The Monetary Conspiracy For World Government

Zahir Ebrahim
November 23, 2008
This is an Addendum to The Enduring Capitalist Conspiracy for World Government
© Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Permission granted to use freely as per copyright notice.
Document ID: PHBFZE20081123 URL: | Print | PDF | Comment.

“The United States debt, foreign and domestic, was the price of liberty.” --- Alexander Hamilton,
explaining the real underlying principles of “liberty” for the 1776 Revolution,
quoted on the front page of US Treasury website
Economics and Money aren't supposed to be as abstruse as it is made out to be, and nor does it take a Ph.D. from M.I.T. to realize that one is being taken for a sodomized ride on the Capricorn of economics gibberish. It is the responsibility of every denizen of the world to understand how humanity is being herded into global debt-enslavement and a centrally managed world-government, baby-step at a time, by manufacturing deliberate crisis and then proposing the next baby-step as its solution or fait accompli. Each baby-step erodes away some aspect of national sovereignty. 911 helped setup the global police state as a proposed solution to 'terrorism' – a manufactured product – to create the sine qua non mechanisms for world-government. “World government could only be kept in being by force”, as Bertrand Russell had put it.
The latest financial crisis is designed to systematically create a central world-banking system, as a proposed solution to 'bad loans' – again a manufactured product – to be managed by a global banking cartel under legal sanction. “Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws”, as the Rothschild banking scions boldly narrate in almost every generation. Today, the cumulative world debt is in uncountable trillions, and there is no nation on earth which is not beholden to some banking cartel, be it the WB-IMF tag team of economic mercenaries preying upon the resource-rich nations of Global South (see John Perkins), or the private central banks lending parasites doing the same to their richer brethren in the Global North (see Money as Debt).
On top of them both, sit the same handful of private banking families in their interlocking relationships, protected by their own hand-crafted instruments of commerce, trade-treaties, and their hand-picked political governance which creates for them the legal sanctions necessary for the entire global racket based on unpayable debt to flourish. Once a nation, like a person, can't pay its debts, demand for the proverbial “pound of flesh” is as convincing as making an offer one can't refuse.
In contrast to the Neanderthal gangster Al Capone, or Michael Corelone in the blockbuster movie 'The Godfather', who weren't smart enough to change the laws of the land in favor of their criminal enterprises and therefore, the state's policing apparatus could be relied upon to eventually take parasites like them down, these banksters connivingly write the very laws of the land in their favor. They own, or control through proxy, the media, the legislatures, the executives, the think-tanks, the foundations, all levers of power, good and bad loans, and discourse itself, in pretty much all major societies – from G7 to G20 (excepting to some extent BRIC, Venezuela, and Iran) – cleverly hiding their own role behind the scenes in constructing their global fiefdom.
That aspiration was unabashedly and boldly re-stated by bankster James Warburg in 1950 to the US Senate – the son of bankster Paul Warburg who not only founded the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921, but was the key architect of the Federal Reserve System under the clandestine auspices of Senator Nelson Aldrich at Jekyll Island in 1910 – “We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”
And that precise “consent” is being manufactured, as we speak, baby-step at a time! This ain't no 'tin-hatted' conspiracy of the UFO's taking over as the 'body-snatchers', or Orson Wells' famous dramatization on radio of H. G. Wells' novel “The War of the Worlds”. That Halloween eve special in 1938 – as an experiment in mass psychology to observe the response to fear – panicked New York city!
A bona fide long-running elitist conspiracy for world government that is rapidly reaching fruition today within the windows of opportunity created by manufactured crises – “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order”, noted David Rockefeller – is writ large in the ex post facto con-fessions and deeds of its vainglorious key architects themselves. Indeed, witness this eloquent boast from the bankster, in his own 2002 'Memoirs': “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (pg. 405)
A penetrating understanding of manufactured crises as Machiavellian harbingers of calculated change, may be gleaned in Isaac Asimov's science fiction classic known as the 'Foundation Trilogy'. It is not accidental that foundations, both in real life, and in art, are instrumental harbingers of imperial change. This truism is attested to by the evidence gathered by Norman Dodd for the Congressional Reece committee in 1953-54, as described below. Wikipedia notes of the art version, that, “According to Asimov, the premise [of Foundation] was based on ideas set forth in Edward Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,”!
The only protection against these parasites – whom America's courageous President, Andrew Jackson, referred to as “a den of vipers” – is for ordinary peoples first learning what has been kept hidden from them, before it is too late. For indeed, tortuous control systems are being put in place globally at an accelerated pace, and overturning them after fait accompli would require nothing less than a new 'Moses' powerfully proclaiming to the new 'Pharaohs': “let my people go!” Last time I checked, god of chosen peoples had unmercifully relegated both the old and new prophets to the enactment of miracles only on the silverscreen for the entertainment of the masses, as its ordained New World Order is brought into beguiling existence under the radar screen of most plebes. What now sayist the plebe?
For those who know nothing of these matters, Project Humanbeingsfirst has compiled an 'essentials' self-study bibliography of videos, books, documents, news reports, and its own forensics reports, for both, beginners frantically searching for an understanding of what's happening to them as they lose their shirts and their skirts to Wall Street, as well as for advanced non-researcher white-collar professionals whose job it is to understand money, but who actually remain no less ignorant than the plebes. All only suffer its want, or enjoy its superfluity, but no one has the time or the inclination to ponder its creation, or which hands control it. Most believe, as did this scribe once, that the government creates and controls money. Please see the self-study bibliographic guide: Monetary Reform Bibliography – A self-study guide for uncovering the agendas behind the economics gibberish. [a1]
The Ignorance of the Learned
It has been rather disturbing for this scribe to continually rediscover that even well educated persons from among the ruling elite themselves, CEOs of corporations with fancy MBA degrees, venture capitalists with CA degrees, economists with Ph.D., and financial geniuses on Wall Street with degrees in mathematics and physics from Caltech and M.I.T. – never mind engineers and scientists perpetually kept too busy to bring their rational forensic acumen to bear upon such mundane existential matters as money, economy, geopolitics and empire – do not fully understand the mechanics of money, nor its direct manufactured relationship with economic booms-and-collapses, war on terror, and the broader calculated agenda for world government. All feel daunted by the economics gibberish which surrounds any discussion of it.
It is also painfully obvious that even the so called “expert” economists, and Nobel Laureates, do not fully grasp all the issues regarding money. Because they still can't manage the economy despite their Nobel Prizes, and keep getting run over by the exact same inability to link together artificial booms and speculations fueled by cheap credit that is created out of thin air as national debt, predictable busts, tightening of credit, loss of confidence, and ultimate windfall for the handful of wealthy in whose hands all the wreckage of prosperity gets transferred pennies to the dollar, consolidating enormous wealth in fewer and fewer hands at the end of it all. And they still can't call it correctly, as evidenced from the statements of the famous 92 year old economist Anna Schwartz – coauthor of Milton Friedman's classic text on monetary history of the United States – and all the rest of the economists quoted by Lendman. [a2] More examples can be found in “Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?”. And as is the case for the common man who least understands any of this, it could be for these learned economists as well, that it's simply because of the overloaded semantics and secrecy which surrounds this most essential and profound human invention since fire.
