eplosive gold rallyGerald Celente is one of the world’s top trends researchers.  His top trends in 2014 start with the Middle East.  Iran, Syria, Egypt, Israel, Yemen and Turkey are just a few of the countries facing big problems.  Celente exclaims, “You just keep going around the Middle East, it’s total turmoil.”  Will there be war in the Middle East in 2014?  Celente says, “I thought it would have happened last year; but, then again, there are wild cards.”  On the economy, Celente predicts, “Interest rates are going to go up. . . . When interest rates go up, the economy is going down—period.”  Celente goes on to say, “I think they are going to institute more tapering, and it’s going to create a financial crisis worldwide.”  On gold, Celente predicts, “Then they’re going to dump more dough into the system.  When that happens, that’s when you’re going to see the real panic start to happen. . . . You’re going to see a rise in gold prices that’s going to eclipse the last one.”  In Asia, Celente points out, “Things are heating up between China and Japan.  If that thing goes into a war, it’s a whole new game.”  Celente predicts, “Absent the war card, I think we will see a financial crisis before the end of the second quarter of 2014.”  

End of Year Blowout!
2013 Silver Eagles As Low As $3.29 Over Spot at SDBullion!
*While Supplies Last!


Berkey Water Filtration Systems from The Doc
The Only Portable Water Filtration System that Removes Toxic Fluoride!

Big Berkey

  1. Celente’s usually correct. He can change character depending on who’s show he is on and what particular niche info-market he knows he is talking to, but his analysis is always consistent and his calls are much better than most.
    Financial panic, economic collapse, and war??? HAPPY DAYS!!!
    There is nothing new under the Sun, and that’s a trend we can all believe in … Celente just fills in some timing. One thing’s for sure; the deck is stacked against the US and even if it takes another 2 years to tip over the almost vertical ponzi cliff the Fed has already created, once again the trend is predictable … down, down, down, into the burning ring of fire … damn flames got higher … and it burned, burned, burned … that ring of fire … that damn ring of fire.
    We reap what we sow, and all of this QE can not be reversed, and definitely not unwound. The economy has only been sitting at stall speed even with the massive balance sheet increases at the Fed … unwinding even a small qty will push the economic indicators in reverse much more than the govt published and tweaked fixed data is already indicating.
    What really gives me the creeps is the sycophantic mantra about “Great holiday shopping data.” Who gives a damn when it was all made in China and bought on more cheap credit. There is 1000% more focus on retail data over Christmas than any mention about Jesus Christ and/or Family Values … Christmas is now a damn Consumer Cult, and the temple idol is a graph flashed up on the TV continuously and the priestesses of this cult are blond bimbos caked up with so much makeup and plastic surgery that you can barely distinguish any emotional facial gestures. This is the worst most evil cult ever created, Baa-Humbug.
    Who gives a damn if retail data was up, this doesn’t solve the problem for the next 11 months of each year when homeland manufacturing and employment matters… cheap junk made in China doesn’t help average Joe American. I hope everyone tried to buy US made this holiday season, if you can find anything still made in the US that is.

  2. I can understand Celente’s gripe over ‘Public Assets’ sold back into private hands … when those ‘private hands’ are politically connected cronies. But, he consistently and too often raises this disdain with an obvious preference that things like minerals, fuels and such ‘resources from The Land’ are somehow intrinsically ‘Public’ … vehemently endorsing their remaining under government control. This is a quite demonstrably Statist tenet in the Collectivist mode! While preaching Capitalism, he conversely Teaches Socialism.

    This gives me the uneasy, nagging feeling that he’s a ”Closet Commie’, surreptitiously ‘planting’ collectivist Principals in the sub-conscious of his audience, while preoccupying their conscious attention with loud, alarming, accusatory ‘patriot rhetoric’.

    If this is true (and I believe it is), his equally repetitive coercions toward ‘revenge’ and ‘revolution’ also fit into that ‘M.O.’. These kinds of provocateur operatives ALWAYS appeal to people’s base emotions through impulsively reactive ‘mobocracy’, because the confusion and disorder of mayhem allows ‘Strong Man’ political allusion (which is what Feudalist Commie Centralism IS) appear like a ‘solution’ to calamity.

    • >>>But, he consistently and too often raises this disdain with an obvious preference that things like minerals, fuels and such ‘resources from The Land’ are somehow intrinsically ‘Public’ …
      I don’t think I have ever heard him say anything of the sort, perhaps he has and I have missed it, but I don’t think he is a crypto-commie by any measure. IMO, he is quite clearly referring to infrastructure that was already built by Fed/State/Municipal Govt that is only being sold because the market is so broken and govt debt is so high through corrupt looting leading up to the crash (California; prime example … Schwarzenegger should hang). Privatization of such assets should be undertaken when the markets are strong in order to pay down other balance sheet liabilities, not after they collapse and are sold for cherry picking prices to plutocratically connected corporo-fascists (Like Bilderberg members that bank ALL of their profits in Tax Havens owned by the British Crown and screw both Producer and Consumer countries at both ends of every trade then pay Zero tax whatsoever and then use their mega profits to graft as many plutocrats into protecting their virtual legislative monopolies with teams of corrupt corporate lawyers … Neo-Plantation Economics is all it is). IMO, he was referring mostly to the fact that they are being privatized in current market conditions giving away all the ripe-fruit to people who have just been handed freshly printed hot-money from behind the TBTF Interest Rate Firewall/Apartheid.
      Should Prisons for instance EVER be privatized? Would holding on to Prisons be referred to as Statist? My answer would be a double No to both questions… it depends what is being privatized and when it is being privatized IMO.
      On the contrary one organization that SHOULD be Nationalized would be the Federal Reserve 😛 and the secret private shareholders should get named and shamed, Bailed-In and receive 1cent on the Dollar as a consolation prize for having taken their Pounds-O-Flesh many times over already 😛

    • WillNotBeASlave … “I don’t think I have ever heard him say anything of the sort
      Check his statement at 4 mins. 57 secs., where he alludes to Mexican oil being the property of the Mexican People (rather than the owners of the land from which that oil is recovered). His CLEAR position is that the oil ought to remain under Title of the Mexican government. That’s Feudalist Social Order philosophy (which is what Collectivism IS … masked Feudalism).

      He consistently says the same thing about resources of other countries as well. I know, I’ve listened to the fellow for years now and things like THAT … NEVER … get past me.

      I certainly don’t cast any aspersions on any of his followers, but I only hope to make folks aware that he does have subliminal messages tucked into his spiel.

