What of the Global Currency Conspiracy?

International Monetary FundI have to admit that there have often bee things that I want to bring up on this site that I have chosen to not touch with a ten foot pole. There are things I want to discuss, but I am not a conspiracy theorist. Some examples would be the President’s citizenship and the “One World Government” stuff. I find the ideas interesting. I don’t know that they have merit. I really don’t. I have not spent ample time researching Obama’s citizenship status. I have also not spent ample time researching the one world government stuff. So I don’t know how valid the arguments are for or against either conspiracy theory. But I am afraid that even bringing them up would render this site as filled with conspiracy nuts rather than intelligent folks trying to get a grasp on the truth today. Yet I find that I want to discuss them, because I want to become more informed. So for now I offer this little foray into conspiracy theories.

One of the regular readers sent me this article. I never mention names unless given express authority to do so, so I will not do so here. If that person would like to be recognized for contributing this article to our discussions, they are welcome to speak up and say so. But I will leave that to their discretion. I didn’t have a Friday night guest commentary ready to go so I figured that I would post this article and let everyone read and comment on it. I have not research this subject much, so I can’t offer a great opinion, but I would be really interested to hear from everyone what they think of the content and whether it could be plausible or not. I am sure that there might also be some folks who have researched this subject and I hope that they will share what they have learned.

canada free press logoSo let me clear about this article. I have no idea about the source. The website I found it on is called CFP – Canada Free Press (perhaps our northern cousins can enlighten us on this site and it’s purpose or bias). The author of the article is a gentleman by the name of Brice Wiseman. According to his bio on the site:

Bruce Wiseman is the co-founder of a company that oversees the business and financial affairs of some of the biggest names in Hollywood. He writes and speaks on matters of international finance and banking with particular attention to the oppressive activities of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Bruce has also been an advisor and consultant on the subject of market research, branding and positioning. He writes a market research newsletter on market research and positioning for such publications as Government Technology and Hotel and Motel Management. He is also a published fiction author under the pen name, John Truman Wolfe . Bruce holds a Masters Degree with Honors from the California State University at San Jose and is the former Chairman of the Department of History at John F. Kennedy University.

Bruce Wiseman PodiumI can’t claim to know much about Mr. Wiseman, but a preliminary search shows him to be a Scientologist. That is usually enough for me to say, “OK, crackpot, nothing to see here.” But again, I try my best to always judge the content of what I read by its accuracy rather than its source. Heck, even MSNBC gets stuff right once in a while. I figure that posting this article and discussing it can serve a couple of purposes. First, I can get input from people smarter than I am on economic issues, which can help me understand if this article has any merit. Second, if there is no merit, I will acquire ammunition to shoot down those who espouse the conspiracy theory to me in the future. Finally, if this guy is a crackpot, I will have provided a showcase to allow more folks to see what a whacked out organization Scientology might be. So here is his article…

A towering citadel housing what is essentially a sovereign state known as the Bank for International Settlements is located in Basel, Switzerland. The bank now controls the financial affairs of planet Earth.

If you think this is an exaggeration or the conspiratorial ramblings of the author . . . or not, I invite you to read on. I wrote the first installment of this article—“The Financial Crisis: A Look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain”—in mid-March of this year.

The article included the following statement:

The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a Global Monetary Authority—a planetary financial control organization “to ensure this never happens again.”

This purpose has now been accomplished.

The dollar, the former king of currencies, now goes begging in the pant-suited persona of Hillary Clinton to our creditors at the Chinese Communist Party.

BIS Headquarters

BIS Headquarters

Almost unthinkable a few short years ago, the U.S. dollar is fast losing its status as the world reserve currency, and any thought of saving it is being nuked by the Larry, Moe and Curly of U.S. economic policy – Bernanke, Geithner and Summers – and their Alice in Wonderland trillion-dollar budget deficits.

I would not be surprised to see central banks start using the renminbi (the currency of the newly awakened People’s Republic of China—also called the yuan) for international trade and reserves in the not too distant future. This prediction will likely be scoffed at by global economists, but then they have about as much credibility as pharmaceutical salesmen these days.

A more generally discussed alternative is the International Monetary Fund’s SDR (which stands for Special Drawing Rights). There is no production or property behind the SDR. It is one of those clown currencies that are made up out of thin air—a magic trick central bankers like to do. Intoxicated by the power of the purse, they think of themselves as fiscal alchemists.

But the dollar has seen its glory. It can return one day, if Washington ever finds its financial backbone. But let’s be real, with the exception of a very few, like Ron Paul in the House and Tom Coburn in the Senate, these folks are addicted to spending like junkies on horse.

More importantly, the other shoe has dropped. Like some ghoulish predator from another Alien sequel, a Global Monetary Authority has been born. It lives.


On April 2, 2009, the members of the G-20 (a loose-knit organization of the central bankers and finance ministers of the 20 major industrialized nations) issued a communiqué that gave birth to what is no less than Big Brother in a three-piece suit.

Which means? . . .

G20 Summit

G20 Summit

The communiqué announced the creation of the all too Soviet sounding Financial Stability Board (FSB)—and no, I’m not going to make a crack about the fact that this acronym is the same as that of the Russian intelligence service that replaced the KGB.

The Financial Stability Board. Remember that name well, because they now have control of the planet’s finances . . . and, when one peels the onion of the communiqué, control of much, much more.

The FSB morphed into existence from an earlier incarnation called the Financial Stability Forum. The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) was established in 1999 to promote international financial stability through co-operation in financial supervision and surveillance. Since it had done such a wonderful job, the central bankers decided to expand its powers and give it a new name.

A board sounds like it has more authority than a forum. But the name change isn’t the problem. The FSB’s broadened mandate includes under point 5, “As obligations of membership, member countries and territories commit to pursue the maintenance of financial stability, maintain the openness and transparency of the financial sector, implement international financial standards (including the 12 key International Standards and Codes), and agree to undergo periodic peer reviews, using among other evidence IMF/World Bank public Financial Sector Assessment Program reports.”

Rather a mouthful of elitist banker-speak. But, as a friend of mine is fond of saying, “The Devil is in the details.”


While several press releases from the G-20’s London conclave reference these codes as though they were handed down from a fiscal Mount Sinai, finding the specifics takes some digging.

HitlerBut then the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), out of which the FSB operates, has never seen transparency as one of its core values. In fact, given its fascist pedigree, transparency hasn’t been a value at all. Known as Hitler’s bank, the Bank for International Settlements worked arm in arm with the Nazis, facilitating the transfer of gold from Nazi-occupied countries to the Reichsbank, and kept their lines open to the international financial community during the Second World War.

As noted in the first article, the BIS is completely above the law.

It is like a sovereign state. Its personnel have diplomatic immunity for their persons and papers. No taxes are levied on the bank or the personnel’s salaries. The grounds are sovereign, as are the buildings and offices. The Swiss government has no legal jurisdiction over the bank and no government agency or authority has oversight over its operations.