None among them apparently knows the money mechanics and how it astronomically enriches the private bankers for doing absolutely no production work in society other than ledger-entry, and none has any appreciation for the overarching “forces that drive them”. For surely, as Bernard Lewis had observed in another terrorism context, a study of motivations can lead to a better understanding of why the financial terror crises fueled by newer deadly toys and things – what Warren Buffet called the “Financial Weapons of Mass Destruction” and predictable “time bombs” [a3] – keep getting repeated under the very noses of those chartered to explicitly prevent them, leaving the much lauded economists from prestigious institutions none the wiser. But it is perhaps also more credible to argue, that they – the profoundly learned economists – deliberately promulgate economics gibberish in the service of their 'ubermensch' masters. The empire needs its own knowledge-scions, just as it needs its own media, its own presses, its own propaganda and spin machinery, and its own military-industrial-academe complex. Who sits atop all of this? Who funds all this? Who benefits from all of this? Does the United States – its economy and its peoples in worst shape today in this first decade of the information age than they ever were since the Great Depression years of the industrial age?
So, clearly it wasn't just for the “full spectrum dominance” of the nation-state of the United States, for which the sole superpower was being coerced into exercising its Project for the New American Century under the disguise of 'war on terror'. It was not just for the hegemony of the sole superpower that Zbigniew Brzezinski – an Executive Director of the globalist Trilateral Commission which David Rockefeller founded – had penned 'The Grand Chessboard' and made it available so publicly, like its PNAC twin.
While clearly America bombed Iraq and Afghanistan, and may yet nuclear bomb Iran and Pakistan, not to mention enter into a chicken-style nuclear confrontation with Russia, but what fuels this asininity? Who benefits?
The American peoples as well as their nation-state are certainly the very visible losers in the final analysis – even at the cost of decimated 'lower-civilizations' and their unfortunate children of lesser gods, many more will follow in those footsteps, and only they will see the end of war being waged upon humanity – going bankrupt and trillions of dollars in debt as they are. See the latest national debt figures in “The entrenched notion of Public Debt in America – will take a gestalt shift to overcome!” (see Public Debt)
Who holds this national debt at its very top, and for which, every American tax-payer perpetually pays interest on? Aaron Russo in his documentary “America: from Freedom to Fascism”, makes the astonishing revelation of how private central banking under the Federal Reserve System, and the federal income tax, are joined together at the hip as a congenital birth defect. There is some discussion of the possible illegitimacy of the federal income tax and the IRS in the film, but that's a red herring which distracts from the fact that it could be just as legal as the Federal Reserve System, and still remain a premeditated congenital birth defect devilishly crafted to ensnare the unwary public into paying gratuitous interest on the issuance of their own national currency! [a4]
Something far more insidious has been under construction using just one primal axiom of political science: “what is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times”, the devilish words of David Ben Gurion who presided over the leadership of the newly acquired land for the Jews at the expense of its indigenous Palestinian inhabitants exactly 60 years ago. The same maxim is being deployed for world conquest at the expense of the rest of its indigenous inhabitants.
At the top of that pyramid, sit the moneychangers of modernity. For money is an even bigger existential necessity today in the producer-consumer global paradigm of high finance than it ever was in the past, even though the imperial coin is as old as mankind!
And yet just the fact that one has to come by the accurate understanding of “Money” only as a forensic detective assembling a jigsaw puzzle, and primarily from empirical analysis of widely disparate data and events, is very revealing of the secretive role of its affluent creators.
The power of money creation in private hands lies at the root of all evil. A forensic recognition of this blatant fact and the concomitant direct full spectrum public assault upon it, will lead to the termination of all the wet dreams for world government by hectoring hegemons of all stripes. It will also lead to the immediate termination of all the manufactured mechanisms employed for achieving it, namely, the fiction of 'war on terror' and the manufactured economic collapse. Furthermore, a lineup before a court appointed legal firing squad with confiscation of all wealth should create a reasonably effective deterrence example for the future.
So let's no longer be counted among the ignorant, the co-opted, and those who, quite bewilderingly, “scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle” [a5] waxing platitudes against an indomitable foe out for their enslavement.
To emphasize the relevance of learning from history to avert a tortuous future, take for example, the remarkable 1982 video interview of Mr. Norman Dodd by G. Edward Griffin, cited in the Project Humanbeingsfirst's Monetary Reform Bibliography. It can be watched here.
As a member of the “Morgan Bank” during the Great Depression, and later a chief investigator in 1953-54 for U.S. Congressman B. Carroll Reece's Special Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations (the Reece Committee), Norman Dodd makes some extraordinary revelations on video. He appears to be an unusually credible person, unlike many other plebeian detractors of aggregated wealth – scion of wealth and pamper, educated at Andover and Yale, insider to banking and Wall Street investment – not a 'tin-hatted' conspiracy theorists alluded to in the main discourse (“The Enduring Capitalist Conspiracy For World Government”).
After the crash of 1929, Norman Dodd says he had “rendered” a report on the stock market crash to his bank's superiors, and according to the paraphrase of the Morgan bank officials that was rehearsed back to him: “Norm what you're saying is we should return to sound banking ... We will never see sound banking in the United States again.”
Mr. Dodd further reveals that the officials rehearsed “chapter and verse” to explain that point and stated:
“Since the end of world war one we have been responsible for what they call the institutionalizing of conflicting interests, and they are so prevalent inside this country that they can never be resolved.”
With that as the backdrop, this is what Norman Dodd relates of a conversation he had with the President of the tax-exempt Ford Foundation in 1954, as part of his Congressionally mandated investigation of tax-exempt foundations:
“Mr. Dodd, we've asked you to come up here today because we thought that possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of the foundations such as ourselves.” Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on and said: “Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here have had experience operating under directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
ED GRIFFIN: Why do the foundations generously support Communist causes in the United States?
NORMAN DODD: Well, because to them, Communism represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly, that is, an organization of, say, a large-scale industry into an administerable unit.
ED GRIFFIN: Do they think that they will be the ones to benefit?
NORMAN DODD: They will be the beneficiaries of it, yes.
Another ominous thread in the interview is when Dodd reveals of what his lead investigator discovered in the minutes-books of Carnegie Endowment for Peace. According to Norman Dodd, the following was recorded on the old-fashioned dictaphone machine by Katherine Casey as she was browsing the minutes-books in the CEP library:
'We are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. In that year, the trustees, meeting for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year in a very learned fashion. The question is: “Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?” And they conclude that no more effective means than war to that end is known to humanity.
So then, in 1909, they raised the second question and discussed it, namely: “How do we involve the United States in a war?”
Well, I doubt at that time if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the people of this country than its involvement in a war. There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were. Then, finally, they answered that question as follows: “We must control the State Department.” That very naturally raises the question of how do we do that? And they answer it by saying: “We must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country.” And, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective.