      “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that precious jewel.” –Patrick Henry

    • If the corrupt Mexican Govt pushed a bunch of peasants off of their land, and sold the land and the rights to drill oil to multinational offshore firms that don’t pay any tax what so ever into the national treasury and instead just supply the ruling party with a comparatively small kick back, then I would agree with Celente’s statement, and I would not believe myself to be a proponent of ‘Feudalist’ philosophy, or a Communist/Socialist.
      I understand where you are coming from, but I think Celente delivers his opinions on this subject with a non spoken caveat that people understand the state of complete corporo-fascism in Mexico … he perhaps doesn’t bother qualifying such a statement because there would not be enough time in each interview to remind people of the current Contextual situation of modern Corporatocracy in each country that itself owes no allegiance to a so called ‘People’ but only for their ‘Shareholders’ (sometimes … if they feel like it, LOL). Officers and shareholders of such multinationals don’t have the displeasure of having to live in the country that is being exploited, or in the case of the USA they confine themselves to an ivory tower whilst raping and pillaging the peoples at ground level.
      Trust me, I know where you are coming from, and I completely understand the reactionary dangers of trying to fight Fascism with something that sounds Communist/Socialist, but in my opinion the world is not Black & White, it is Grey. I used to believe in the fundamentalist mantra of ‘Totally Free Markets’, simply because Socialism/Communism is such a crony-crock of bad philosophy … only to realize that the mantra of ‘Totally Free Markets’ is also a crony-crock of bad philosophy; one should not base their beliefs solely on a reactionary basis against the beliefs of others (IMO). Totally free markets don’t exist. ‘Free Trade Agreements’ for instance actually clear the way for only large multinationals to loot every country of hard assets/resources whilst banking all profits ‘off shore’ … they kill domestic markets in the process and make each country the hand maiden to a Global Fascism (ie, Bilderberg Group, case point). The US was made great through National Protectionism whilst maintaining REAL Domestic Free Trade … my wish would be for the US to revert to this program and that Mexico too should have their chance to realize this same nation building policy instead of being looted by multi-national Anglo-American Oil Companies etc…
      When Celente says that ‘it should be for the Mexican People’ I believe this is what he is referring to … he is not against Mexican Nationals owning shares in Mexican Oil (ie, Domestic Free Market Capitalism), thus he is also not suggesting Domestic Communism in Mexico, he is referring to multinational corporations looting Mexico and treating the Mexican People like they don’t exist.
      I am going to put my Statist Cap on for a moment (tongue in cheek 😉 ) and suggest that Mexico should print a whole lot of domestic currency and/or raise targeted infrastructure bonds and invest in building its OWN Oil Infrastructure … kick out Anglo-American Oil Companies (Like Iran did) … and then after the sweet, sweet black gold is running out, sell it direct to China for Yuan bypassing USD’s in order to build a foreign reserve (maybe buy some physical Gold Reserves from Shanghai in the process), and then slowly float the company to selective Private National Investors such as pension/superannuation funds that aid only the Mexican People … whilst maintaining capital controls to ensure that foreigners cannot gain control … any Anglo-American really wanting a piece of the investment could move to Mexico, become a citizen and live in the country like every other Mexican rather than expecting a double standard where rich foreigners can profit off of Mexican resources to the detriment of Mexicans whilst never ever having to experience the same domestic conditions of impoverishment and insecurity in what should by all means be as prosperous and safe a country as Texas is a state.
      But of course an Eric Holder of the world would send more assault rifles over the border and Mexico would explode into an all out civil war quicker than you can say ‘Anglo-American Oil’, and there would be an instant dictator in charge with an ‘un expected’ pro Western corporate policy… and things would return to the normal cocktail; just bearable social chaos with only a twist of social justice for the 99%; shaken not stirred.
      I also would not consider this to be Statist or Communist/Socialist prerogative, I would consider it to be Nation Building in the same way as the 19th/early 20th century US was doing quite fine until the Federal Reserve and TBTF banks came along and turned the US into something soon to resemble Mexico.
      Domestic Free Market Capitalism is different to Multi-National Off Shore so called ‘Free Market’ Capitalism.
      Domestic Free Market Capitalism requires a Government to protect national industry from off-shore parasites, whilst also here and there investing in domestic development of Key Profitable Sectors that cannot find private investment. Maybe this view is too Utopian, but it is a damn sight better IMO that creating a really, really small government, and allowing multinationals to take its functional place (ie, Fascism). I believe in smaller government, but not too small, and definitely not at the expense of allowing these large corporate sharks to loot everything. Definitely a large restructuring of Govt though, and elimination of domestic spying apparatus for instance and lots of other costly police state expense … cut that to the bone. Prisons for instance should NOT be privatized; they are an extension of the Justice System, not a business, next they will suggest the Courts to be privatized … oh wait … they are. Time to flee the 4th Reich maybe?

    • WillNotBeASlave  … “Celente delivers his opinions on this subject with a non spoken caveat
      This single incident isn’t unique or isolated. As I said, it’s a repetitive pattern I’ve picked up on over the years.

      We actually agree on more than we disagree, so you have the final word and I’ll simply let my statements stand or fall on their merits as they unveil themselves over time.

    • “Commie”
      Dude your reading way too much into this.
      I would say that his views are Anarcho-Capitalist. Liberalism can sometimes be mistaken for Communism. Would you call a Rastafarian or an aboriginal with land rights a communist?
      The problem with Capitalism is that it creates Monopolies. How do you destroy monopolies in a Capitalist State? This is the problem of the “us versus them” scenario where the them hold all the aces. Or are you a proponent of might is right scenario. If might is right, then why bother with capitalism at all? just go straight to I have gun, I steal from you (Take with force, against your will, all your possessions as accord to survival of the fittest).

    • @
      Pardon me for not minding my own business and jumping in here. @
      PatFields is only putting forward Rothbardian Classical Libertarianism. Any involvement/coercion of the State is an affront to liberty. Rothbard lines out in his libertarian manifesto where the classical laissez faire liberals went astray adopting litle bits of fascism and conservatism.
      LOL, and Free-Market Capitalism is contra monopolies. You are probably mistaking Crony-Capitalism and Corporatism for Free Market Laissez-faire Capitalism.
      Finally, I have to disagree that things are not black and white. They most definitely are. They are either evil perpetrated by the initiation of force or they are good and the product of voluntary exchange. There is only that. There is only liberty and property or there is slavery. Just that. Only that…