In a 2003 article titled “Controlling the World’s Monetary System the Bank for International Settlements,” Joan Veon wrote:

“The BIS is where all of the world’s central banks meet to analyze the global economy and determine what course of action they will take next to put more money in their pockets, since they control the amount of money in circulation and how much interest they are going to charge governments and banks for borrowing from them. . . .

“When you understand that the BIS pulls the strings of the world’s monetary system, you then understand that they have the ability to create a financial boom or bust in a country. If that country is not doing what the money lenders want, then all they have to do is sell its currency.”

And if you don’t find that troubling, a close reading of the new powers of the FSB are chilling.

The 12 key International Standards and Codes, which are minimum requirements, contain such things as:

  • clear specification of the structure and functions of government;
  • statistical and data gathering from ministries of education, health, finance and other agencies;
  • corporate governance principles;
  • shareholder rights;
  • personal savings;
  • secure retirement incomes;
  • international accounting standards to be observed in the preparation of financial statements;
  • international standards of auditing;
  • securities settlement;
  • foreign exchange settlement;
  • minimal capital adequacy for banks;
  • risk management;
  • ratification and implementation of UN instruments; and
  • criminalizing the financing of terrorism.

“Sounds oppressive,” you say; “but I don’t really care what a bunch of bankers do in Basel, Switzerland. It’s got nothing to do with me.” But I am writing this to tell you that it has everything to do with you, your family, your business, your country, and—if you’re up to it—your planet.

Dick Morris

Dick Morris

Because as currently structured, the dictates of the Financial Stability Board will impact your life without any say-so on your part whatsoever. Here’s one example from an article written by former Clinton advisor and political strategist Dick Morris in an article for The Bulletin on April 6, 2009.

“The FSB is also charged with ‘implementing . . . tough new principles on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms.’

“That means that the FSB will regulate how much executives are to be paid and will enforce its idea of corporate social responsibility at ‘all firms.’”

You begin to see what’s involved here.

You see, these standards and codes are commitments, obligations and requirements, not merely advice. The strategy, policies and regulations of the FSB are worked out at the senior levels of the bank. They are approved by the plenary and implemented through the national representatives.


The plenary, in this sense, is the complete membership body of the FSB. And the membership, my friends—the national representatives who implement these policies—just happen to be the heads of the planet’s more powerful central banks. And in case it slipped your mind, most central banks are private institutions and answerable to no one.

Take our central bank, the Federal Reserve Bank. Yes, the chairman is appointed by the President and often testifies before Congress, but there is virtually no public control over the institution. It can’t be audited nor can Congress tell it what to do. It is not really accountable to anyone. The idea that the Fed is a government agency subject to the control of Congress is a PR line. It is simply not true.

Among other things, central banks govern a country’s monetary policy and create (print) the country’s money.

They make income by charging interest on the money they loan to the government.

Watch this, because if you blink, you’ll miss it.

Governments are perpetually in debt. They are always borrowing money. They have a mental disorder that prevents them from spending less than they collect in taxes—BDD, Budget Deficit Disorder. And if it looks like they might balance the books some year, why, someone can always start a war.

Here’s an example.

Federal DeficitLet’s say the annual budget calls for the U.S. government to spend $2.5 trillion. But the income will only be $2 trillion. They’re going to be a little short. But no worries, they have the ultimate credit card—a debt limit that they themselves control. If they borrow up to the established limit, they can just vote it higher—which they have done to the tune of a cool $11.2 trillion dollars.

The Fed loves this.

Listen as the Secretary of the Treasury calls the Chairman of the Fed.

“Ben. It’s Tim.”

“Dude. What’s happening?”

“I need a little bread. Friggin’ Taliban again.”

“No problem, Timbo. How much you looking for?”

“Five hundred big ones.”

Ben licks his lips. “Anything for you, big guy. Send me the notes and I’m down with the five hundred. Five percent work for you?”


So the Treasury prints up $500 billion dollars’ worth of IOUs—they are called Treasury bills (short term), notes (medium term) or bonds (long term)—and sends them over to the Fed with a fifth of Chivas.

In the old days, the Fed would print the cash. These days, they click a mouse.

Now here’s the part where you aren’t allowed to blink.

When the Fed prints the money or clicks the mouse, they have no money themselves. They are just creating it out of thin air. They just print it, or send it digitally. And then they charge interest on the money they lent to the Treasury. A hundred-dollar bill costs $0.04 to print. But the interest is charged on the $100. Go ahead: read it again; the words won’t change.

The interest on the national debt last year was $451,154,049,950.63. That’s $1.23 billion a day. These are the same people that are now running our banks, insurance companies and automobile manufacturers.

Reason weeps.

Federal Reserve SealSure, I oversimplified it. The Fed doesn’t own all the debt and they do some other things. But these are the basics. That is how a central bank works.

It is the heads of the planet’s central banks and some finance ministers that make up the membership of the FSB.

In brief, here’s how it works: the Board’s leadership provides strategies, policies and regulations to the membership. The members vote on the matters and then see to their implementation in their respective countries.

FSB leadership is in the hands of the chairman, Mario Draghi. Mr. Draghi is also the governor of Italy’s central bank. He is a former executive director of the World Bank and like his comrade in international finance Henry Paulson—the former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury who bludgeoned Congress out of the first $700 billion bailout package—Draghi was a managing director of Goldman Sachs until 2006. Like Paulson, he left Goldman in 2006, a year before the financial crisis exploded: Paulson went to Washington to run the U.S. Treasury; Draghi went to Rome to run Italy’s financial system as well as the Financial Stability Forum (forerunner to the Financial Stability Board).

Let’s call it government by Goldman, shall we?


More to the point, you may have noticed that you weren’t consulted on this setup. Neither was Congress. In other words, the command channel for implementing global financial strategies goes from the FSB leadership to its central banker members and from them to the world’s financial institutions. You don’t get a peek, neither does Congress, nor, for that matter, does the White House.

And while there may be some accountability in some of the member countries, by and large these central bankers have the authority to implement these regulations and strategies. And they are held responsible by the FSB to do so.

In short, on April 2, 2009, the President signed a communiqué that essentially turns over financial control of the country, and the planet, to a handful of central bankers, who, besides dictating policy covering everything from your retirement income to shareholder rights, will additionally have access to your health and education records.

There is also this troubling little line about “clear specification of the structure and functions of government.” What the hell is that suppose to mean?

There is no oversight here. Not by you, not by Congress, not by anybody. No oversight over a handful of central bankers who operate out of a clandestine organization that is above the law and is responsible for having implemented and enforced the “standards” that froze world credit markets and precipitated the worst financial crisis in the planet’s history (see “The Financial Crisis: A Look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain”).

I haven’t heard word one out of Congress about this, but I’m afraid they are a few clowns short of a circus up there.

Which begs the question, what do we do about this?


There are two critical things that need to be done.

The first lies in the fact that the communiqué signed by the President is an agreement that is binding on the United States and, as such, requires approval by Congress. If classed as a Treaty, it requires approval by two-thirds of the Senate. At the very least, approval should be by Congressional Executive Agreement, which requires a majority of both houses of Congress.

