel and the American Department of Homeland Security have in common?  I doubt you’d be surprised.

What Price Gold $7,000… $14,000… $60,000?  You may think this will be a wild ride. If you think collateralization, currency equivalents, double-entry bookkeeping and mortgage-backed securities are dull subjects – if you think wishful thinking is a harmless activity – if you think taxes are essential for the development and maintenance – rather than the destruction – of civilization, then, yes, this will be a very wild ride. We are about to study concepts and actions, crimes and fictions that few, if any, others have examined yet relative to their influence on gold. It may also be a disturbing study; for, the dollar is the world’s reserve currency. It is used as gold once was used: to serve as backing, or collateral, for issued currencies around the globe; in the dollar’s case, for the world’s major currencies and a few dozen others. Thus, today, wishful thinking has replaced gold as backing for most of the world’s currencies.  Money is the basis for practically all human action; as it is based on solid ground so man’s society will endure. Forget about the house built on shifting sand; we should be concerned about societies built on houses of cards.

Lost Right (The) Among the many rights officially declared by American Founders is the right to withhold taxes until the government redresses grievances. This was adopted unanimously by the Continental Congress as one of the “three grand rights” intended to be secured by the Revolution. And who knows it? Here, in this book, is the history, law and procedures of this lost right.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s