    • @hromano1030 >>>Finally, I have to disagree that things are not black and white. They most definitely are. They are either evil perpetrated by the initiation of force or they are good and the product of voluntary exchange. There is only that. There is only liberty and property or there is slavery. Just that. Only that…
      Way too bipolar for me I’m sorry. 1% of the country have stacked the deck so that they can control 99% of the land and resources and to ensure that it is completely under their control. Do this 1% have a right to own 99% of the land? Is this their right through ‘Liberty and Property’ simply because the purchased it through a means which they consider legal? I say in a Black and White world your point would make sense and they would have legally become owners of the 99% who are their chattel property, but in the real world the other 99% just get pissed off at the blatant cornering of a God given human right (land) and they go ape shit and hang those 1%, and of course this is how ‘The Terror’ of the French Revolution happened and look what happened there. When two wolves and a sheep are arguing about breakfast there is no better wolf, they are both predators. ‘Liberty and Property’ is just 3 words that mean different things to different people … someone who is able to take advantage of a downturn by pumping and dumping the entire economic system of a country can further attain/corner more of the real assets, and to them I suppose this is their God given right to ‘Liberty and Property’ … in reality it just invokes a revolution and Communist Dictators are born … thus someone has to take care of or nurture the Grey area in between to ensure a balance in Property, and this is where the Law comes into it (the anti-Trust legislation etc…); that little thing that has broken down the last few decades, the Law. IMO, the Law is the Grey area, and it is the most important part of a Republic. If there was no Grey area then we wouldn’t need lawyers, and God I wish we didn’t but we do. The only thing that is truly Black and White is the floor of a Lodge Room.
      I’m not at present moderately/mostly Right wing simply because many others are on the Left. I am where I am because I don’t believe in extremes, they all end badly.
      >>>LOL, and Free-Market Capitalism is contra monopolies.
      Yes I’m glad you have your interpretation. David Rockefeller has his too (anti-Trust laws broke up his monopolies? Chopb the head off of a hydra and you make the situation worse, many grow back), and so do the royal houses of Europe that own most of the shares in the large Oil & Resource companies that are f*cking 3rd world countries for well on a century now via their corporate plantation model. As I have said, Domestic Free Market Capitalism is different than International Free Market Capitalism because the former applies to a single legislative unit whereas the latter applies only to a global corporate syndicate/s that are a law unto themselves. This is a Big World, which is why Rothbardian Economics is now out of date when applied to International Economics, but I do in fact subscribe to almost all of his theses as applies to domestic economics… I will not disagree with you on that.
      @WaitingForSilver  >>>There you go, some basic information on what “The Crown” actually means.
      Thanks for the piss take. Trust me I know more about “The Crown” than almost anyone. You should checkout what a Secrecy Jurisdiction is, or what Regulatory Capture means. Also checkout what a ‘Delaware Corporation’ is for the equivalent in the US. You obviously have no idea where the biggest Tax Havens are or what Price Offset Accounting is and how it is used through Free-Trade legislation to destroy Domestic Economy and smaller internal national companies by using 3rd Party Profit Banking centers … most of the biggest of which are retained through “The Crown” (Legal Entity; don’t you know) and their little business districts are dominated by City of London banking families/associates. The relationship between “The Crown”, “The City Of London”, and the actual Royal Family is complex, but when you actually have done the research you can see the REAL TRUTH … and it is not what it looks like on the surface, it is much more mafioso.
      NOTE: Crown Dependencies are NOT regulated through UK Banking Legislation, and they are also independent of UK Parliament, they are run through Micro-State Councils that are stacked with OBEs and ex City of London trained Lawyers from old British Empire Mercantile Dynasties. They are easy to branch stack and capture through pork barreling, and ever since the Big Bang in London in the 80’s they have risen to dominate world shadow banking. I’m not talking here from a position of ignorance, and I have a good grasp on International Accounting Standards and how the City Of London (The Square Mile only) utilizes the Cayman Islands, Jersey, Isle of Man, Nauru, Grenada, etc… to shadow bank away all of the large multinational spoils and rape and pillage every National Treasury at the Supply & Demand sides of every trade.
      A good book to read on this that is not too big is Treasure Islands by Nicholas Shaxson … it will educate you a little [there I go with my own piss take, hope you don’t mind]

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      In response to your Momopoly Fallacy Argument:
      “In a free society, what stops corporations from becoming monopolies?”
      Or (and this was part of a rational, reasonable discussion, and certainly not a fallacy itself, so I only include it here as an example of the question, especially as the first response was directly to it):
      “Just so I understand your position completely: Would you propose any sort of system to keep corporations in control, to limit monopolies and oligopolies? Or do you propose we only depend on the free market?” (Angela Roby)
      Depend on the market. Depend on the distributed power of individuals to respond to force with force, or even things that are not force or fraud per se but “unfair practice” (racial discrimination, various acts called “exploitation”, misleading advertising) with ostracism, or simply not buying from such companies if alternatives exist.
      There are a few sorts of monopolies: those established by force (e.g., a city gives a cable provider a monopoly and stops anyone from competing), or fraud, or other criminal acts, and those established peacefully.
      To give a simple example of a peaceful monopoly, consider the first coffee shop that opens in a town. It’s not shutting anyone out, and it is likely that there will be competition if their is demand, but for now, it’s the only place to buy coffee, just because it was first. Clearly it’s doing no harm. If it overcharges for coffee, people can leave town to buy it (it only has a limited regional monopoly), brew their own, or compete with it.
      Qualifying what the monopoly is in is important, too. If there is also a tea shop (that only serves tea) in town, the coffee shop has a monopoly on coffee, but not “hot beverages”… and then if there’s a soda fountain or grocery store, they share a market for “beverages” in general. At the most basic, everyone has an absolute monopoly in their own labor. It will usually be part of a class of labor (“basketball player”, “barista”, “lawyer”—or “criminal lawyer”—or “torts lawyer specializing in mechanical sock-sorting patent infringement claims”) but the point stands. Microsoft was adjudged to have had a monopoly on “Windows”, but not operating systems in general.
      Another form of peaceful monopoly is just a company that is better at satisfying its customers—there are no artificial barriers to competing, but people try and they can’t be as efficient, or their recipes aren’t as well-liked, or their pay scale makes their employees surly, whatever.
      And again, in line with the “first in town” is the “first inventor”. I’ve used an example of autonomous (self-driving) vehicles in the past. If Joe starts a business selling converted Corollas, charging, say, $22000 ($5k over the base $17k price, which goes to the extra effort to install the computer driving mechanics, profit, research, etc.), then he has a monopoly as first seller.
      (Aside: no patents in a free society—there is no right to do harm to someone for copying your idea.)
      Fred copies Joe’s idea but uses an Aveo body which he can get for $15k and manages to reduce his costs to $4k, for a sale price of $19k. Joe cuts his overhead to $4k but is still at $21k; customers start flocking to Fred. Joe no longer has a monopoly on autonomous vehicles, but he does have one on autonomous Corollas.
      Let’s suppose that Joe makes a bundle on his business, and isn’t investing much back into it; instead, he buys a private island and passes the business to his son, who’s not so sharp. Meanwhile, Fred has employee profit-sharing plans (giving his employees incentive to work harder); he manages to cut his overhead to $3k; he invests in continuing research; and he adds Corollas and other body types to his lineup. Joe’s former company goes out of business, and Fred’s a monopoly now. But is it a license to print money? Heck no. Other people would be looking at competing, and if Fred doesn’t stay on the ball—keeping customers happy—they’ll swoop in and take his customers. Maybe automakers would decide they want to be in the business directly, even. People might sell vehicle conversion kits, which would also compete. Fred can’t sit back and raise prices and expect to get anything he asks.
      Of course, it’s just a hypothetical story, but the point is that being the sole supplier, without the ability to force people to buy from you—or stop competition with patents or favorable (unfair) regulation and other artificial force-backed barriers—a monopoly is not necessarily a bad thing for customers.
      (A theory exists called “predatory pricing” where companies lower prices so they’re losing money to put competitors out of business, then raise them above the former price to make back the money. It has a number of flaws, one of which is, IIRC, is that it’s never been observed in real life. I’ve heard of a chemical company that tried it—maybe in The Myth of the Robber Barons; the competition bought up their product at the low price and sold it in another market at a profit. The true “Robber Barons” were the ones that used the force of the state to guarantee them a market.) (DBR)
      When businesses are accused of being monopolies (frequently falsely, and never through violence), that’s bad; but the state, a violently-maintained monopoly in all sorts of essential services, is held up by those same people as ultimate good. Choice is the answer; remove government as violently-maintained (and funded) monopoly; relegate it to the role of just another service provider among competing others, and there is a chance for true accountability and choice. (DBR)
      Without antitrust laws, we would all die.
      The Antitrust laws—an unenforceable, uncompliable, unjudicable mess of contradictions—have for decades kept American businessmen under a silent, growing reign of terror. Yet these laws were created and, to this day, are upheld by the “conservatives,” as a grim monument to their lack of political philosophy, of economic knowledge and of any concern with principles. Under the Antitrust laws, a man becomes a criminal from the moment he goes into business, no matter what he does. For instance,
      ·         if he charges prices which some bureaucrats judge as too high, he can be prosecuted for monopoly or for a successful “intent to monopolize”;
      ·         if he charges prices lower than those of his competitors, he can be prosecuted for “unfair competition” or “restraint of trade”;
      ·         and if he charges the same prices as his competitors, he can be prosecuted for “collusion” or “conspiracy.”
      There is only one difference in the legal treatment accorded to a criminal or to a businessman: the criminal’s rights are protected much more securely and objectively than the businessman’s.