Federal REserve Board of Governors SealThe agreement signed in London on April 2 has been called a New Bretton Woods (Bretton Woods being the location of a meeting of world leaders toward the end of the Second World War, which gave birth to the international financial organizations the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund). The original Bretton Woods agreement was put in place as a Congressional Executive Agreement. So this “new Bretton Woods” should at least do the same.

But this step is just to get Congress to recognize their responsibility here. The Federal Reserve Act, the bill that established the Federal Reserve System, was passed in 1913 two nights before Christmas by a sparsely attended Congress.

People have been complaining about this ever since.

What do you say we don’t let this happen again? Not on our watch. Congress needs to understand that it has a responsibility to approve any agreement signed by the President that is binding on this nation.

But the point is not to get Congress to approve what has been done. It is to first get them to recognize that agreements have been made that affect our entire financial system and that it is their responsibility to shape these agreements in a way that is beneficial to our Republic AND to provide a mechanism for real oversight of this international body.

Central bankers should not be making decisions about international finance without oversight and a system of checks and balances that are reflective of those provided by a republican form of government.

I am, of course, not talking about a political party here. No, no. I’m talking about the American form of government where citizens elect others to represent them.

A republican form of government is one that is operated by representatives chosen by the people.

Congress must step up to the plate. They must insist that the Financial Stability Board be ratified either by Treaty or Congressional Executive Agreement. And that ratification must include the creation of a body with oversight and corrective powers that is comprised of representatives of all the nations involved who are chosen from each country’s elected officials.

There is nothing inherently evil about an international financial organization. As much as we might protest it, it is a global world today, and a body that oversees the smooth flow and interchange of currencies and other financial instruments is needed in today’s world.

But the organization cannot be controlled by international bankers who are not answerable to the citizens of the countries in which they operate. It should be overseen by a senior level group which itself is organized as a liberal republic, following the original model of the United States.

Why? Because the system of government originally created by the United States has been the most successful form of government in man’s history. Any problems with the system have come about as a result of deviations from the original structure—a representative form of government with adequate checks and balances.

Such a body could help create an international economic system in which those that want to be successful can be so. It would also allow them to take an active role in controlling their futures by effectively participating in the legislative process.


Let your Representatives and Senators know: the Financial Stability Board must be approved by Congress and must be subject to oversight by elected officials of the countries involved.

Personal visits, followed by calls and faxes to both Washington and local offices, are the most effective. Don’t be surprised if they don’t know what you’re talking about. Politely insist they find out and take action. And understand this when dealing with legislators or their staffs: they are focused almost exclusively on legislation that has already been introduced—a bill with a number on it.

That is not the case here. You want them to take action on this matter by introducing legislation that brings the approval and structure of the Financial Stability Board under congressional control.

This can be accomplished.

So how real might all of this stuff be? I have no idea, But I wouldn’t mind figuring it out together. I am, by nature, not a conspiracy theorist, which is why I so often scoff at those ideas, or don’t reply to them at all. And I certainly don’t want to turn my site, with so much intelligent discussion going on, into a conspiracy theory site that gets labeled as such and thus ignored. I will leave it up to all of you as to whether we even take the time to look at the other theories out there such as Obama’s citizenship or the one world government stuff. It might be interesting fodder to discuss, but is it even worth our time?

As for this piece and Mr. Wiseman, I have no idea. As I mentioned above I tend to discredit Scientology right from the start. I don’t know if that is fair or not. I don’t know anything about Scientology except what is presented in the media, which mostly paints them as crackheads without a pipe. Does anyone here have better insight into that group? As I have always said, I am open to learning anything I don’t know about.

And before I forget, a link to the original article:  The purpose of the financial crisis



  1. USW,
    Thank you for putting this out on your site. If true, yes, Legislators should be making legislation forefronting our Republican representative form regarding FSB, granting such is the case. Research is required by our representatives, eyes clear and open.

  2. Certainly appears to be legit. Saw more than one site with similar statements.

    Even one article where it is mentioned by Ben Bernanke.

    Awful hard for a lot of us to understand all of the intricacies.

    Any action taken by our government with regard to international groups should be written in such a manner that our sovereignty is absolute.

    We have enough problems in our United States that we do not need outside interference.

    Taking from Peter to pay Paul is immoral

    • Hey Garth….howzit going? Concur with your statement, although have to admit to having to reread USW several times to grasp this. Have a great day.

  3. JayDickB says:

    All this stuff wouldn’t affect the US very much if we didn’t spend so much. If you lower (or even just restrain the growth of) government spending, the economy will boom and the taxes will roll in. Deficits will be eliminated and debt will be repaid (over time, of course; we have a very long way to go).

    Look what happened in the ’90s.

    • Hey JD:

      Hate to drizzle a little rain on your parade but do you realize the supposed “budget surpluse” had evaporated by the time Bush was sworn in? And that the surplus was tied to Capital Gains from the dotcom bubble not so much from increased expansion or productivity and thus tax on production type revenue. My source, for the record, on this is Alan Greenspan himself. It was buried in his book.

      Decreasing taxes to raise revenue will only work to some unknown theoretical point. No one knows where that point is.

      I think you were correct in the reducing govt spending part, but I don’t think just reducing growth rate is enought anymore.

      Hope yer saturday is shaping up well.

      • JayDickB says:

        I’m doing well, thank you JAC.

        Actually, I didn’t say anything about taxes except that revenues will increase as economic activity increases. I do think lower taxes help, but I think restraints on government spending help more.

        Several economists I read several years ago (I would have to research it to get their names at this point, but they were of the supply-side variety) maintained that government spends money so poorly in terms of economic growth that its spending less money frees money for private businesses to spend, thus increasing economic efficiency. The thinking is that a dollar spent by the government must be taken from somewhere else in the form of borrowing, taxes, or money creation.

        The 90s seemed to bear this out. Whether the increased taxes came from income, capital gains, or elsewhere, the fact is that the economy did well so government revenue increased.

        I’m not an economist, so all I can say is that the theory makes sense to me.

  4. This theory falls in line with several others I have heard. When the price of oil exploded last year, it was relatively short lived. But it effected the confidence of alot of Americans pre election. Add that to the sub-prime mortgage explosion, which banks had to know would occur, and you have a meltdown of confidence in government, once again pre-election. Times were made to be bleak, not just occured as an accident, and “hope and Change” became the mantra of a Marxist/Socialist/progressive Presidental Candidate who got elected to facilitate the further erosion of our economy.

    Call it what you want, New World Order, one world currency, whatever the term is at any given moment, it matters not. The redistribution of America’s wealth, thru Cap and Trade and unfair taxes (amongst other things), controlling healthcare, education, energy, and soon to be limiting many other rights that we cherish. The writing is well written and on the wall for all to see, most just won’t open their eyes to any of this.

    Our government is part of the problem, not the solution. Going to them would be a waste of time, as many of us have tried and found out first hand. I hope Black Flag gives his input on all of this, and lok forward to asking some questions of him.



  5. USW:

    Thanks for the info.