Then time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War I. At that time they record on their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatched to President Wilson a telegram, cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly.
Finally, of course, the war is over. At that time their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914 when World War I broke out. At that point they came to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, “we must control education in the United States.” They realize that that's a pretty big task. It is too big for them alone, so they approach the Rockefeller Foundation with the suggestion that that portion of education which could be considered domestic be handled by the Rockefeller Foundation and that portion which is international should be handled by the Endowment. They then decide that the key to success of these two operations lay in the alteration of the teaching of American history.' [See Norman Dodd Hidden Agenda]
Mr. Norman Dodd had also revealed another interesting little known fact in a prior year, in his testimony on “Regionalism” in 1978 before a committee created by the Illinois legislature. He disclosed the fact that a brand new constitution for the American continent had already been constructed as a super-state – what today in its baby-step incarnation is called the North American Union – and it has been patiently waiting in the wings, like the Patriot Act, to be sprung at the opportune time just like the oppressive police-state legislation was sprung upon the American public within a few weeks of 911. Witness this exchange: [a6]
Mr. Dodd: [...] Now, the second experience that I would like to share with you... oh, and incidentally, it is the Ford Foundation's grants which are responsible for the formulation of this idea of regional government, and also the idea that given regional government, we must, in turn, develop and accept and agree to a totally new Constitution which has already been drawn up, as was mentioned just a few minutes ago. [previous testimony] [...]
Rep. Lucco : Fine. You've answered my question. Now, another thing. You took us back to 1908, and I came on the scene in 1912, about the time of the Balkan Wars, which you alluded to, and World War I. Now, today, and you said that we actually created -- or "they", whoever "they" are - actually created the situation of a war. Now that we have the...
Mr. Dodd : Wait, now. You deserve to know who the "they" are.
Rep. Lucco : I was going to ask you that.
Mr. Dodd : The "they" in this instance are the Trustees. . . were the Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. They were men who were prominent lawyers in New York; men like Nicholas Murray Butler, the head of Columbia University; also, and subsequently, Allen and Foster Dulles, as attorneys -- that caliber of gentlemen.
[CDR Note: "Global Tyranny ...Step by Step", by William Jasper, quotes Allen W. Dulles from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 - New York: The Foreign Policy Association, Sept-Oct, 1946- page 46... "There is no indication that American public opinion, for example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit American membership in it. In other words, time - a long time - will be needed before world government is politically feasible... This time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country..."]
Rep. Lucco : Then I'm trying to collate what you are talking about -- 1912 -- with 1978, the meeting at Camp David, the problems in the Middle East, the Sino-, or Chinese-Russian situation--are they now getting us ready for a third world war?
Mr. Dodd: My answer to that, sir, is that they have set forces in motion, and these forces cannot help but culminate in World War III. I happen to personally believe that it is possible to prevent it from working out that way, but I'm alone in my beliefs.
Rep. Hudson: Apparently you're not alone, Mr. Dodd. [...]
Rep Hudson : Mr. Dodd, I have one question. You mentioned a proposed new Constitution, or federal charter, for this country, sort of waiting in the wings, you might say.
Mr. Dodd : Yes.
Rep Hudson: Is that the one... I have heard tell of a Tugwell type. Is that the one you refer to?
Mr. Dodd : That's it, sir.
Rep. Hudson : Thank you. All right, well, thank you very much, Mr. Dodd. We are grateful for your being here.
Now, if Rep. Lucco of the Illinois legislature in 1978 can endeavor to “collate what you are talking about -- 1912 -- with 1978”, surely a sensibly learned person today might try to collate the same to 2008? How might one forensically bring to bear all such historical knowledge, including revelations by Norman Dodd, on the present financial crisis and the role of the Federal Reserve System? How does that relate to the blatantly undisguised drive for world government today? How does that relate to 911? But no! Not the Federal Reserve System Chairman, nor any of the Nobel Prize winning economists waxing more economics gibberish, will go there! [a7]
And forget about the mainstream presses, erudite pundits, and even lauded dissent-space politicians like Ron Paul, [a8] and intellectuals like Noam Chomsky [a9] [a10] and Howard Zinn [a11] – forever only rehearsing the crimes of the “rogue state” and 911 its “blowback” – doing so either. Their laudable emphasis on the facts that are visible like the American F16s and Apache Helicopters bombing civilians, or the crash of the stock market as a result of casino capitalism, and lamentable silence on the ones which are not readily visible like that which remains shrouded in conspiratorial secrecy for an overarching agenda and must be forensically uncovered from rational thinking and analysis, or official narratives that are required to be kept intact, only ends up circuitously leading their own fawning flock, amidst great applause, to the pastures dutifully bounded by the same fences as the mainstream scholars! [a12] [a13] Their intellectualism, apparently, only extends to the government mandated axioms of “Bin Laden” and “Al-Qaeeda”, which are most obligingly, implicitly retained by them in their very learned dissenting discourses that valiantly document and courageously standup to the crimes of their own nation. [a14] [a15] And these intellectual are this scribe's own respected teachers! [a16]
Perhaps all these gadfly historians and men and women of letters who mainly delight in rehashing histories which are already faits accomplis, and in waxing moralizing sermons on being the privileged minority to whom “Western democracy provides the leisure, the facilities, and the training to seek the truth lying hidden behind the veil of distortion and misrepresentation, ... through which the events of current history are presented to us”, [a17] be graciously reminded of George Bernard Shaw's famous maxim “We are made wise not by the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility for our future”.
One wishing to learn more may review the pertinently culled reading list in the Monetary Reform Bibliography, and minimally peruse: “Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?”, and the Press Release “This may be a psy-op!”.
As Noam Chomsky once wrote, and quite correctly too, that “it takes a sentence to repeat lies and deceit, while it takes considerably more space to unravel them.” [a18] Elsewhere, he also wisely noted “It's always a good idea to start by asking about the facts. It's whenever you hear anything said very confidently, the first thing that should come to mind is, wait a minute, is that true?” [a19] Fortunately, many dedicated and quite ordinary peoples have learnt from Noam Chomsky's teachings, and have already done just that. They have diligently asked about the facts for all the official myths which are axiomatically rehearsed “very confidently” from the highest to the lowest pulpits across the land, and some of their truly intellectual works are cited in the Monetary Reform Bibliography.
The reader is also invited to ask the same question, “is that true”, of the 'who-dunit' axiom of the first 911 which “very confidently” narrated of an invasion from abroad; of the axiom of 'macro economics inevitability of this financial meltdown' that Warren Buffet termed “an economic Pearl Harbor”; and finally, of the axiom of 'the only solution for avoiding both types of 911s in the future, is world government controlled by the private central banks at the top of the pyramid'. The same pyramid-top which keeps the watchful-eye upon the world from the back of the world's reserve currency, the one dollar bill! It is an important question to ask, who effectively controls this reserve currency? For their identity is the identity of the watchful eye, the real emperors of the world! Upon their feet, lie the seeds of all the crimes against humanity in modern times. And upon whose beck and call, lies the “imperial mobilization” of the sole superpower state to preside over its own calculated demise, to create 'one world'!