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      As for your argument against black and white, I’m a little confused.  Are you advocating the use of force against the “1%” because it’s just not fair?  Really, I could not make sense of your argument.  I did however, gather that you prefer moderation, so I copied the below quote.
      In battling evil, excess is good; for he who is moderate in announcing the truth is presenting half-truth. He conceals the other half out of fear of the people’s wrath.

    • @hromano1030 >>>Are you advocating the use of force against the “1%” because it’s just not fair?
      No, I’m saying that any society that allows such a hegemony to occur without utilizing specialists in the ‘grey’ area (honest intervention by honest attention to Law) in order to prevent it getting out of hand is inevitably going to cause the 99% to revolt. “When people lose everything they lose it”-G.Celente. It’s not my opinion it is reality.
      I’m not stating it is my personal opinion that I would be in the 99% and find it ‘unfair’, in that I would go beat someone over the head and steal their goods, although I understand the implied stereotype, and in considering myself to be quite right of center but nowhere near the extreme I commonly have to deal with getting hammered from both extreme left and extreme right proponents with Absolutes, but I refuse to pick an extreme wing. It has nothing to do with what I want, it is just reality taking over when Communists/Socialist movements arise, and then the real Terror starts, and it is almost always preceded by a minority having concentrated all liquid capital and real assets (and political power through purchase) to themselves, and then placing an economy in stagnation/decline as they stockpile and hoard even more causing deeper and deeper depression. Socialist/Commie like movements like the Occupy Wall Street crowd, instead of fighting to break up the Fed and sticking it to Washington about their relationship with TBTF, they go and occupy the finance center and scream out for more justice and welfare with less demand for justice and more demand for the welfare state. Welfare of course simply exacerbates the problem because it means the TBTF can get away with even more looting and economy screwing because the Govt is providing bread in order to keep the masses from revolting earlier (God I pray it is peaceful mass resistance or non-compliance when it occurs, but history says otherwise).
      In regards to the examples you give of Monopolies in the first post I can only go by real historical examples, like when J.D.Rockefelller Sr was chosen by the biggest at the time on Wall Street (J.P.Morgan mostly) to target all of the other micro oil producers for anti-competitive behavior using much larger supplies of available credit than anyone else could attain from Wall Street (The biggest on Wall Street had chosen HIM as their man) and he undercut all the smaller entrepreneurs by selling at a loss in their markets, and then created a transit cartel with the large railroad firms in order to run competitors out of business. The history books of course have been re-written by the Rockefeller Foundation lackies to make him into a saint and to downplay the railroad connections, but just like Jekyll Island it was simply Mob Activity plain and simple. In modern Capitalism it is simply WHO HAS ACCESS TO MEGA CREDIT who ends up getting the golden handshake to screw every smaller fish in the pond. And with 85% of all US capital under control of 5 Banks whereas for instance in Germany it is 75% of capital under control of 3000 separate banks, the Golden Handshakes in the US occur quick and fast, and only ‘Chosen Ones’ need apply, everyone else can go and hang as far as these Merchant & Banking Dynasties are concerned, it is no different to Royal Families and Lords pre-1776.
      I simply don’t see your point about the anti-Trust Laws and them being a problem. Any Law can be abused, but without some laws the abuse is greater … Utopia actually means ‘No Where’, thus trashing every Law and allowing the pixies and unicorns to ride free in the street, freely expecting a pot of gold behind every rainbow for every man who cares to venture without dealing with Extreme Asset Hegemony will only lead to enslavement, and then revolution, and then Communism, which will then break down into complete cronyism, it will eventually collapse in anarchy, and you will be back at the start in order to start it all over again. Nurturing the Grey Areas (Law and reasonable application of it) slows down the process and may even be able to prevent the cycle (But perhaps that is my own utopian vision, because the Extreme Wing proponents are many, and Moderates are few)
      As regards your belief that Patents are restrictive I once again completely disagree because Access To Credit means that small inventors/innovators would be completely robbed instantly by large Industrial multi-nationals that are shacked up with TBTF Credit. Destroying Patent Law when this TBTF behemoth and the Multi-National combines are in such control of everything would be devastating to the serfs who are trying to get ahead by using their brains.
      Just because Laws can be abused (and I know this) is absolutely no reason to abolish them. I consider this argument to be a straw man in order to advocate Anarchy … and I fully understand the semantical debate on the Extreme Right about the true definition of Anarchy and it being all good and wholesome, but I once again cannot agree. Adam Weishaupt was an Anarchist who believed in the destruction of property rights and all forms of statism … and in my opinion he was engineering a catalyst for Marxism, but he was working for the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Ducal House in order to secretly set up a Synarchy. Anarchy plays straight into the hands of Synarchists at the end of the day, they relish it, plain and simple (IMO).
      My ethos would be one of constant Reform and constant Reasonable de-Centralization of Political and Economic power, and a constant focus of Law Reform utilizing Public Consensus at every step… I know it is much harder to define than picking an extreme wing and running around with a banner of pride saying LIBERTY AND PROPERTY or LIBERTY AND EQUALITY or TAX THE RICH or some other 3 word warm and fuzzy sentence that is supposed to recreate Paradise … but I’m willing to hold as a Moderate and to resist picking a team … I prefer arbitration, it has less chance of causing blood in the streets.

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      I have no idea what the right of center is or means.  I guess it’s a euphemism for can’t decide what you want and have no morals.  I see either you want to give the State the power over you to govern your actions and be a slave, or you want no government or ruler over you and you want to be free.  Personally, from what I read from you, you should probably change your avatar name.  Slavery is what you preach and seem to prefer.

    • @hromano1030 >>>I have no idea what the right of center is or means. 
      I know you don’t and that’s the problem.
      >>> I guess it’s a euphemism for can’t decide what you want and have no morals.
      No morals? What a load of bull, if I had no morals then I wouldn’t bother trying to educate dead beats.
      Can’t decide? Yes. I can actually, is called Moderation and Arbitration, just as I have said.
      – Prisons are not to be privatized… this is not ‘Statism’ … but for an Absolutist like you, I suppose you can just avoid that one, ignore it because it doesn’t fit into your idea of Utopian Anarchy (Orwellian you know?)
      – Public Libraries are a good form of public expense.  etc… totally wasted on you though huh?
      Go worship a ‘Goddess of Reason’ or something, there will be plenty on the Extreme Left who will be willing to actively disagree with you in time.
      >>> I see either you want to give the State the power over you to govern your actions and be a slave, or you want no government or ruler over you and you want to be free.
      Actually I believe the State IS the People, and I am willingly active in taking part in reform, just as George Washington and the others were in fact creating a State in 1776, but I see you have your guns, your opinions and your inability to see some necessary grey areas. By the way I am not against guns, but it seems to help your Mantras so I’m throwing it in there to indicate your limit to present, with barely any knowledge of the past, and definitely no interest in the future. After the Roman Empire collapsed the populations were routed by the next rapers and pillagers .. Yay, the State was conquored but ooooh, sh*t didn’t get better, who would have thunken?… those who advocate anarchy get what they deserve, just as will you, I just feel sorry for the innocent people who try to moderate their positions who get stuck in the middle. You yourself are a CATALYST for Communism … look in the mirror.
      >>>Personally, from what I read from you, you should probably change your avatar name.  Slavery is what you preach and seem to prefer.
      You are a brainless wonder obviously, go grab a Three Word Banner you Fundamentalist prick. ‘LIBERTY AND PROPERTY’ will do … just go with that. Run out into the street and rally some more cannon fodder, you sound like a Pro.
      You can scream ‘USA..USA…USA…’ after you kill a fellow American or something.