    I have sent the following in an email to my Representative and my Senators:

    It is my understanding that we have signed something with the international Financial Stability Board (formerly known as the Financial Stability Forum). It is my further understanding that this requires confirmation by Congress.

    Any involvemnent with international groups such as the Financial Stability Board that require our signing on should be authorized by vote of 2/3 of both houses of Congress.

    All necessary steps must be taken thru amendments, if necessary, to insure that the Sovereignty of the United States remains absolute.

    We can get by without the international community but they can not get by without the U.S.

    We do not need a one world government. It appears to me as if President Obama feels we do need a one world government. I further feel that he would like to be the titular head of such a government.

    If our involvement in the world is such a terrible thing, as so many countries say, lets pull back and just concern ourselves with defending ourselves. We have run out of money and must start restricting our generosity.

    Let’s take all steps to remove our considerable reliance on foreign oil – including drilling in the continental shelf, nuclear power, natural gas, wind, thermo, solar, and water.

  6. I don’t know much about the Huffington Post or where it stands, left or right, but found this article on this subject that was interesting.


    • Think of Pamela Anderson’s stance on animals or Sean Penn’s position on Hugo Chavez and keep going left of there until you run out of planet.

    • Holy Cow Batman – a conservative, linking to the Huffington Post, and calling the article INTERESTING!?!?!

      Head for the Hills everyone – this is the seventh sign of the apocalypse!!! 🙂

  7. I mentioned a little about this one world government yesterday. I have heard this global governance theme repeated by Obama, W, Gore, Clinton (both), and others.

    As far as the Fed goes, Ron Paul has tried to introduce a bill to audit the Fed, and has big time support, but is being blocked by a few including Bernancke, Geithner, and a few in Congress like Franks, Pelosi, and Reid. From what reading I have done, they know if the bill is introduced in Congress it will be passed and upset someones applecart, so they don’t want to hear it.

    USW, I am not a Conspiracy theorist either. I don’t even want to think that any of these conspiracies could possibly be true. I also think maybe that this is why Nubian rarely comes on here anymore, because no one pays attention to her conspiracy theories. Yes I came out and said it plain. But, if you’re out there Nubian, I will tell you this. Some of these theories are not so far fetched as some on here may believe. I can’t legitimize most of them but they do make you wonder. The longer this administration goes on, the more things we see happen in this country and the world, the worse it looks. Who knows, maybe some of these theories are not just theories after all.

    What could be better if they are true than to have the people believe that they are all crackpot theories? Or if only some are true and the rest are disinformation to keep us confused? I am not advocating USW, I’m just starting to wonder about some of this crap. There is no possible way that all of the smart folks in Washington can possibly be doing some of the absolutely retarded things they are doing to us without some kind of ulterior motive for it.

    I have a 7 year old neice that can do math better than Congress and the Administration. I guess what I’m trying to say is that I believe this about the banking and financial things going on in the world and this country. If that makes me a crackpot then so be it. I have read about this garbage from too many sources to just dismiss it.

    Good day to you USW and all the rest of ya’ll.

    Peace Out. EHG

    • Hey there Esom,

      “There is no possible way that all of the smart folks in Washington can possibly be doing some of the absolutely retarded things they are doing to us without some kind of ulterior motive for it.”

      Exactly. We are busy calling them stupid morons, idiots, crooks, and losers, all the while the background agenda marches on. We argue right vs. left issues, the agenda marches on. They could care less how mad we get, how loud we yell, how much we argue with each other, matter of fact that suits their purpose of distraction.

      A few defining moments, for me:

      1.) Bush, McCain, and Obama, meeting in the White House, pre-election, about the “financial crisis”. All THREE promoted the TAPR bailout, voted YES. Not a DIME’S worth of difference between any of them.

      2.) Dick Morris on Fox News Channel telling how the Cap & Trade deal came down, how it passed. Behind the scenes, the decision was made about who “would be allowed to vote NO”…and THAT was those with weak poll numbers up for reelection. The news reported how it passed by a “slim” margin….well HELL YES that is all they needed!

      3.) Bills being rammed through, not even BEING READ, for crying out loud! They are signing sh** and they don’t know WHAT IS IN IT!

      4.) The “Stimulus” package….it hasn’t done anything to help the economy, but then again only 7% has been spent. Where is the rest of it and WHY ARE THEY SITTING ON IT?

      And while we are screaming about all this, they keep playing the distraction games, and that dark agenda is being met, bit by bit.

      I don’t think all the Obama travel is innocent or about building good “foreign relations”….I have to wonder what we are NOT seeing behind the scenes. One thought is, he is cuddling up to these foreign governments so when it all hits the fan here, they will help take our country down. It won’t be the world against the U.S government, but against the U.S. CITIZENS. Our freedom loving attitude doesn’t work well for the purposes of one world order.

  8. As I have been preaching all along, from day 1, off the hop, out of the gate! You’ve(sorry if too broad a brush being used) been letting the ink fly about Sarah Palin and whether or not your president was checking out the Saudi King’s package while someone’s been removing all the safety devices from that roller coaster you guys are on. Here’s your first clue of many:

    – The reason for America’s financial stability for decades HAS BEEN because the other nations of the world have been playing nicey-nicey with your currency which is very much unlike yourselves with regard to the currency of others. Currency devaluation has been the weapon of choice ever since assassination went out of style and out of the playbook (thanks for that one Gerald). You guys have used it all over the globe to inflict destabilization whenever faced with an opponent you can’t outright attack militarily. It WAS a big part of the cold war, a successful part of the cold war and best of all these days, its not obviously reprehensible and when written of it’s actually laudable. Sure it can cause starvation and suffering as would burning a nation’s crops or crippling their health care system but that it does so without anything OBVIOUS to report on afterward? Its squeaky clean. HOW COOL IS THAT!!!

    – The “why” of leaving America’s money alone is of course because they all love you guys so. Of course it’s not. They have done such to protect the market value of their own reserves of US currencies. They save their pennies in currencies they require for the monetary tides of business of course and the American dollar has enjoyed being the de facto foreign currency. Comprehend that you guys have been as stable as China, Japan and a few others have left you alone to be. Should any of them wish to play the financial ruin game, they’ve only to take a big public dump… of American currency at a time when their own is sufficiently strong. Sure there are intricacies to setting up the conditions for such but the current market makeup has afforded ever big player with the ability. Welcome to the digital age. Scared yet? You should be.

    – One world currency has been a dream of the uber financiers for as long as they’ve understood the power of “perceived” money. Think of a world currency as the constant value while all other currencies remained in flux. A world bank filled to the gills with all the world’s currencies not actively engaged in their respective economies is the goal. A world bank able to stabilize the weak is the pitch. A world bank able to affect great pressure on any government on the planet for any reason is the actuality. It should be the intelligent socialist’s weapon of choice for the next century! Once in place, you guys will not escape its gravity and regardless of a changing of government from left to right, its lure of acceptance for all that ink and paper you keep printing will make it immovable.