Armed with all this analysis from many disparate sources and a rational long-view perspective which connects all the dots – perhaps a weekend's worth of self-study – one can finally judge for oneself what is deliberate disinformation, and what are the indisputable facts of the matter.
Thus, at least, one is now trivially able to judge for oneself, the worth of half-truths based disinformation masterpieces which deceive by omission rather than outright lies, like:
But even more importantly, now one has sufficient knowledge, as well as perspective from many sources, to ask the overarching meta question:
Why should there be any need for super-abundance of non-information, and at best, disinformation – the profound ignorance of the learned – on such a transparent matter as the Federal Reserve System, and on such a mundane issue like money which everyone in society needs existentially, like air and water, in the first place?
If one ponders upon that question first, either agrees or disagrees with the proposition that this subject is shrouded in secrecy and obfuscation which is what creates mythologies, half-truths, and even outright lies – not to mention the trillion dollar Bailout of Wall Street [a20] that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson now also recommends for other nations through a coordinated central banks' attack upon all the world's peoples to ensnare them all in further debt – then the rest follows on why detective forensic skills are either needed, or not, to tell the difference between propagandists shilling for their paymasters, 'tin-hatted' conspiracy theorists indulging their imaginations, 'technique of infamy' and manufactured red herrings, and the unarguable real facts of the matter.
Answering this question first, can further enable one to look at solutions-spaces more critically without being fooled. But only after the problem-space, and its awesome power to corrupt and to confuse, has been first well understood. In this regard, humanity owes a great debt of gratitude to Ezra Pound, America's most ignored poet and thinker, for explaining the specialized version of the dialectics of deception – the 'technique of infamy'.
Thus We Fail as a “focus group”!
To begin exploring the solutions-space, the following websites might be useful. Project Humanbeingsfirst does not endorse, or censure, anyone of them, and remains largely agnostic when they make sense – for the real challenge lies elsewhere. A preliminary analysis of two main proposals, the Gold-Standard (Mises Institute) favored by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, which does not make any sense, and the Greenbacks, (thought to be) favored by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, which does make sense, can be found in the Monetary Reform Bibliography.
Richard Cook also pontificates yet another solution-space in his just released 2008 book “We Hold These Truths – The Hope of Monetary Reform”. His concept, in its preliminary form, inspired by the work of the late C.H. Douglas of a century ago called Social Credit, was published in 2007 here and here. [a21] The late Dr. Edward Hamlyn at the British Association for Monetary Reform, also left the world his gift of the 2007 edition of “The New Money Text Book” which can be read here. [a22] The American Monetary Institute has their own Monetary Reform Act drafted here. [a23] The 3-1/2 hour video, The Money Masters, in its concluding last 45 minutes, also explores a rational solution-space and makes specific recommendations for national monetary reform. [a24] The video also points to an alternative local solutions-space for individual communities, that of local 'community-currency', as a sustainable money system to fulfill local trading needs debt-free. Some Europeans, apparently, tend to agree with this community-currency prescription. There already are, or will soon be, 65 regional currencies in operation alongside the EU. One of these currencies, made defunct, was based on the ideas of Silvio Gesell in the now almost century old classic, “The Natural Economic Order”: [a25]
'Austria's Tyrolean community of Wörgl launched a scheme based on his theories, in 1932, reputed to have slashed unemployment at the height of the Depression. It was watched by Keynes and Irving Fisher, who saw a fast-depreciating currency as a possible answer to the 1930s “liquidity trap”.
The Wörgl experiment was declared illegal by Austria's central bank when a further 200 other communities launched copycat currencies, threatening the authority of the state. Though article 35 of the Bundesbank's founding law forbids the circulation of “quasi-currencies”, the experiments are being treated as a harmless eccentricity.'
As one can easily glean from this quick survey, there is a surfeit of monetary reform proposals. If only there was some way to bring them all together on one common platform!
Project Humanbeingsfirst encourages the readers to first endeavor to fully comprehend the problem-domain, and what entrenched systems of power inhibit all debt-free solutions from emerging, before jumping into the solutions-domain and spending time on the treadmill of inefficacy – like the antiwar movement. The failure to recognize that power only respects power, otherwise it is merely a “focus group”, [a26] has been the latter's undoing. This certainly does not preclude understanding the technical domain itself, including the local community needs to transact business at the individual and local business level; understanding the national needs to monetize the GDP and transact business at the national institution level, including collect taxes and pay for services; and understanding the global needs, not only for international trade, but also as a stable repository for valuation of public and private assets, both global and local, and as the calibration of a fair standard for measuring wealth in vastly disparate levels of industrial development and/or natural wealth, in rich and poor nations.
Some will surely argue that the latter needs a 'global currency'. If they were to do so, they would fall right into the trap of the banksters. The afore-cited monetary reform bibliography contains a culled selection of recent pertinent news reports which plainly betray the globalist motivation of the International bankster cartel who wish to use the present manufactured financial crisis to lead the world's gullible public to precisely that conclusion-space. To be managed centrally, by a world cartel of International private central banks, which would be the first and last nail in the national-sovereignty of all nations. “Give me control of a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws”, was not stated in mere vanity by the Rothschild scions.
Based on the knowledge and forensic touchstones now gained, anyone capable of even a modicum of reflection should trivially be able to dismantle red herring reform proposals made by erudite scholars of empire to cleverly maneuver the world towards the masters' choice. Take for instance, this 1978 masterpiece by James Tobin, “A Proposal for Monetary Reform”, which many reform advocates now eagerly promulgate as the “Tobin tax”. [a27] It retained the international banksters' profiteering axiom of 'money as debt' quite intact, and like his learned colleagues at the Federal Reserve System routinely do, proposed some other erudite gibberish for how to green the yellowing leaves. Tobin began with the following synopsis of the problem domain in his presidential address at the 1978 conference of the Eastern Economic Association, Washington DC:
Over the last twenty years economists' prescriptions for reform of the international monetary system have taken various shapes. Their common premise was dissatisfaction with the Bretton Woods regime as it evolved in the 1950s. Robert Triffin awakened the world to the contradictions and instabilities of a system of pegged parities that relied on the debts in reserve currencies, mostly dollars, to meet growing needs for official reserves. Triffin and his followers saw the remedy as the internationalization of reserves and reserve assets; their ultimate solution was a world central bank. Others diagnosed the problem less in terms of liquidity than in the inadequacies of balance of payments adjustment mechanisms in the modern world. The inadequacies were especially evident under the fixed-parity gold-exchange standard when, as in the 1960s, the reserve currency center was structurally in chronic deficit. These analysts sought better and more symmetrical "rules of the game" for adjustments by surplus and deficit countries, usually including more flexibility in the setting of exchange parities, crawling pegs, and the like. Many economists, of whom Milton Friedman was an eloquent and persuasive spokesman, had all along advocated floating exchange rates, determined in private markets without official interventions.