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      Well, I could write pages in response to your filth, but I have no doubt that it would not alter your statist thinking.  So I won’t bother.  Let’s leave it at this, which I hope we can find some common ground.
      You believe and do what you like and you will, as long as you don’t initiate or threaten aggression against me or others and our property.  I will do exactly the same.  That is the entire foundation of my philosophy.  Deal?
      I know that it is a tough one for a statist not to use force against others, but I am sure you can do it if you try.  Well, maybe not.

    • @hromano1030 >>>You believe and do what you like and you will, as long as you don’t initiate or threaten aggression against me or others and our property.  I will do exactly the same.  That is the entire foundation of my philosophy.  Deal?
      Absolutely nowhere have I stated that I do not respect property, in fact property rights are protected by Guns or in the sake of disputes and for more feeble people who cannot defend themselves it is protected in THE COURTS and by THE POLICE (You know … the ‘State’, the collective support structure that makes in some way not a complete individual but part of a civilization.)
      I notice on another post you mentioned your daughter was in the Army. Who pays her wage? Does she work for the state?
      What a hypocrite you are.
      >>>I know that it is a tough one for a statist not to use force against others, but I am sure you can do it if you try.  Well, maybe not.
      There are only two categories of people in your world, Anarchists and Statists? Boy, what a lonely and bi-polar world.
      The Founding Fathers were NOTHING like you, and you need to realize that, when you wave a banner of LIBERTY AND PROPERTY around … you’re all talk an no substance, and YES, I will now leave it at that!

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      No, my daughter is not in the Army, and I never said she was in the Army.  So it appears that your reading comprehension skills are what most typical statist skills are.  Second of all, you liberal fu*ktard, what my daughter does for a living or who pays her salary, is not your business, nor is it mine.  How in the fu*k can I be a hypocrite for the actions of someone other than myself.  Where you, my daughter, or anyone else derives their income is their business and none of my own, you liberal @sslicker.  However, if you must know, you statist c*nt, what my daughter does for a living, she is a Registered Nurse for a private hospital.  Does that meet with your approval, you statist c*cksucker.  So, now suck my di*k and we’ll leave it at that, Motherfu*ker.

    • @hromano1030 >>>No, my daughter is not in the Army,
      Well then how do you answer your post on this LINK … You’re also a filthy liar, caught with your pants down.
      I have posted an IMAGE of your post and family pic below … a little memory jogger for you if maybe you are simply demented and have forgotten you even have perhaps another daughter in Fleet Marine Force.
      >>>So it appears that your reading comprehension skills are what most typical statist skills are.
      It seems to be YOUR reading skills that have failed, of maybe your understanding, you seem to have misinterpreted the WE from WE THE PEOPLE (ie, the Preamble to the Federal Constitution … when they created a State declaring to honor individual liberties)
      The FEDERAL Constitution was a COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT where a NATION of PEOPLES decided to create a SYMBIOSIS between INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and COLLECTIVE RIGHTS (ie, the WE). The Collective Rights were to be moderated and not ABSOLUTE under a DICTATOR, thus a ‘Statism’ without the ABSOLUTE.
      You only care about the YOU part of it … there is no YOU in WE … so you seem not to be covered by the Constitution. How can a single person make an agreement with himself? Were there MULTIPLE signers on the Constitution? Were they representing a COLLECTIVE NATION and creating a LAW?
      ### Your reading skills have failed you also, you didn’t even get past the Preamble. ###
      The cold hard piercing truth and no less.
      You’re just a Cheap Fundamentalist Anarchist, and you give the word Patriot a bad name … You have no idea that Individual Rights are only enshrined in agreements between MORE THAN ONE PARTY … otherwise go live on a rock in the middle of the ocean or something, and call it your Nation Of Self.
      …and Change your avatar to LORD OF THE FLIES while you are at it.
      And as for convicting me of writing ‘filth’, your last post is quite the irony, obviously you lead by example … not that you advocate to lead anything at all … more irony.

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      So I am a filthy liar, am I?  Why you stupid fu*k, why don’t you Google Fleet Marine Force Corpsman and see if that is part of the Army. Then, after you Google it and discover that you don’t know your @ss from a hole in the ground, let me know if after I fu*k you in the @ss, if you’ll let me stick the shitty end in your mouth. You punk Motherfu*ker.

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      So, before you called me a liar and before you brought my family into the discussion, I was willing to leave our differences as just that differences.  But now, since I have discovered what a piece of s*** you are, I’ve decided to only respond to you everytime you address me with comment about sh!tting in your mouth and @ss fu*king your mother, sisters, and daughter.  Don’t want to see it or read it, the STFU and quit addressing me, you filthy liberal statist. 

    • @hromano1030 >>>So I am a filthy liar, am I?  Why you stupid fu*k, why don’t you Google Fleet Marine Force Corpsman and see if that is part of the Army.
      My original point was that obviously whether on contract for Medical purposes in a WAR she was serving the STATE.
      But I know that just as ‘Anarchist’ is a proud banner for you to wave, so the use of the word ‘Army’ you will also manipulate. . . OPERATION IRAQI ‘FREEDOM’, fighting with the Saudis for the PetroDollar. The Founding Fathers were dead against foreign wars for Empire whether veiled or unveiled … it would bring a tear to their eyes.
      Her wages came from the State no less, whether directly or indirectly. You don’t need to try to squirm out of your obvious bull sh*t, it is all over your face.
      >>>I’ve decided to only respond to you everytime you address me with comment about sh!tting in your mouth and @ss fu*king your mother, sisters, and daughter.
      And I will simply link to this thread and your 11 December post so that anyone reading your filth can see what you are. By the way, I don’t hold any such desire against your Mother, Sisters or Daughters, and that’s what makes us very different. You are rotten inside, and by the way, when you added pics of your daughter to a public blog YOU brought your family into it … it’s not my fault I have a good memory and am willing to call out people who are obviously rotten to the core inside and openly lie or manipulate by choosing their words carefully in order to cover up the truth of their hypocrisy. You’re actually not that intimidating by the way, but you are very dirty indeed.
      I will repeat what I said before … THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE NOTHING LIKE YOU, and you would not even have been considered by them to be an American with your contrarian ideas AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION. You are definitely no Patriot, just a cheap Anarchist!

    • @WillNotBeASlave,
      And my original point was how much your mother loved the taste of my c0ck after fu*king you in [email protected]

  3. Willnotbeaslave and Pat Fields  I concur with silverrrrr  A well framed debate with first rate repartee and retorts.  A good learning experience that extended beyond Celente’s dialogue
    My only question is why Celente would buy eastern seaboard property if the corrupt infrastructure of this country would not support the long term enjoyment of the income and private ownership of such a property.  The way Celente talks I am not sure he has not gone completely expat at this stage. Or has he?

    • AGXIIK … “I am not sure he has not gone completely expat at this stage.”
      I did that years ago! I’d sent certified Notices of Expatriation from status as a ‘citizen of the United States, with Reclamation of Pennsylvania State Citizenship to both Condoleeza Rice and the Pennsylvania State Department, along with Declaration of Lawful Permanent Domicile, stipulating it to be under the original, ordinary Pennsylvania State jurisdiction. I did that quickly after making the final Principal Money Mortgage Loan payment on my house and land in gold, to secure full Title At Law as In Equity. Then I set all that into the County Public Record. There were more notices and filings, but those were the most important.