    Of Note: Remember kids we’ve met a world currency before and his name was Mr Gold and we liberated him from whomever had him and tried to keep him all to themselves. He was beholding to none but himself and for that he was welcomed at every door and in any condition. Ah yeah, he was the man but he couldn’t just be pulled from thin air. Sure we tried with witchcraft and alchemy but sorry Charlie, you either dug him up or liberated him from someone who had already had. Those were the days, shiver me timbers! (Side Note: Anyone else disappointed with what passes for pirates these days?)

    – For years and years and years (you get the picture) I’ve been watching the Chinese financiers work their wizardry. Holding up the dollar and maintaining the devaluing the yuan with stability has been a terrific trick. They just don’t get anywhere near enough praise for having done such so spectacularly. You guys owe them a a large portion of your standard of living so don’t forget to say thanks. One world currency takes the Chinese to whole other level. For them this might as well be the next best thing to the realization of fusion.

    • You only left out one detail Alan.

      The U.S. dollar standard developed because of its link to oil. The Petro Dollar as it is called.

      The rest of the world has been trying to free itself from this ever since it was invented.

    • Alan, Why would I owe the Chinese anything? I did not borrow money from them and waste it on worthless projects and bad fiscal decisions. I have never supported any large spending bill the Government passed and probably never will. Maybe I am misreading your comments, so correct me if I’m wrong (which is often), but it seems as though you would like to see the economic collapse of the U.S., for whatever reason. I’ll apologize now if I’m taking your comments out of text, but that was the impression that I got.


      • Alan F. says:

        Ah but they have been at work all around you every day providing products and consumables which afford you your standard of living. Look around you and discount everything and every service using the fruit of Chinese production.

  9. Black Flag says:

    Watching Comments.

  10. Judy S. says:

    Thought I’d pop in and say Hi, and see how everybody is doing today.

    Hope everybody’s Saturday is going good so far.


  11. OK BF – enough watching and jump in – we need your help here to understand.

  12. TexasChem says:

    When the economy collapses I have 275 head of cattle for barter and about a 6 acre garden planted with vegetables if you guys get hungry! 🙂

    I accept indentured servitude as payment…LOL

    • Black Flag says:

      Your mere jest was the foundation of feudalism.

      But good for you … at least you will not be a slave!

      • TexasChem says:

        Shhh… you may dash my aspirations of becoming King of East Texas!!

        • Black Flag says:


          I’d probably move there if that happened.

          I may not agree with every principle you have.

          I do know I could appeal to your morality.

          That is certainly a massive step above any current situation.

          Salute, mon ami!

    • TexasChem,

      I have put a lot of thought into this survival stuff, we would be in a situation very similar to yours….land, cattle, we garden and put up lots of food, and have a few chickens for eggs & meat. All this would be pulled together with family pooling of resources. There would be maybe a dozen of us. Would probably try to grow that number, by inviting in neighbors with whatever resources they would have.

      It would, of course, depend on the level of meltdown, whether total chaos, or maybe some government & services would survive, such as food distribution and law enforcement. (Ok, I hear Black Flag saying we don’t need NO DAMN GOVERNMENT! He is probably right, government would probably be another threat, and confiscate everything they could get their hands on.)

      I’m thinking regardless of being armed and well supplied, unless you could be very well hidden, you would have a heck of a challenge hanging on to what you have. Millions of people flooding out of the large cities would soon deplete wild game, firewood, and potable water. (Thinking water treatment plants, electric, natural gas, gasoline, and diesel would soon be non-existent). You would have to build some kind of compound, to protect yourselves, and have a small army there. I envision roaming armed gangs that would take at gunpoint whatever they could find.

      No matter how well we prepare, I’m not sure if it would be enough.

      • Damn, How could I forget where Galt’s Gulch was located.

        Taking from Peter to pay Paul is immoral

      • TexasChem says:

        We have a tight knit community where I live.My immediate family together has approximately +400 acres of land.My extended family is basically the entire community with +400 population 30 sq. miles or so.Creeks crisscross the land so have access to running water.Our land is surrounded by a national preserve so the entry points are few.Cattle, horses, gardening, chickens, goats etc.We still run our hogs wild in the woods and trap what we need.We smoke our own meat and put up our own vegetables.

        My father in law is an oil man and has 8 or 9 active wells within a twenty mile circumference of the community.The pumps run on solar and wind power and are self sufficient with seperators.I have a degree in chemical process technology so am quite capable of rigging together a small scale system to refine fuel if the need ever arose.

        My only worry would be the amount of people in exodus from the cities if the economy were to fail and we did have some type of collapse.I can promise you this though: any roving armed band would face severe resistance from a “civilian security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong and almost as well funded as our military!” LOL

    • Unfortunely the thumbs on both my hands have turned black (they never were green), but I am not above turning a shovel or pulling on a hoe. So, how about posting the GPS co-ordinates to the front gate? Indentured?? No, lost all the ones in front in ‘Nam.

  13. Black Flag says:

    Allow me to reference a good acquaintance of mine: Dr. Gary North.


    For several months, there have been news reports of announcements by bureaucrats in China and politicians in Russia about the need for a new reserve currency to replace the U.S. dollar.

    One suggestion: substitute the non- currency known as the SDR (special drawing rights) of the non-governmental, non-central bank IMF (International Monetary Fund).

    No bureaucrat or politician recommends that his own nation’s currency replace the dollar. This is strange, on the face of it. The United States possesses a unique series of advantages as a result of its reserve currency status. These include the following:

    1. The government can rely on the Federal Reserve System to create money out of nothing to buy U.S. Treasury debt, and then repay foreign central banks with this newly created counterfeit money.

    2. Americans can buy imported oil in newly created dollars.

    3. There is a huge market for its Treasury debt (at about 0% per annum), corporate debt, and even stocks, which foreigners and foreign central banks buy, thereby funding the nation’s gigantic trade deficit.

    4. The world’s commodity futures markets are priced in dollars, making it more costly to trade in other currencies.

    National governments possess the advantage of being able to pay off their domestic creditors with fiat money.

    Why wouldn’t they all love to do the same to foreign creditors? The United States has been doing this since about 1940. Why let the United States retain this monopoly of creditor-stiffing?

    I can think of one obvious reason why no politician recommends his nation’s currency. The suggestion would be greeted with howls of derisive laughter. “Use the [ ]? Is he serious?”

    Then the critics would publish a laundry list of reasons why no one in his right mind would use that nation’s currency as its primary foreign currency holdings. The critics would be correct.

    The U.S. dollar got its position fair and square: by staying out of World War II until the British government was clearly broke economically. Hitler then committed the second stupidest political decision of the 20th century: he declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941, which he was not obligated to under the Axis defensive pact, since Japan had attacked the U.S. (The stupidest decision was Hitler’s decision to attack the USSR in June of 1941.) This let the United States enter on the side of Britain, knowing that the U.S. would replace the British Empire as the dominant player in international affairs after the war. Roosevelt self-consciously scuttled the British Empire, and Truman completed this policy. (The best book on this Otto Scott’s long-neglected masterpiece, “The Other End of the Lifeboat,” published a quarter century ago by Regnery.)