Thus notice that in the above description of the problem domain, not a single mention, by anyone, of money coined by private central banks as a national debt from which they directly profit, like many a blood sucking leach. The conversation begins, very conveniently, posing an entirely different problem, as the key problem for monetary reform! Is this scribe the only one who sees such ab initio obfuscation by the super learned, which, by its very design, cleverly circumscribes the entire discourse space, and hence masks the real problem and its effective solution?
Tobin continues:
By the early l970s the third view was the dominant one in the economics profession, though not among central bankers and private financiers. And all of a sudden, thanks to Nixon and Connally, we got our wish. ... Clearly, flexible rates have not been the panacea which their more extravagant advocates had hoped; international monetary problems have not disappeared from headlines or from the agenda of anxieties of central banks and governments.
So the “exchange rate regime” wasn't the right problem to have solved for in the first place, as Tobin sheepishly observes from empirical results, for the problems persisted in the headlines then, and obviously still do today. The solution identified was in-efficacious for the disease, because it obviously did not address the root cause of the real disease. And this is essentially what Tobin is confessing to, that it was the wrong medicine for a poorly diagnosed disease:
I believe that the basic problem today is not the exchange rate regime, whether fixed or floating. Debate on the regime evades and obscures the essential problem.
Okay, so let's see what is the new “essential problem” which Tobin identifies:
That is the excessive international-or better, inter-currency-mobility of private financial capital.
So the fundamental problem for monetary reform is now identified as “currency mobility”:
Under either exchange rate regime the currency exchanges transmit disturbances originating in international financial markets. ... Specifically the mobility of financial capital limits viable differences among national interest rates and thus severely restricts the ability of central banks and governments to pursue monetary and fiscal policies appropriate to their internal economies.
Notice the error of obfuscation, of central banks are lumped with the government, and treated as benevolent entities operating in the best interest of the peoples just as governments are supposed to. With that as the unquestioned axiom, Tobin makes the accurate observation:
Likewise speculation on exchange rates, whether its consequences are vast shifts of official assets and debts or large movements of exchange rates themselves, have serious and frequently painful real internal economic consequences. Domestic policies are relatively powerless to escape them or offset them.
And then comes up with the wonderful solution space for this newly identified problem:
There are two ways to go. One is toward a common currency, common monetary and fiscal policy, and economic integration. The other is toward greater financial segmentation between nations or currency areas, permitting their central banks and governments greater autonomy in policies tailored to their specific economic institutions and objectives. The first direction, however appealing, is clearly not a viable option in the foreseeable future, i.e., the twentieth century. I therefore regretfully recommend the second, and my proposal is to throw some sand in the wheels of our excessively efficient international money markets.
And to his great regret, that he can't immediately have world government of the central banksters as his first preferred solution, Tobin throws “some sand in the wheels of our excessively efficient international money markets”! He formulates both the problem, and its solution thusly:
At present the world enjoys many benefits of the increased worldwide economic integration of the last thirty years. But the integration is partial and unbalanced; in particular private financial markets have become internationalized much more rapidly and completely than other economic and political institutions. That is why we are in trouble. So I turn to the second, and second best, way out, forcing some segmentation of inter-currency financial markets.
Great – and that “forcing some segmentation of inter-currency financial markets” is his famed 'Tobin Tax', which many would-be monetary reformers now carry upon their own proud backs as the greatest invention since sliced bread! It is not un-interesting to observe that Tobin's language of “economic integration, "one world" ideal, [of] a common currency, national financial and capital markets, and a single national monetary policy”, almost mirrors that of David Rockefeller. And surely, his 'Tobin Tax' may well be a solution to some problem, but certainly not the most significant one which plagues all mankind – the spectre of debt-slavery!
This is, qualitatively, exactly equivalent to the mainstream focussing on the stated legitimacy of the 'war on terror' – for the suicide bombers are indeed a grotesque and observable reality – and axiomatically assuming that those going after them are the good guys doing so in self-defense! The famous dissent-stream only disagreeing to the extent that yes, these 'terrorists' are real, but it's “blowback”, and that we should not be using this for “imperial mobilization”! But neither entertaining the thought that perhaps the threat of suicide bombings is being deliberately manufactured, and in order to make the threats appear credible and non-immanent, the bombings planned into existence! [a28]
After all, who did not see the planes crash into the tall buildings on television? Thus, keeping the first axiom of 911 – 'Bin Laden's invasion from abroad' – naturally intact, or unexamined, or deflected as “endless controversy, [which] just gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation”, all kinds of artificial discourse space, and its concomitant inefficacious solutions, are opened up for energetic debate in society. Being part of the same world-game, economists too conjure up their pet solutions keeping the sacred-cow axioms unquestioned, and then use the resulting failures and/or expected reactions as rationale for pushing their preferred overarching agenda. Tobin openly regretted in 1978 that the time wasn't ripe for pushing his “one world” agenda all the way home just yet:
Perhaps it is true that establishing a common currency and a central macro-economic policy will automatically generate the institutions, markets, and mobilities which make the system viable and its regional economic consequences everywhere tolerable. The risk is one that few are prepared to take. Moreover, EEC experience to date suggests that it is very hard to contrive a scenario of gradual evolution towards such a radically different regime, even though it could well be the global optimum.
Time has indeed been made ripe today, another thirty years further into the machinations for world government from when James Tobin wrote that! And that same overarching agenda – which Norman Dodd revealed, which Tobin confirmed, and which even Allen W. Dulles, the founding father of the CIA and its longest running Director, lamented in 1946 would require “time - a long time - will be needed before world government is politically feasible” – is now being pushed with the most forceful vigor by all the banksters and their minions [a29].
How much more confirmation does one need before the pig-headed men and women of substance – the much lauded persons of the arts, sciences, and the letters – will recognize what's staring one blatantly in the face? It is a calculated conspiracy which sees no price as too burdensome, no war as too onerous, and no extermination as too unsightly, for creating world government!
It is also very convenient for the learned to mix up the 'highest order bit' with 'lower order bits' of a complex matter – irrespective of deliberately or inadvertently – for the plebes can hardly tell the difference. And that's just wonderful for creating clever red herrings when the latter are emphasized, and the former is ignored! Surely whatever one comes up with is always a solution to something, and that's just as undeniable as any pathetic tautology. But is it a solution to the 'most significant bit'? Has the problem itself been accurately diagnosed, and the systemic multi-lateral illness accurately mapped out to its very DNA? Not when the sacred-cow axioms remain untouchable! And this is indeed how one wins a Nobel Prize and lucrative appointments. [a30] In some cases, even stays alive.
To explain the commonsense concept of 'bit' drawn from electrical engineering, it's like having a “one” in the 7th decimal place, and also in the 2nd decimal place, to create the total amount One million and Ten dollars, $1,000,010, and while auditing the books, focussing on the digit position which identifies the Ten dollars and not the one which identifies the Million! The significance of this is not lost to the banksters!