    • @PatFields
      “I did that quickly after making the final Principal Money Mortgage Loan payment on my house and land in gold, to secure full Title At Law as In Equity. Then I set all that into the County Public Record. There were more notices and filings, but those were the most important.”
      And the result of all that was… ?

    • Ed, while, I’m still tussling with the City Hall Soviet over land tax liability … since then I haven’t heard a peep out of anyone regarding any sort of ‘income tax’ and I suspect Socialist Security has finally given up trying to get me to stumble into a tacit allusion of claim to the ‘benefit’. Otherwise … I win most of my litigation and bogus claims I don’t outright ‘win’ on, seem to just fade into a sort of frozen limbo.

      Sometimes I wish I had the wherewithal to test out some of my other legal conclusions. One example is, I’m quite certain that acquisition of a used automobile, certified as ‘Junk’ by the State, removes ALL its Title. Thus, purchase in ‘Lawful Money’ under a signed, sealed and witnessed Common Law Bill of Sale, can be safely used without any crap about ‘compliance’ under Administrative Civil Process. Another has to do with setting up a retail operation, doing entirely private business under original, ordinary Common Law jurisdiction of the State. Yet another, is acquiring arms directly from a manufacturer, again, under Common Law Bill of Sale.

    • WillNotBeASlave … “You are a braver man than I.”
      Thanks, but it isn’t so much ‘bravery’ as confidence in the … years … of research and study (on the shoulders of others in the ‘Patriot Movement’) I’d devoted to the effort toward dissembling how these snares are constructed and laid out to trap us and careful examination of both correct and incorrect procedures others have worked with in the past.

  4. A couple of other thoughts.  What about the two bombing attacks in Russia right before the Sochi Olympics.  Bandar did try to make a faustian agreement with Putin regarding the control of the Chechens who ‘could attack’ the Olympics.  But Bandar did tell Putin he could control the Chechens if Putin supported the Saudis against Syria, a client state.  Putin knocked over a big pawn or knight on the chess board when he rebuffed that offer.  Putin showed some real stones in this matter.
    One more thought occurs to me and it’s a bit off base. What if Putin and Jinping jerk a knot in KLUMMAC’s tail to prevent Il Duce from going FULL RETARD STATIST in America.  Not that Russia and China are great friends of this country but they have vital interests in America in many fashions.  If Obama tried some sort of coup, it would not be in the interest of Putin and Jinping to see their investments harmed.  Any speculation.
    Purin and Jinping,  friends and supports of POTUS?  Or making sure he doesn’t go off the reservation.

    • @AGXIIK >>>If Obama tried some sort of coup, it would not be in the interest of Putin and Jinping to see their investments harmed.  Any speculation.
      IMO, it could go both ways. Under a FULL RETARD STATIST America (LOL) the Govt Cronies still rely on international trade to keep their chosen families fat and plump, so a Statist America that works with the Chinese and Russians in order to squeeze every last drop of labor/wealth out of We The Slaves would be desirable because there would be more Graft to go round … otherwise they would end up like Poorer Dictators … like Chavez, ostracized from all of the international action … and Michelle (or her next place holder) needs to keep up their 4 to 6 holidays a year … US Cronies are too used to the good life, so don’t underestimate their desire for traitorous activity.
      On the other hand I really think the Chinese remember the Opium Wars, they are a proud nation that has up until now been treated like an inferior race, and they want to ostracize the US (IMO)… the Russians remember the NYC and City of London looting of their liquid assets in the 1990’s and they also want to see the US on its knees. Obama wouldn’t get a deal from them even if he got down on his knees as offered Putin & Jinping a you know what…
      But it could go either way I guess. I really don’t think any world leaders actually like Obama. They think he is mutton dressed up like lamb, and is McCain any better? was Romney? … Where the hell do these stooges come from? Not an ounce of genuine charisma or moral principles in them, and Obama has no charisma, he’s a Harry Lennix wannabe, it’s all too fake, and from the beginning I wasn’t buying it, LOL.

  5. AGXIIK, regarding the horrific bombings in Volograd, I do remember reading a rumor that Putin threatened to smash Saudi Arabia if the Saudis set their terrorist dogs loose and disrupt the Olympics.  Given how much personal pride Putin has in hosting the Winter Olympics, if they are ruined by a terrorist attack, then what would he have to lose by making good on his threat?
    Since a picture is worth a thousand words, this one should aptly convey the status of the relationship between Putin and Obama.

    • That is such a perfect picture. 
      A truculent student and dismayed teacher.
      My recollections are that back in the day the Russians called up their Bulgarians and the problem was taken care of. Just the fact the it was Bulgarians that did the wet work was enough to let the others know their time was short if they did not toe the line.  Subtle, effective and far less messy and costly than sending in the 7th fleet.

  6. Language is a powerful thing, and words stated in ignorance or hypocrisy is not true knowledge.
    I beg you all, before stating opinions and regarding them as fact, please make sure the fact is factual and not based on prejudice or some high notion of personal opinion.
    Human first.

    • >>>Language is a powerful thing, and words stated in ignorance or hypocrisy is not true knowledge.
      You never specify who or what particular part of their argument/comment you are referring to.
      If someone is apparently according to your opinion a hypocrite or ignorant could you be specific please?
      It is ironic that you are cautioning on the use of ‘language’ when you then throw out ‘ignorance’ or ‘hypocrisy’ in the same sentence … especially because you are not being specific.
      The very uniqueness of SD is the quality of debate that many contributors put the time and effort into providing on controversial subjects. Confrontation is the very essence of Liberty, because free speech is the oil that makes the mechanism turn, and debate is what determines ‘true knowledge’, not a single persons opinion.
      >>>I beg you all, before stating opinions and regarding them as fact, please make sure the fact is factual and not based on prejudice or some high notion of personal opinion. Human first.
      Who exactly arbitrates what is or is not a ‘fact’ if nobody gets a chance to air their opinion?
      Perhaps the only ‘high notion’ applies to your own seemingly more erudite ‘personal opinion’?

    • Did he learn to do that to political dissidents as KGB chief when he took care of dissenters in the gulags?

    • waitingforsilver 
        No question the Chechnyans have had a rough go of it. Their plight could easily figure into something much more serious.
        World War I started from a minor assassination, one  of Arch Duke Ferdinand.
        Every major country in Europe had weapons systems and were itching to test them, settle some centuries-old grievances and before you know the entire continent was in flames. Each country was concerned that the other one would attack first, disable the defending country, take them by surprise. So everyone went at it pretty much simultaneously.
       It may not matter why the Chechnyans did what they did,  who they report to, if anyone, or what they wanted to accomplish.
      Putin is not going to allow this to go without consequences.  This sort of action could blow out of hand and no one will stop the momentum of aggression once it gets started.  The wars state in the middle east and have for generations. This time would probably not be any different.  The Saudis have no friends at the White House.  They may go it alone, or help Israel with a strike against Iran’s nuclear plants.  60% enriched uranium is the next goal. Helping Israel is compromised the Syrian pipelines and those to China.  The Saudis are in a tough place.  I think we would back them if push came to shove if for no other reason that we have to preserve the patro dollar system  Our entire country relies on that.   War War seems to be in the offing.  No Jaw Jaw.  It may be beyond that now.
      I hope not

