There is NO ‘Money’ Powerful industrialists and bankers essentially bribed the politicians in almost every country of the world into giving up their Constitutionally-protected right to print notes for the Treasury. They handed that power over to a private corporation which issued notes called Federal Reserve Notes – not ‘federal’, no ‘reserves’ (well, maybe 10%), and not a true ‘note’ – they are ‘debt notes’. This can be difficult to understand. What we think of as ‘money’ does not exist; it is borrowed into existence. It is not a substance, or a commodity, or anything which simply exists, for example, as water exists. It does not exist until someone creates a debt. That debt can be created only by an equally non-existent entity. This causes ping pong balls to go jumping around in your head, doesn’t it? This non-existent entity is the ‘public’. First, make the distinction that we are the private and all corporations, bureaucracies, governments, etc. are the public – they do not exist except on paper. There is no money. There was, once upon a time – for example, Colonial Script, gold and silver, Lincoln’s Greenbacks, Kennedy’s Silver Certificates. Did you notice that both those presidents were assassinated for creating notes which were not based upon debt? The banksters didn’t like this. They had a monopoly on the currency and weren’t about to let anyone cheat them out of their con game. We neither spend ‘money’, nor are we paid ‘money’. It doesn’t exist. Any ‘money’ you think you have in the form of cash is borrowed the second you put your signature to anything – a cheque, withdrawal slip, an application, a contract. These requests for your signature are ALL for the SOLE purpose of creating debt money. With each signature, you, yes, you go farther and farther into debt. When we ‘borrow money’ from a bank, which seems to be the only entity from which we can borrow, our signature upon a ‘promise to pay’ is not only what gets us the loan but also what immediately repays the loan. Did the bank lend us money? No. There is no money. It didn’t lend ‘money’, it exchanged the credit we created for bank promissory notes. I watch people’s eyes glaze over when I mention this concept so think of this: I take my credit card over to Sears and purchase $100 worth of goods. I sign on the line which states, “I agree to pay...” I do agree to pay, just as soon as they can devise a method for me to do this. Since 1933, when the USA declared bankruptcy and who knows when in Canada (since Canada was on and off the gold standard for some time after the uSA fell to the banksters) public policy (in the uSA: HJR 192 of June 5, 1933, and in Canada, Order in Council No. 16, April 10, 1933) has dictated that since there is nothing of substance with which to pay, the best I can do is promise to pay. All public debt will be discharged by the feds. Those who hold the gold pay the debt. The only way to do this is to sign a note with the number attached to it. It is a promissory note – the same as that which we sign in a bank just before we are told they won’t lend us cash. I have asked ‘loan officers’ why they won’t just hand over to me the cash which we’ve just agreed I was going to borrow. They say, “I don’t have the cash right here; I’ll give you a cheque which you can take over to the teller and she’ll either deposit it into your account from which you can then withdraw cash, or you can just cash the cheque.” I ask, “If its right over there with the teller, why can’t you go over for me and get the cash?” They then tell me that I have to endorse the cheque they intend to give me. But I signed for cash. I promise to pay $10,000 plus interest for ... $10,000, not a piece of paper with numbers and a date on it. Why isn’t this a straight exchange – note for cash? Because they want two signatures. Keep in mind that every time we sign anything, we are creating credit, rather, bringing forth our unlimited credit, and if for some reason we don’t receive this credit, count on the fact that someone else did – by stealing our exemption. To boot, we have agreed to it – take a look at the (unilateral and hence, unenforceable) contract, whether it is your driver’s licence or your credit card application. Your exemption is being stolen through your signature. It is worth a fortune. Time to take control, eh? Let’s get back to Sears. When I went into the store for the goods and I made payment, in whatever form, what did I get for my payment? No, not the goods; I got a receipt. The direct exchange was signature for receipt. The goods were already mine; I just came to collect them. So, the merchant is happy because I signed for the goods; i.e.: he exchanged goods for my signature which that day was worth $100, so his accounts are balanced. He doesn’t see that he exchanged his receipt for my signature. My books are balanced because I exchanged my signature for his receipt, I also happened to get the goods, which were pre-paid. Then, the merchant sends to the bank, my signature along with the hundreds of others which he gathered that day. The bank then transfers funds electronically over to Sears. The bank did not gather up cash (or anything of substance) and send it over to Sears; it transferred to Sears, by the clicking of computer keys (Electronic Funds Transfer), the amount of credit matching, and hence balancing the amount of, the credit slips. I’ll say it again, because it is so stunning: NO MONEY ever left the bank to PAY Sears. The next thing I know I get a bill from VISA for $100. For what? I’ve already ‘paid’ – at least to the extent of my ability. Public Policy has dictated that this is all I can do. How do you want to ‘pay’ for goods which are already yours? Via working forty hours a week? Or via your signature, thereby giving them your tax exemption? Its important that we see the fraudulent banking system as rather outside of normal reality; sort of a middle-man. We ought to work for what we need – a direct exchange. Who deceived us into believing that we ought to work for a piece of paper – a cheque? Then we endorse this paper with our valuable signature. This signature is what creates the amount of funds mentioned on the cheque. Since these funds are debt funds we just created more debt. Actually, we created the credit against which the entity, which handed you the cheque, will create a matching debt – yet, essentially, we are responsible for the creation of this alleged ‘debt’ because, since there is interest on debt funds, we climbed deeper into an inescapable chasm. The bank hands us other pieces of paper which we take out into the market place. Although you believe you bought goods with these debt notes you can’t possibly own these goods because you gave nothing of substance in exchange. All you did was double the debt. The $300,000 invoice for your house is based upon liability funds. If you hand over $300,000 in FRN/BCN you have not discharged or zeroed the debt; you have made the debt $600,000. You do not own anything for which you have not exchanged something of substance. You have only equitable title. Legal title can change hands only upon direct exchange (no middle man) of something of substance, ie: your labour. If you labour and you are given liability funds and you trade them for something, it vitiates not only your labour but also that which you think you bought. Why not simply labour for what you want? Labour is real and what you want, e.g.: your house, is real. Both become a fiction when you trade both for and from nothing. You have been programmed into believing you need money. Au contraire, it is money which keeps us from having what we want. The more ‘money’ we have, the more debt we have. WHY do we think we want ‘money’? I become quite perturbed when I hear a ‘financial advisor’ suggest, “Get out of debt!”. Listeners presume he means, “Pay off your debt” and this is not what he means – well, maybe it is, yet, if so it is because he doesn’t know. Once I heard Suze Ormond talk. After 30 seconds I screamed, “AARRRGH!” and walked away. Don’t listen to these government-educated ‘experts’. “Get out of debt” means to discharge the debt and quit accumulating debt notes. It also means to put those things which you have slave-laboured to acquire, into Your Name. He who dies with the most cash LOSES. Cash represents your labour and the amount of cash you have in your possession represents the worthlessness of your labour.
Posted on: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 18:34:14 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015