With that detailed analysis as the backdrop to warn the unwary mind of the unlimited methods at the disposal of a highly intellectual ruling elite which predominantly runs its affairs using political science 101, not good intentions 101, it is also important to emphasize that one monetary system does not necessarily fit all challenges, nor meet the needs of all nations.
Some nations are more agrarian, struggling with even the basics of daily existential necessities, and some are already in the post industrialization travails borne of superfluity and rape of poorer nations. Cultural sensitivities and social mores also make one size fit all an anathema to those peoples who don't always measure all that they value in dollars and cents!
But one basic principle of money does fit them all, and no nation's public is ever against it:
Power to coin a nation's money, and to manage its money supply, thus availability of credit to borrowers, must not be put in the for-profit interest-bearing indenting hands of private individuals and their banking institutions regardless of how kindly and benevolent their claimed motives, how great their claimed expertise, or how compelling the expediency.
And yet, despite such a common principle uniting all the detractors of aggregated wealth and proponents of monetary reform, both their detailed analysis of the problems, as well as their proposed system-solutions, often suffers from their jumbled philosophies which almost act like 'religion'. That's partially because it is indeed 'religion' and passion for justice which drives the detractors, not business motives for personal gain, as it does their antagonists who little care for the purity, or lack thereof, of their fleecing system, and only remain focused on how to keep their befuddled flock in perpetual debt. The bankers therefore, apart from their enormous power and wealth, hold a practical and expedient advantage over the 'malcontents' who are seeped in idealism, and often with empty pockets.
Furthermore, all such proponents of a new monetary system even do not pursue a proper system design discipline. They invariably link their design to an imagined economic system of their preference, and none is able to perceive that one is a mechanism, the other is policy. Many economic policies, even full blown economic systems as diverse as socialism, to real free-market capitalism with winner take all, and every social balance in between, should be efficiently constructible on a properly architected monetary system mechanism which operates in the public interest. To understand the real challenges, please see “Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?” and this response to the petition in “Open Letter to G-20”.
Therefore, it is unsurprising that some propose platitudes as solutions, forgetting that the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule are at least 3000 years old but have made little impact on the real world of avarice and plunder. These include proposals for radical transformations as if revolutions are just around the corner. Some propose solutions which merely favor the private central-bankers themselves, knowingly or unwittingly is immaterial. Many of these are almost always cosmetic bandaids. These also include partial solutions that leave the core problems intact. “Religion” is most apparent in these arguments. An example of this is the gold standard, or the gold-equivalence standard pushed upon the world by the dominant victor of World War II at Bretton Woods. The “religion” in this case is protecting the asset holders against inflation at all cost.
A memorable oration in history on this “religious” discourse already exists. It was made by William Jennings Bryan over a century ago. [a31] The principles still remain the same, even as they were the same under which the English forced the gold standard upon the colonies to bring the prosperous colonies back from coining their own money called 'colonial scrip', into the fold of debt enslavement to the British empire which monopolized the gold. [a32] This speech is worthy of review by any student, and proponent, of a gold backed standard. Project Humanbeingsfirst has taken its first analytic look at the idea of a limited 'precious commodity' backing a national currency, in “Monetary Reform: First Look at the Gold Standard”.
In the ability to tell the nuanced differences therein, among outright BS, partial asininity born of misconceptions, idealism, and usefulness at different application hierarchies, lies the key that can practicably and immediately unlock the world from the debt shackles of the perpetual monetary conspiracy for world government. Coming together on one single point of focus, debt-free coining of money by a government, and single-mindedly driving that focus to the point of its political acceptance – as fait accompli – and leaving the design of the actual monetary system under that guiding principle to a transparent body chartered by the government, or Congress, as a public process, is the only sensible approach. Indeed, the only practical reform approach that will ever work.
But as those given to even a modicum of realism well understand, rectification of injustices is only possible either with the mighty hand of the victor's justice, or under the astute gamesmanship of balance of power. In this case, political power to affect legal solutions at all levels. Never on its own, regardless of the soundness of the platitudes or the solutions.
To build such a balance of power today that might be effective, does not seem to be in the capability arsenal of those proposing monetary reform solutions. A largely powerless peoples who cannot even fund one single economics think-tank of national consequence, and one single financial political action group of influence, never mind mustering the kind of lobbying-power before which powerful Congress persons and local law-makers, mayors, state governors, attorney generals, and newspaper editorialists might bow their head.
Realistically, I see no impact by monetary reformers at the national or international level. For it is but a truism that those who control purse strings, control nations' destinies – the real golden rule on earth, as old as mankind! To confiscate their purse-strings – as easy as a stroke of pen – is a revolutionary act for which there is no “Jesus” today to cleanse the Congress of the moneychangers. The Wall Street bailout with the new crown of thorns, and which the US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson [a33] is now brazenly attempting to extend to crucify all of mankind upon the new cross of a global monetary system, is proof-sufficient.
Finally, not wishing to end on the afore-stated pessimistic note as in the original version of this report, Project Humanbeingsfirst's position is the one principally reflected in the political-science notion of countering power with power and not platitudes, and principles of hegemony with principles for liberty, not ego nor preference for a particular “religion”. The first loss of sovereignty of a nation, is the loss of controlling its money. The founding fathers of the United States of America understood that principle just as well as the founders of empire from time immemorial – as evidenced in this excerpt from an oped which appeared in the Times of London: [a34]
“If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”
It entirely sums up Project Humanbeingsfirst's antithetical axiom adopted as its rallying cry for abolishing the Federal Reserve System – the power of private central banking – forcefully reclaiming, for all nations and all peoples, what President Lincoln had noted: [a35]
“The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of the consumers.”
“The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity.”
“By the adoption of these principles ... the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” (See Public Debt)

This essay has extensive embedded reference links in the online version of which the more pertinent ones that beg citation or elaboration are noted below.
[a1] Introduction is part of the Monetary Reform Bibliography by Zahir Ebrahim,
[a2] Stephen Lendman, The Financial Meltdown: This Time Is Different, October 22, 2008
[a3] Warren Buffett, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2002 Annual Report, pages 13-15:
“Derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal”, and, “We view them as time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the economic system”
[a4] Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
[a5] Raphael Eitan, quoted in: Former Israeli army chief drowns, BBC News, Nov. 23, 2004,
When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.”
[a6] Norman Dodd, Testimony on Regionalism, September 26, 1978. Transcript of Public Hearing – Joint Committee on Regional Government – September 26, 1978, Edwardsville, Illinois, Norman Dodd – pgs 51-61
[a7] Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
[a8] Zahir Ebrahim, Open Letter to Hon. Ron Paul Supporters October 29, 2008
[a9] Zahir Ebrahim, Letter to Noam Chomsky on Steven Jones seminal paper on the destruction of WTC towers, April 21, 2008
[a10] Noam Chomsky, putting out his pathetic “911” Seven Stories Press booklet to tote his broken horn of “blowback” and state sponsored terrorism immediately after 9/11, retaining all the core-axioms seeded by the Pentagon and the White House, not to mention making a ton of money on it at the expense of devastated civilizations, has left this scribe intellectually standing quite alone to fend for himself, without any priests!