    • @ShelbyGT500 from your link: “We often hear that we need government to intervene to prevent monopolies. But the truth is that on a free market there are no monopolies: monopolies are created by government intervention.”
      Sorry but this is some really bad Randian one dimensional jibber-jabber.
      If there was Zero Govt (also Judicial; remember that other pillar of the Govt?) and you allowed the capitalist game to go on un-questioned, ALL industries would end up in Monopolies. Cartels are unavoidable, and in a purely anarchic system they thrive because dirty tricks are even easier. Monopolies don’t just disappear simply because Govts stop intervening, this is complete rubbish. The Judicial Branch of Govt is required to break up monopolies, it is part of the government, and even though many of us hate Lawyers with a passion we still need Law Givers … the Founding Fathers don’t forget were essentially Law Givers … The Constitution is the foundation of Law, and better still there is Natural Law which even trumps the Constitution … just like Moses was also a law giver, but I liked Moses’ version a little better when I think about the last 50 years of US Law Making, because Moses knew when to get the sword out for some righteous indignation.
      Ayn Rand was a smokeaholic basket case IMO … way too damn general in her thinking to have any real application to a working system. Some Libertarians worship her like the ‘Goddess Of Reason’ from the Jacobin Era … it’s damn scary, and a lot of people would be killed if these sorts of ideas were enacted again.
      I believe Ayn Rand is playing a game of cards with Karl Marx in the 9th circle of hell, and Rand is screaming about how great she is that she won, and Marx is beating her blind with a really big useless text book. Match made in heaven, or hell..

  7. Now the Russians can outmaneuver everyone with this… but

    This bad boy’s avionics are way ahead of Russian avionics, meaning it might not be as maneuverable, but who cares, this F-22 will spot the Russian jet and launch a missile at it before the Russians even spot the F-22 on their radar.
    Avionics will win wars for America.

    • And ooo baby, don’t mess with Israeli systems, they’re even better than American stuff. Mmmm, yummy Jewish brains 🙂

      A bit of manly competition between Seals and Israelis… more entertainment than anything… manly entertainment. 🙂
      Cry Muslims.

  8. If the economic elitists are really so clever, why would they let so much gold flow over to China? Is it because they know something we don’t know? Are they planning on de-valueing gold somehow? When you think carefully, gold has very little real value other than as something nice and shiny. It doesn’t produce food etc.
    Are we just buying in to their trick/joke on the Chinese? They can stack as much of the yellow as they want, but we still control our own land etc. right?

    • matthewinuk stated: “If the economic elitists are really so clever, why would they let so much gold flow over to China?”

      ‘Economic elitists’ aren’t known to have any preventative role potential here. Mining companies mine the gold and it finds its way to the LBMA. Other entities have gold that finds its way to the LBMA. Chinese companies/government purchase it on the LBMA and arrange for shipping to China. Short of shutting down the LBMA (isn’t it now owned by a Chinese company or their government now?), I’m not sure how the ‘economic elitists’ can prevent sales to Chinese entities or their representatives. Besides, why should Chinese citizens or their government be prevented from purchasing what they want?

      matthewinuk stated:
      “Are they planning on de-valueing gold somehow?”

      De-value gold in terms of what? And how? You need to elaborate more clearly to make your point known.

      matthewinuk stated:

      “When you think carefully, gold has very little real value other than as something nice and shiny. It doesn’t produce food etc.”

      I guess you haven’t read about gold’s use as money for thousands of years. It’s also used in industry, so it’s value towards industrial use should logically infer that it’s worth more that the cost of mining it. Does the $100 federal reserve note produce food? This last statement of yours infers either a.)compete ignorance, b.)complete lack of monetary knowledge, or c.)intentional troll activity.

      matthewinuk stated:
      “Are we just buying in to their trick/joke on the Chinese?”

      What’s the trick or joke??? I’m not sure what you’re referring to.
      Perhaps you’re assuming that the Chinese are somehow potentially getting screwed out of something? As I see it, the joke is on the gold mining companies who are selling gold at a loss. They’re getting screwed out of making a fair profit. Thus the joke is on them. The banksters are facilitating the ‘joke’ on the mining companies, because it’s playing a role in their NWO planning.

      matthewinuk stated:
      “They can stack as much of the yellow as they want, but we still control our own land etc. right?”
      What in the world does the amount of gold imported in to China have to do with control of “our own land”? Who’s land are you referring to? The land of the guy here on SD, who’s in Latvia, who just purchased a monster box of silver maples? Or the land of the guy from Russia who posts here all the time? Or the land of occasional poster Bron Suchecki over in Australia? Or the land of some of our posters on SD from Thailand, Norway, UK, or Canada? Or should I just assume that you’re assuming that the USA is the only place in the world, and that Chinese ownership in gold somehow correlates to USA residents controlling our own land? I see no connection between ownership of gold by Chinese individuals/government and land ownership around the world.

  9. Willnotbeaslave.   I really laughed over your description of Rand and Marx in the 9th level of hell. I heard they are both playing gin rummy.  Rand flails at Marx with her 1080 page tome; Marx beats her around the head with Das Capital.
    Each winnning hand forced the other to drink a shooter of Beefeater.  Friedman’s the bartender.  Brandon serves crepes.  No country club for any of them, they got thrown out of the last one available

    Pat Fields has compiled a library of legal machineries that allow an ordinary person to secure their rights before the law. 
    The good thing is that Pat is intelligent enough to work his way through the labyrinthine channels of 150,000 laws laid on top of each other by either the wily legislator who wants to separate the citizen from justice and equity or the dunderheaded legislator who signs off on a simpleton’s version of legal process only to find it’s consequences are completely at odds with equitable legal solutions.
    It occured to me that in the ideal world we could all be Pat Fields, understand and accessing the law because is remained simple. Aside from the problem of legal complexities, in this land scholarly minds a few, the laws are many and our extremely well paid legislators sit around doing nothing by compiling hundreds of thousands of additional pages, further assuring the idiocy continues.

    I like the 10 Commandments.  I could work well within those 10 laws and do, even if I don’t think consciously about their application in my life.
      Someone told me that Moses had 20 Commandments but his wife talking him out of the lasy 10.  
    She said  “Moses, Oy, keep it simple. The women will take care of the other 10. That’s what we do best.”
      “Didn’t your mother tell you that,  Mr. Bigshot, parting the Red Sea and all.  
     “Now be  sure to keep a clean world:  You never know when you’re going to get run over by God” 
    ” And don’t forget to feed the goats” 
    As for Obama. He and his crew, as close as they are to the thinking of Putin and Jinping’s manifestos, is still in kiddie school. the South Side of Chicago is not a good place to learn real-politic when the fate of the world is on the line. To the winner goes the spoils. As you put it, China and Russia both got hosed by the west. I heard that trillions were leached from Russia during that black period. Payback is an ongoing procress. I doubt if Obama understands the real implications. He was smoking and snorting his way to the Presidency while that took place

    • AGXIIK … “The good thing is that Pat is intelligent enough to work his way through the labyrinthine channels of 150,000 laws laid on top of each other”
      You know, the funny thing is … I’m REALLY not much smarter than the ‘average bear’. All those myriad statutes are actually part of the diversionary ploy! Nearly every self-litigator I know, has lamented at least a couple years … totally wasted … mucking in that quagmire of Civil Process until eventually discovering the rather uncomplicated sublime eloquence of Common Law.

      In our country’s earliest years, lawyers were contemptuously reviled by most folks who ALWAYS litigated their own causes … mano e mano … At Law or In Equity, because the contest there is not on statutory nuance, but on Principals held across many centuries and the cases in precedence which often set paths already well trodden.