    There are no reports of any bureaucrat, politician, or central banker who recommends a return to gold as the world’s reserve currency. There is a reason for this. Gold served as the world’s reserve currency prior to World War I. It kept national governments and central banks in check. When they inflated, gold flowed out. Their monetary bases declined in response to the outflow of gold. This transferred control over domestic monetary policy to foreign central banks, gold speculators, and foreign currency users, such as commercial bankers and specialists in international trade.

    This transferred sovereignty over money from the nation state to international speculators who put their own money at risk for forecasting incorrectly. They could make large profits by correctly forecasting a nation’s devaluation of its currency. When they believed a nation’s monetary policy was becoming inflationary, they would pull the plug. They would exchange currency for gold.

    Central bankers hated this when it happened to them. But they put up with this system from the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1815 until the outbreak of World War I in the summer of 1914. Stable money reduced the risks of currency depreciations. World trade grew rapidly as a result. Prices were approximately the same in 1914 as they had been in 1815.

    The price of this price stability was the reduction of control over currencies by politicians and central bankers. This was a political price that politicians always resented. It interfered with their ability to use newly created money to buy votes and weapons.
    No central banker or national political leader is calling for a return to the gold coin standard, where citizens and foreigners can pressure governments to stop their legalized counterfeiting.

    Nevertheless, it is possible for the central government of any large trading nation to establish its currency unit as the world’s primary reserve currency. The dollar’s position has not been based on gold since August 15, 1971. On that day, Nixon unilaterally took the United States off the gold-exchange standard. There would be no more gold sales to foreign governments and central banks at $35 per ounce.

    I offer this strategy to any national political leader and his successors.


    Let us assume that the head of a central bank decides that his bank will become the next Federal Reserve System: the dominant central bank on earth. He issues an announcement.

    Beginning tomorrow, this central bank of will no longer buy or sell the debt of our government or any other government. It will also not buy or sell any other form of debt or equity. We are freezing the bank’s currency operations. To verify this, we have created a new Website that makes available all information relating to the bank’s asset holdings and daily operations.

    The bank has shut down its currency-trading desks, domestic and foreign. The employees have been offered an opportunity to take an early retirement at full pay. Any of them who refuse the offer will no longer get a pay raise. They will be assigned the task of answering inquiries by staff members of the Parliament and the media.

    The central bank will no longer attempt to influence interest rates, long or short. Since the bank will no longer buy or sell assets, it has no way to back up its official announcements on what the overnight inter-bank interest rate ought to be.

    The central bank will no longer lend to commercial banks that offer collateral.

    This policy is permanent. It will take five to ten years for us to prove this, but prove it we will.
    We will fund existing internal operations from the interest received on present holdings.

    It is our intention to replace the United States dollar as the world’s reserve currency. To prove that we are serious, we have removed all of our gold from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and had it shipped to our national vault. This will confirm the rumors to this effect that began six weeks ago.

    All that is necessary to establish a currency as the world’s reserve currency is a central bank that is immune to domestic politics and which follows the press release to the letter on a permanent basis.

    The same result could be achieved even more rapidly by a joint press release by the head of the central bank and the Prime Minister.

    The news of this press release would have leaked out for weeks. This would merely confirm the rumors.


    Initially, most investors would not believe the press release. They would assume that the central bank will buckle, i.e., knuckle under to government pressure.
    The nation would soon be in a recession. Interest rates would climb. There would be no counter-cyclical policy. Commercial banks would go bankrupt. These would include the largest banks.

    The economy would contract. Labor unions would call strikes. Production would fall. Unemployment would rise. The bad investments that had been made in terms of the assumption of monetary expansion would produce losses.

    As banks went under, there would be monetary contraction. Solvent banks would face a domino effect, since they keep deposits in other, insolvent banks.
    There would be no bailouts. The national equivalents of Bank of America, Citigroup, and J. P. Morgan would close their doors. There would be a money panic. There would be a run on the bad banks.

    The economy would be an a serious recession and maybe depression within six months.

    When it became clear that none of this forced the central bank to go back to its old ways, money would begin to flow into the solvent banks. These banks would gain the reputation of being survivors.

    The pain of recession has been too great for any political regime or any central bank to resist since 1933. This is why we live in an age of price inflation. Resistance to market-adjusted prices is universal, especially among economists, whether Keynesian, Chicago, or supply-side. They all preach salvation by inflation.


    The U.S. dollar would begin to fall against the reformed currency. There would be ups and downs, because no one would really believe that any central bank and its government would stick to such a scheme.
    The reformed currency would move toward a new status: “paper gold.” That is what the original IMF SDR’s were called in the early 1970’s. This was dismissed by one hard-money writer as the equivalent of glass diamonds. So SDR’s have proven to be.

    The national government would be forced on domestic saving and international demand to sell its debt. On the one hand, investors would expect the new plan to be abandoned as soon as the government runs out of low- interest buyers. But if the bank stuck to its guns, investors would change their view. On the other hand, foreign central bankers might decide to buy the debt of the reformed currency nation. The nations’ export sectors would want to sell more goods abroad. By creating new money domestically, the foreign central bank would lower the value of its currency, making its exports even more attractive. This would lead to a beggar-thy-neighbor competition among rival central banks. That would make reformed currency look even better.

    It would become apparent over time that the reformed currency’s value is due to supply and demand for an asset with a fixed supply. This might take two years. It might take five years. But, year by year, word would get out: this currency is the equivalent of gold. Investors will not have their wealth undermined by the central bank’s policy of monetary expansion.
    Private investors seek a profit. An appreciating currency lures in private capital.

    Currency futures markets would begin to adopt the new currency.

    If the oil-exporting nations began to sell in the reformed currency as well as the U.S. dollar, the world’s markers would see an advantage. “Buy the reformed currency and wait for its appreciation to lower the price of oil.” Those holding dollars would suffer comparative losses.

    Central banks are not profit-seeking. The directors do not own the banks, nor do they represent profit-seeking investors. They are not under pressure to buy high- yielding assets.

    At some point, however, central banks would move out of depreciating dollars into the reformed currency. Why? Because of political pressure. Word would get out that the dollar is a loser’s game. Central bankers do not want to be identified as losers.


    The reason why the BRIC nations — Brazil, Russia India, and China — do not want to see their currencies replace the dollar is because central bankers and politicians are Keynesians. They believe in salvation by inflation. The few Chicago School economists in the staffs are convinced that the central bank can and should inflate to forestall a recession. That was Milton Friedman’s main legacy to the modern world as far as the modern world’s leaders are concerned. He blamed the Federal Reserve System for not inflating, 1930-33.

    This is why we see no candidates to replace the U.S. dollar. Any of the BRIC nations could establish policies that would elevate its currency to number-one status. But the price is too high. It is as high as adopting the gold coin standard. It would mean the end of monetary intervention.

    The modern world believes in salvation by inflation. So has every civilization except one: the Byazantines, who had a stable gold currency for a thousand years after 325 A.D.

    The cost of reform is too high for central bankers and politicians. That cost is the restoration of monetary freedom. None of them is willing to pay that price.


    The IMF’s non-currency cannot replace the dollar in the world’s currency markets. So, every currency is counterfeit. The investor has to decide which fiat currency will be best over his lifetime.