See Noam Chomsky, Closet Capitalist, by Peter Schweizer, Hoover Institution, who quotes Chomsky:
If you look at the things I write—articles for Z Magazine, or books for South End Press, or whatever—they are mostly based on talks and meetings and that kind of thing. But I’m kind of a parasite. I mean, I’m living off the activism of others. I’m happy to do it.”
Peter Schweizer further observes: “Chomsky’s marketing efforts shortly after September 11 give new meaning to the term war profiteer. In the days after the tragedy, he raised his speaking fee from $9,000 to $12,000 because he was suddenly in greater demand. He also cashed in by producing another instant book. Seven Stories Press, a small publisher, pulled together interviews conducted via e-mail that Chomsky gave in the three weeks following the attack on the Twin Towers and rushed the book to press. His controversial views were hot, particularly overseas. By early December 2001, the publisher had sold the foreign rights in 19 different languages. The book made the best-seller list in the United States, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, and New Zealand. It is safe to assume that he netted hundreds of thousands of dollars from this book alone.”
The following video clip of Noam Chomsky's interview on CBC is also disturbing to observe, in that while he very eruditely questions the overt motivations of the 'rogue state' bombing Afghanistan as outright criminal, he leaves unquestioned, the core-axiom upon which the state sponsored terrorism itself was based – he does not question the government's narrative of 911. Just like once before, for the JFK's assassination, Chomsky did not question that official narrative either. Noam Chomsky still maintained, in his email communication as of 2008 with this scribe, that 'Bin Laden' had done 911, and he scoffs at those who might argue that the only person who couldn't have done the controlled demolition of WTC-7 on which no plane hit, is a yogi sitting on his rump in the Hindu-Kush, armed to the teeth with AK-47s, cell phones, laptops, and prayers! Nevertheless, apparently, it is acceptable to the 'rogue state' that controlled critique be permitted on its “imperialism” upon others in order to channel and manage a controlled dissent on what is already obvious to all and sundry, and to vigorously prevent dissent from being extended to what might really interfere with its agendas and complex magic-shows such as genuinely conscionable thinking peoples correctly adding two plus two equals four and effectively mobilizing protest in millions based upon it. Protests of a few hundred thousand is merely “focus group”. It will remain so as long as there is an external enemy to continually scare the peoples with. Protest of ten million in major cities however, when the enemy is known to be within, an inside job, becomes “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”. Chomsky had explained 'Manufacturing Consent'. This scribe has explained 'Manufacturing Dissent' in “Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science”
(Part 1 of 2 CBC Interview)
(Part 2 of 2 CBC Interview)
[a11] Paul Joseph Watson, Howard Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If 9/11 Was An Inside Job, Tuesday, November 18, 2008,
Transcript from video clip
In response to a question by Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US Senate from Colorado, Howard Zinn stated:
Of course as I told you, I never believe the government, or rarely believe the government. Do I believe the government version of what happened? Well, I am skeptical. Do I believe that the government was in the conspiracy to do this? I don't know. I don't know enough about the situation, and the truth is, I don't care that much. That's past. ... the whole argument that the people are engaged in, about, was the government behind a conspiracy to blow up the two towers, to me that's a diversion from what we really have to do, deal with the fact that whatever, whoever was behind 9/11, the government took advantage of that, to take us to war, and to put us on a disastrous course, and it's that war, those wars, that disastrous course we have to deal with. I don't want to go back to the controversy that I think is endless controversy, and just gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation.”
Howard Zinn not dealing with the first-cause enabler of “imperial mobilization” lends automatic endorsement to the government's axiomatic propagandistic lie, that there is an external enemy. And it is precisely that propaganda which keeps the fire of “doctrinal motivation and intellectual commitment” lighted underneath all the wars that Howard Zinn does want to deal with! So even for pragmatically dealing with the “immediate situation”, directly dealing with the first-pretext cause to yank away the very fuel of “doctrinal motivation” might appear to the sound of mind to be the most efficacious and sensible course of action. Therefore, deliberately not dealing with it only lends zero efficacy to all the subsequent dissent because the existence of the enemy remains unchallenged. That's just peachy for the government, isn't it? By its more logical name, such devious support of the ruling elite's mission, might rightly be called 'Manufacturing Dissent'! So much for the intellectuals of the West – where “truth” is a commodity, like everything else.
[a12] Zahir Ebrahim, Responsibility of Intellectuals – Redux,
[a13] Noam Chomsky, in an interview with Barry Pateman at M.I.T., makes the following coldly accurate observation on deliberate attitude control being calculatingly practiced upon the public in free-societies by its ruling-elite, but then, quite inexplicably, fails to apply that same observation to his own blind acceptance of government propaganda of 'Bin laden' did 911, just like his friend Howard Zinn (op. cit.), also forgetting his own decades' old moralizing proclamations on the responsibility of intellectuals:
Intellectuals are in a position to expose the lies of governments, to analyze actions according to their causes and motives and often hidden intentions.” (Ibid.).
Transcript from video clip, 7:15 to 8:50,
The people who understand this the best, are those who are carrying out the control of domination. In the more free societies like the United States and England, where popular struggles have won a lot of freedom over the years, and the state has limited capacity to coerce, there is a very striking, that it is precisely in those societies, that elite groups, the business world, and state managers, and so on, recognized early on, that they are going to have to develop massive methods of control of attitude and opinion, because you can't control people by force anymore. And therefore, you have to modify their consciousness, so that they don't perceive that they are living under conditions of alienation, oppression, subordination, and so on. In fact, that's what, probably a couple of trillion dollars a year are spent on this in the United States, very self-consciously, I mean from the framing of television advertisements for two-year olds, to what you are taught in graduate school economics programs. It's designed to create a kind of a consciousness of subordination, and it's also intended, specifically, and pretty consciously, to suppress normal human emotions.”
For a deconstruction of this Chomsky admission “you have to modify their consciousness” of the diabolical modus operandi of persuasion to create both conformity of views among the sheep in the mainstream as well as inefficacy of dissent among the conscionable rabble rousers in the dissent-stream, see Project Humanbeingsfirst report “Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science”
[a14] Zahir Ebrahim, The attack of 'Al-Qaeeda' and Pakistani 'loose nukes', and 'Bin Laden': Key enabler of “imperial mobilization”
[a15] Zahir Ebrahim, Weapons of Mass Deception – The Master Social Science,
[a16] This scribe in his youthful years benefited greatly from the voluminous works, as well as from the courage, of both Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn. The former taught this scribe a couple of his famous foreign policy classes at M.I.T., and the latter very kindly wrote a recommendation letter for the book “Prisoners of the Cave” to the publishers This scribe's humble interlocution of Noam Chomsky on matters du jour can be read at:
[a17] Noam Chomsky, quoted, op. cit. Responsibility of Intellectuals – Redux.