      Prosecuting Common Law and the Constitutions is actually FAR less effort than swimming around in the statutory spaghetti bowl of innumerable loose ends. It was like Revelation when I first discovered it.

    • @AGXIIK
      I just heard Rand and Marx have progressed to the Mud Pit, and Greenspan has joined her as Towel Boy, and Adam Weishaupt has stepped up to the Towel for Marx. After 666 rounds it’s still a dead tie, and Rand has called for a smoke break … Marx is trying to call in backup but Lenin and Trotsky are arguing.  
      LOL, we could make an awesome parody on that. Comedy Central material for sure.
      As regards your Moses comments I was in fits … all so true. As for Moses’ wife controlling the Household Law (LOL), but the femminazis would not like her one bit, she would also have to get the sword out (She was a Midianite so she probably knew how to fight ….. Grrrrr). LAW 11: Don’t mess with the wife.
      I looked into some of the links you provided me a while back and am progressing nicely, but as you say, it is a bit of a quagmire, and the Civil Law Barristocracy have been getting away with blue murder for so long now that it is touch and go whether you have a bully boy Judge or not if you start to get into Common Law (They don’t like it, but some Judges still respect it and will back off or give a plaintiff more room .. there is still hope).
      I personally prefer Forest Law (The other part of the Great Charter) … if times get tough then run into the Forest, but don’t touch the Kings Venison … deal with that King later, but the Trees provide nice shelter and temporary respite from the Baron.
      Maritime Law in my opinion is simply a nice way of saying Martial Law when push comes to shove. Did the British East India Company ever dissolve completely is my question???

    • WillNotBeASlave … “Civil Law Barristocracy have been getting away with blue murder for so long now that it is touch and go whether you have a bully boy Judge or not”
      Ahhh, you’ve not yet fully comprehended that in Common Law procedure, as prosecutor (‘plaintiff’) it’s YOUR court being held. There, the Judge is strictly in the role of impartial arbiter to keep the litigants from exceeding their Lawful rights and conducting Process correctly. Under such constraint, you CAN (quietly and respectfully, on the record)charge that Judge with contempt of court for usurping authority beyond that function! Your initial establishment of ‘Law of the Case’ at hand, and clear entry on the record of the Judge’s having strayed away from that specific Law put into motion, empowers one to … over-rule … such acts.

      Yes, the Barristocrats WILL use every subtle trick they can muster, to shift the case under Civil Law Process (or Admiralty, or Commerce) to change the Judge’s role to one of decisiveness as opposed to clerical, but a sharp and watchful prosecutor remains wary of that and ever ready to Object “Upon and For the Record’ to these slights.

    • @PatFields >>>Ahhh, you’ve not yet fully comprehended that in Common Law procedure, as prosecutor (‘plaintiff’) it’s YOUR court being held.
      No, no, I get it. I was just putting it in the context that if you get a fascist Judge then both of your points of view are different from the start and that the bailiff becomes initially the tool of your misery 😛 Trust me, I fully get the point about it being the Plaintiffs Courtroom and that Jury by Peers (and not Magistrates) is Sacrosanct under Commons.
      Your point about ‘Upon and For the Record’ is well taken … one may have to endure the initial abuse in a case, only to take their ‘on the record’ objections into an appeals process after the fact and get the Judge ‘tarred and feathered’ so to speak when the Common Law finally wins out over the fallaciously attempted application of Civil/Admiralty/Corporate Law within a Court actually only consecrated under Common Law to begin with, and the original ruling is overturned … and perhaps recourse then ensues by the Plaintiff against the Judge for miscarriage of justice … SWEET, SWEET REVENGE 😛
      I guess it depends on whether you personally have the time and energy to take on a particular fight, because sometimes you might consider the payment of perhaps a fine imposed illegally does not equate to the amount of unpaid personal hours spent dealing with it or the travel costs incurred etc… required to resist the wayward arm of the so called ‘Law’. If it was a serious dispute then it would be worth it, but if minor I would personally be more inclined to submit … unless it was for a moral principle that I wanted to fight, sometimes it might be an enjoyable sport 🙂
      What We The People lack in the first place is enough people willing to take on the System in order to put it back in its rightful place (The Commons), and it becomes more arrogant as time goes on … if only Americans were as easy to rally against injustice as Gandhi found it in India … Power from the people only comes with enough bodies who are willing, and there are too many people who are more interested in the Super Bowl etc… they’ve maybe had it good for waaay too long to remember what Testicles actually are. I think it’s a little bit like the Battle of Agincourt; the French Mounted Equite Lords were all dismounted and decimated by Peasants trained with Longbows; it was a game changer when the rich and powerful who felt entitled to rule over their inferiors learned that reality was starting to bite … How demoralizing for the Arthurian romance 🙂 … Bully Boy Barristocrats are no different to uppity Medieval Lords IMO, but every now and then there is a decent Judge who honors their pledge to preserve the Constitution (and by heritage the Magna Carta and Natural Law), and such a Judge is the true enthronement of Justice and Liberty … not the Executive without a birth certificate and no heritage, LOL.

    • WillNotBeASlave … “I guess it depends on whether you personally have the time and energy to take on a particular fight
      As a practical matter, that’s true, but sometimes the Principal outweighs other considerations when ramifications run to the core of a Society’s structural integrity and ‘Spirit’. That’s the essence of Common Law; to preserve the structural Principals, not merely daily minutiae. So, sometimes the decision to litigate is more a Duty than choice.

      “It may be said that a tax of one dollar for passing through the State cannot sensibly affect any function of government or deprive a citizen of any valuable Right. But if a State can tax … a passenger of one dollar, it can tax him a thousand dollars.” Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall 35, 46

  10. @AGXIIK  About the South Side of Chicago, a few years ago an old friend from grade school informed me that Michelle had gone to our school (the former Bryn Mawr Elementary School), a few years after us, and being a dyed in the wool liberal, she was so proud of the fact.  I mentioned it to my brother and I thought he would throw up on the spot. We were Republicans in Chicago, and as such had seen our votes stolen back in the ’60s (“I’m sorry, it appears that you already voted!” -to which my sister was tempted to ask “Well, how many times did I vote?” ) by these vicious little pukes. They are vicious, but they are small time, low class, crooks…living high on other people’s dime. Total scum.

  11. matthewinuk  
    your comment about gold flow to china kicked off a weird thought.
     Leaving aside the moronic squads of drones also known as economists and cadres of bankers who come and go over the decades, and their pathetic attempts to control anything;  what if—and think about the specific gravity or water, silver and gold;  what if these two precious metals flow in a similar manner to the tides. 
    In an off angle relation to monopolies and the impossibility of maintaining one for a long period of time, what if gold and silver flow across the planet like the watery tides are pulled by the gravitational effects of the sun and moon and do so despite the best efforts of those who try to control them?   They flow at a much slower rate due to their density.  Silver being less dense  that gold, flows more quickly that gold.  But both slosh around the planet in steady waves from east to west, west to east for centuries and millenium.

    Since gold is considered a godly metal, who’s to say with 100% certainly that gold flow is not divine, rewarding the group best suited to become the steward of this metal
      Just thinking out loud but it does strike me that there seem to be greater forces here than meets the eye.

  12. Willnotbeaslave   if a Dem says it it mut be true 
    That’s why there’s tides.  With polar reversals, nutations and techtonic plates, the gold must shift from east to west.
    If the planet tipped over all the gold would fall off and land on Mars or maybe Pluto  That would be a disaster   We wouldn’t have anything to talk about.

Leave a Reply