    They are all bad choices.


    The point of his article in two sentences: We had a global currency – in gold – and it was thrown away because it prevented governments from doing what they do best; that is, stealing from and thus destroying their economies.

    No government will support a return to such system unless forced too (ie: it collapses)

    We are doomed to fiat currency – get used to it.

    Therefore, learn everything you can about fiat currency so to manipulate it to your advantage.

    There are many ‘knowns’ about fiat currency that can help you avoid pitfalls as well as thrive. Governments know this, and act on them – do not bet against them, but with them.

    — A dup post – I thought I was on one thread, but I was not.

    Thx, JayDick – indeed the government creates contradictions purposely – it provides power of action.

  14. I am getting a real good kick out of all this . . .

    Yes I have been hearing – for DECADES now – the one world government and one world currency conspiracy theory ever since the early 1960’s. Can’t remember all of them, but something to do with the Rockefeller’s seems to come to mind.

    My personal thought on all of this has to do with the Rosewell UFO crash and keeping the alien spaceship up in a huge underground complex in Area 51 type of story = If you tell a lie long enough and often enough, even YOU will believe it.

    Actually, I believe that eventually this planet will develop a singular planetary type of government and monetary system. However, I believe that will not take place any time soon. Perhaps in a thousand years or so, but not anytime soon. We Humans are just not yet ready for that sort of thing and won’t be until we learn to get along with one another without enslaving each other.

    Just my not so humble opinion.

  15. Cyndi P says:


    Thanks for posting the article I sent you. What a pleasant surprise. I’m grateful for the chance to see others thoughts on the subject matter. Most of my friends are totally unaware or dismissive of what’s going on before their eyes and incapable of intelligent discussion. I’m pretty much to the point of just keeping my thoughts to myself lest some decide to Baker Act me

    My intuition tells me there’s more going on here than utter incompetence. Is Mr. Wiseman 100% correct? I don’t know, but I don’t believe he 100% incorrect either. I have a real bad feeling about what our future holds. For the record, there have been many times where my intuition has been spot on. I’ve learned to listen to it.

  16. Well, USW, it has taken me all day but I have found something about a global conspiracy . . . . . .

    I know that this is a real long one – almost two hours – but I think it is what you were looking for . . . or maybe not?


    Enjoy the movie!

    • G.A., Watched this about two months ago. It was entertaining, but it also had some fairytale stuff in it. Overall the makers did a good job and spent alot of money to make it, and it was well presented and had some cool stuff in it. My favorite part was when the lady near the beginning said that Obama was going to pay her mortgage. Made me wonder what other lies were told the ACORN and those like them.

      THe video of the killing of JFK was very graphic, the most graphic I can recall ever seeing.

      I took it with a few grains of salt, it’s hard to pick out the facts from the BS. What was your take on it?


      • Hey G,

        Generally I do not consider myself a conspiracy theory advocate, however there are certain things in this video that sound and look like there is something being hidden from the public eye that maybe we all should be made aware of.

        Yes, a lot of this video is kind of hokey, but then there is a lot of it that is not. Kind of like shopping for a used car – you have to take a real hard look at the outside and then listen very carefully to the way the thing sounds on the inside and if the salesman won’t let you take it for a test drive, well that should be a real good clue.

        However, I have been hearing (from people that I have had a deep respect for) about some of these organizations since the early 1960’s and I know that some of our most popular leaders have been members of those organizations.

        Keeping in mind what is going on now in DC, you know how fast things are being rammed through, just makes me wonder sometimes if there is someone else at the helm other than the POTUS. I have never seen a Senate or House accept and push a Presidents agenda so fast and so hard in my entire life. This POTUS was a virtual unknown before 2005 as far as I can tell, yet Pelosi & co. act like they have known and trusted him since their birth! That is the very puzzling thing about all this, and that is what gives me great concern – and that is why I have been screaming from the rooftops that we need to do something NOW before it is too late.

        I, for one, honestly believe that we are heading for a train wreck of biblical proportions . . . and if we do not start slowing this train down we will never be able to put it back on the right track. DC is totally out of control, and that is all there is to it.

  17. Interesting topic. I generally dismiss conspiracy theories out of hand, but lately some crazy things are going on in the US govt. Anyway, I don’t believe in the one world govt or universal currency stuff at all. There are no doubt people who would like to see it happen, but I don’t believe humans could stiffle their greed long enough to let someone else be the one in charge, so it will not happen. Not something to worry about . . . if it was concieved it would self-destruct.

    I think we’ve got plenty of apparent and real threats to our well being as a nation to focus on.

    • Alan F. says:

      Oh the world currency push is very much real. When DGC was conceived (digital gold currency) it was as a form of universal currency independent of a single countries financial woes affecting large scale business transactions. Proofed against inflation, its benefits are being used by large companies to move a specific value from one country to another regardless of political and economic conditions. The global aspect of gold once again realized. It has nothing to do with greed at all, just business.

      As for “self destructing”, that’s what eventually happens with a “fiat currency” as brought up by BF which is a “perceived value” not an actual one as a government just prints away and says “its worth X” without a physical representative backing it up like gold, platinum, palladium or silver. That should be very familiar to you guys and a spit swapping shower buddy of the current administration.

      • TexasChem says:

        I’m not a financial guru or anything but isn’t fiat currency worth, based upon a countries ability to tax the populous?Like depending upon a projected amount of tax revenue?

        • Tex:

          At the root the value of money is determined by the demand for and supply of that money.

          The real question is what creates demand. Linkage of the dollar to the purchase of oil created demand for our dollar as every country needed dollars to buy oil from the oil producers. As oil was relatively stable it kind of proped up our dollar and allowed our govt to run deficits and to maintain inflationary policies. Our inflation was basically passed to the rest of the world through our oil supported currency.

          That is why the first move to create a new currency was the discussion by Brazil and China to stop paying for oil in dollars. I understand Iran and Venezuela no longer accepts dollars for payment of oil. I assume they take Euros

          You are also correct in that demand for currency depends on the view of the market as to how sound the fiscal condition is behind the currency. Will they pay off the bonds and interest?

          Printing extra money increases supply beyond demand, driving down value and thus creating inflation. The kind that kills economies and natiions.

          The currency valuation game is very complicated and mysterious to me. I have found if you just keep the simple supply and demand idea prominant then you can see how other actions will affect one side or the other. And money, like all things follows the rules of supply and demand. In the long run you can not fool nature.

          Hope that helps at least a little.

          • Black Flag says:

            Well put, JAC.

            Money is nothing more than the most sought after commodity. The reason: it is the most easiest to be traded for some other good.

            Currency valuations are infinitely complicated – and as such, we all pay about a 15% extra on all our goods because of the uncertainty of currency trades.

            Tax revenues are the collateral for government loans – and are not a backing for fiat.

  18. TexasChem says:

    Carryover repost to finish this debate with BF:

    I think it pointless to compare christianity to the Aryan Brotherhoods version of it BF…I would say the AB is a cult vs a religion.