[a18] Noam Chomsky, Chomsky talks back: Protestors story is ‘mere deceit’, Letter to Editor Newton Tab, Tue Apr 24, 2007,
[a19] Noam Chomsky, on The Clash of Civilization,
[a20] Zahir Ebrahim, No Exits on this Super-Highway!
[a21] Richard Cook, An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform for the United States, April 26, 2007, and, Monetary Reform and How a National Monetary System Should Work, May 11, 2007, both by globalresearch,
[a22] Edward Hamlyn, The New Money Text Book, 2007, British Association for Monetary Reform,
[a23] Stephen Zarlenga, The Need for Monetary Reform, AMI,
[a24] Money Masters: The Monetary Reform Act,
[a25] Germans get by without the euro, UK Telegraph, 18 Jan 2007
[a26] President George W. Bush, February 23, 2003,
First of all, you know, size of protest, it's like deciding, well, I'm going to decide policy based upon a focus group.”
[a27] James Tobin, A Proposal for Monetary Reform, Eastern Economic Journal, July/October 1978, pp. 153-159.
[a28] Project Humanbeingsfirst, A letter to the American Peoples, May 11, 2008,
[a29] News reports cited in
[a30] Zahir Ebrahim, Monetary Reform: Who will bell the cat?,
[a31] William Jennings Bryan, Cross of Gold, July 9, 1896, Speech at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago,
[a32] The Money Masters – How International Bankers Gained Control of America, 215 minutes,
[a33] Project Humanbeingsfirst, Press Release October 09 2008, This may be a psy-op!
[a34] Times of London, oped text cited in: The Money Masters – How International Bankers Gained Control of America, 215 minutes,
[a35] Abraham Lincoln, Ibid.
[John Perkins] Zahir Ebrahim Introducing “A Game As Old As Empire”, the sequel to “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”,
Additional Footnotes
[Norman Dodd Hidden Agenda] The Hidden Agenda for World Government, Interview with G. Edward Griffin, 1982, or
[Money as Debt]
[Public Debt] Zahir Ebrahim, The entrenched notion of Public Debt in America – will take a gestalt shift to overcome! October 30, 2008, notes the United States Bureau of the Public Debt,
Begin Quote
On the US Treasury department website, there is a service called:
Its job, as stated,
“You haven't heard of the Bureau of the Public Debt before? We're a small agency within the Department of the Treasury. Our customers are your neighbors, co-workers, and most likely you, too. You're our customer if you've ever bought any type of Treasury security for yourself or, as millions have done in the case of savings bonds, as a gift for someone else.
Our job is to borrow the money needed to operate the federal government and to account for the resulting debt. In a nutshell, we borrow by selling Treasury bills, notes, and bonds, as well as U.S. Savings Bonds; we pay interest to investors; and, when the time comes to pay back the loans, we redeem investors' securities. Every time we borrow or pay back money, it affects the outstanding debt of the United States.”
The second paragraph is revealing as it is quintessentially axiomatic:
“Our job is to borrow the money needed to operate the federal government and to account for the resulting debt.”
End Quote
Why does that job even exist? There is a presupposition, an axiom based on the a priori supposition of debt, and which remains unexamined --- which is why that statement is axiomatic. The entrenched forces which make that job axiomatic are neither understood nor its insidious power appreciated by monetary reform advocates who seem to think that these forces will magically just disappear to enable “reform”. Which is why I have come to realize that monetary reform is in fact a social engineering scam designed by the oligarchy to keep activists occupied and chattering away in futility. The knowledge of the subversion itself is harmless since nothing can be done with that knowledge in any practical way. The risk analysis in game theory scenario analysis would indicate that permitting this discourse to exist in rebel hands is in fact useful to empire.
Begin Quote
On the same home page, is also this axiomatic quote from Alexander Hamilton, the father of private central banking in the newly independent former colonies, the Bank of North America, followed by the First Bank of the United States when he was the Secretary of the Treasury:
“The United States debt, foreign and domestic, was the price of liberty.”
So – the coupling between the federal government's Treasury Department, and private central banking, is as old as America. It is irrefutably captured in that quote of Hamilton. Despite the occasional bouts of heroism by presidents like Andrew Jackson: “You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out, and by God, I will rout you out.”, and after killing the Second Bank of the United States, “I killed the bank”, for the brief respite of 77 years until 1913, it has become such an axiom that today, generations later, a federal government department is created to monitor the size of that debt.
End Quote

Addendum First Published November 23, 2008 | Links and bookmarks fixed March 05, 2010 | Last Updated links fixed and footnotes extended Thursday, March 12, 2015 12071
Links fixed August 25, 2016

The author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley (patents here), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book was rejected by six publishers and can be read on the web at He may be reached at Verbatim reproduction license at
Copyright Notice:
All material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety, unmodified and unedited, for any purpose, granted, provided the URL sentence and this copyright notice are also reproduced verbatim as part of this license, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at The rights of the author to express these views are based on inalienable rights noted at, and to do so freely without suffering intimidation and duress. All quotations and excerpts are based on non-profit "fair use" in the greater public interest consistent with the understanding of laws noted at Full copyright notice and Exclusions at

The Monetary Conspiracy for World Government 34/34

Full Copyright Notice

All material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety, unmodified, for any purpose, granted, provided the full URL sentence and the copyright notice contained within each Document are also reproduced verbatim as part of this license, along with any embedded links within its main text, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at All figures, images, quotations, and excerpts are used without permission based on non-profit "fair-use" for personal education and research use only in the greater public interest. The usage is minimally consistent with the understanding of laws noted at In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of US Copyright Laws, you are provided the material from Project Humanbeingsfirst upon your request, and taking any action that delivers you any of its documents in any form is considered making a specific request to receive the documents for your own personal educational and/or research use. You are directly responsible for seeking the requisite permissions from other copyright holders for any use beyond “fair use”. Exclusion: All rights are expressly reserved for the usage of the terms (c) HumanbeingsfirstTM and (c) HumanbeingfirstTM which are the copyrighted and trademarked intellectual property of Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Reproduction Note: It is acceptable to reproduce any document in smaller serialized parts provided the full URL sentence and the copyright notice within each document are also reproduced in each part and the entire document is reproduced. Please read

Caveat Emptor

Please be advised that Project HumanbeingsfirstTM fully cooperates with all law enforcement and other governmental agencies worldwide in rooting out Terrorism in all its nuanced shades and stripes in order to end its Neanderthal reign of terror upon all who are human beings first. Project Humanbeingsfirst does not distinguish between terrorists clad in turbans and those wearing suits, nor between the predatory rampages of the pirates vs. the emperors, albeit each is apportioned the measure of crime and guilt commensurate to their respective station of power and impact on their victims. Law enforcement personnel worldwide, but especially in the United States and the West, are encouraged to participate with Project Humanbeingsfirst. It is essential for all nations' state security apparatus to learn how to forensically identify the monumental supreme terrorists hiding in plain sight among us under legal cover, the real merchants of death, while they dutifully chase down the easy to spot handful of often deliberately manufactured pirates at sea.