    Christians do study and apply Jesus’ teachings in this day BF.I submit that perhaps you have not been exposed to a group of true christians that do not follow a biased corrupted version.

    You are not understanding what I am saying.I do not have a problem with someone having a religion other than mine.

    I have a problem with a religion that condones violence, terrorism and represses peoples civil rights.I have a problem with someone stating they will commit genocide upon an entire race of people based upon their religious beliefs.Don’t you?

    This just in about how the Islamic government of Iran conducts their peacekeeping inside of their country.You guys like to spout off how its just a small group of terrorists…you need to open your eyes as to how large this “small group of terrorists” is.If I hear one of you tell me again that I shouldn’t judge based upon the actions of a few I may pull all my hair out!


    Obama wants us to respect this even though we don’t agree with it?

    • Alan F. says:

      The Aryan Brotherhood is a reworking of the “tribe” like any gang and has sweet tweet to do with religion. Its not a cult any more than the Bloods, Crips or MS18 are.

      • TexasChem says:



        1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

        2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

        3. the object of such devotion.

        4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

        5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

        6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

        7. the members of such a religion or sect.

        8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.


        9. of or pertaining to a cult.

        10. of, for, or attracting a small group of devotees: a cult movie.


        Ahem… I believe gangs would fall under the category of being a cult.They match 3 of the definitions possibly a 4th.

        Anyways since were on the topic of the Ab I had to deal with their members on a daily basis and the other three you mentioned (plus these off the top of my head) in a previous career:

        Mandingo Warriors
        Barrios Aztecas
        Mexican Mafia
        Texas Syndicate

        Point is it does have to do with religion because many of their doctrines are twisted versions of various religious beliefs used to justify their actions.

    • Hey Tex:

      Just curious. Would you consider Mormons a legitimate Christian religion?

      • TexasChem. says:

        No and you already know my answer why.
        I believe the Mormon religion to be corrupted by man to suit his own agenda.

        I pull my beliefs from original greek and hebrew text translated to modern english with no bias.There is absolutely no doubt that the Judean books and New Testament scrolls are one of mankinds greatest collection of recorded history.I’m a history buff as well in case you guys didn’t already know.Mankinds knowledge sets us apart from the other creatures of this planet because that knowledge spans thousands of years and can be taught to each successive generation.Wonderful means of accruing intelligence don’t you think?

        • Black Flag says:

          So what is your opinion of the Jewish text, then, where it made it against the law for a heathen to observe the ‘day of rest’ upon pain of death?

          “A heathen who keeps a day of rest, deserves death, for it is written, And a day and a night they shall not rest, and a master has said: Their prohibition is their death sentence”

  19. Judy S. says:

    Obama’s new Attorney General has already said this is one of his major issues.
    This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with USA Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time.. Then pass the link on to all the pro gun folks you know. This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.

    Here’s what you need to do:

    First – vote on this one.

    Second – launch it to other folks and have THEM vote – then we will see if the results get published.

    The Question is:
    “Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?”

    Vote at link below and PLEASE vote Yes!

    USATODAY.com – VOTE Quick Question

  20. Judy S. says:

    you may not have agreed with everything he said, but I don’t think anyone ever doubted that he did what he thought was best for the people and for our system of government. Personally, I don’t have that feeling any more.

    Didn’t realize just how much he’s missed, until I read and remembered some of the stuff he said…
    and stood for

    ‘Here’s my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘The trouble with our liberal friends are not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.’
    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through th e U.S.. Congress.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘The taxpayer: That’s someone who works for the federal

    government but doesn’t have to take the civil service examination.’
    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.’
    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it..’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.’

    – Ronald Reagan

    ‘If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.’

    – Ronald Reagan



  21. For many years, the US dollar and economy have set the world standard. But other nations have come to the conclusion that changes in US policy sometimes are not to their benefit. In fact, the truth is that whenever the US does make changes, it is only to benefit the USA. However the rest turn out, the ordinary citizen of the US does not care.
    There is a movement underway, where other nations have decided to set up another standard that is not directly controlled or influenced by US foreign policy. This has been developing for many years, so blaming the Democrats or Republicans is petty, ignoring the truth, and partisan politics.
    Some people appear comfortable with their government running up a deficit. Here in Canada, it is considered unacceptable, and until the big financial meltdown, we did not have a defecit. Even today, we are in the process of recovery, and already attacking the defecit, and plan to have it paid off as soon as possible. And whenever anyone has to go begging for a loan, they have to accept the terms of the lender. So some may protest the US surrendering any of it’s sovereignty, that is the result of a lack of fiscal responsibility by your elected representatives.

  22. I would like to say I think we should all say a prayer for Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdal from Hailey, Idaho for his safe return to his family and loved ones after being captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan. I am so sorry to hear that one of our brave soldiers has been captured, and I hope and pray that he will be released very soon, unharmed. My thoughts and prayers are with him and his family at this time.

    God speed to you Pfc. Bergdahl, for you are one of our brave heroes and you will be in my daily prayers for your safe return back home.

    Judy Sabatini

  23. Black Flag says:

    So to add my two-bits (fiat currency, of coure 😉 )

    The current collapse of the global economy and the near future destruction of the US$ is not an example of a global conspiracy in action – it is an example of a global conspiracy in failure.

    The Central Banks of the Nations have tried to manipulate the money of the People to their favor – stealing the People blind (or so they thought).

    They did conspire to steal from you – the broke the gold/dollar link – the only way the People had any control over the avarice of government. It was all central banks agreed – this is a conspiracy.

    The People had enough – and what we see is that demonstration. The elites are scrambling – they’re game is up.

    Sad and true, those that bet with the elites are suffering.

    But the elites are back on their heels – they are the biggest losers if the currency fails.

    Do not despair their at loss. Prepare to take your own reigns over your own economic ability.

  24. Many one world govt. conspiracies come from Christian authors. One of the biggest conspiracy guys out there is Texxe Marrs. He has dozens of books about symbolism and global plans. His finest work is Millenium:peace prosperity and the day they take our money away. One of his latest books called Codex Magica discusses this one world goverment and the people ,buildings and esoteric symbolism of their design. This book shows the world bank called the Beast and discusses how every world citizen is in its files. Check out his kooky website.

    • Ty,

      I guess Al Gore and his most recent ‘Global Governance’ comments are the ravings of a Christian ‘kook’? What about Hillary, Obama and his ‘citizen of the world’ BS? I’m really impressed by Dear Leader’s Christian credentials – NOT. Sarkozy in France has made global goverment comments as wel as many other others I’m to believe they’re nothing more than Christian kooks? I think this global/One World government stuff needs to be taken seriously. If it isn’t, that’s exactly what we’ll have. I know AMERICANS that think a global government is a WONDERFUL idea! They envision a StarTrek kind of planet. It hasn’t occured to them what the more likely outcome would be. My guess is something along the lines of Nazi Germany or the Islamic Caliphate. Neither one so much as resembles pre-Obama America. Any American who thinks a global government is a good idea, probably hasn’t thought about it, or has though about it, and is just a schmuck.

%d bloggers like this: