I want you to listen to the words of George Orwell:
We live in a time of universal deceit. Though we are deluged by information, much of the information that reaches us is distorted. It is false.
This is not an accident. Those in government, the media, in education and entertainment have vested interests in spreading lies and suppressing truth. And the most pernicious and effective enemies of the truth are the myths — we might call them the false pretenses — that, although clearly untrue and destructive, nevertheless appeal to the base nature of man. And because they do appeal to the fallen nature of man, we tend to believe them even though they are untrue. AND they thus become the basis for public opinion and public policy.
The Federal Reserve serves as a good example. Americans live under the false assumption — the false premise — that the Federal Reserve is designed for and committed to fostering the health of the American economy through the stabilization of interest rates and the prevention of inflation. The facts are exactly the opposite and these facts are easily discoverable. The Federal Reserve actually causes inflation. One might actually say that the Federal Reserve IS inflation.
The Federal Reserve is a corrupt union of central government and central bankers conspiring in a scheme to manipulate the currency in order to embezzle the productive wealth of America and the American people. The Federal Reserve has been stealing our wealth and eating out our substance for one hundred years now.
It is unconstitutional, that is to say illegal, that is to say, criminal.
The accomplices to this criminal activity include the President, the Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States. One might say that all issues in government tie back to the fraudulent and dangerous use of make believe money – fiat money. The only candidate for president that speaks of this in a serious way is Dr. Ron Paul of Texas.
Dr. Ron Paul is labeled as a revolutionary, but George Orwell told you that would happen, didn’t he?
Listen to: The Fraudulent Federal Reserve
twitter: \’check out http://t.co/dQSCpZIO (from @addthis)\’
(A comment emailed to The American View)
Dear Sir:
Your defense of Representative Ron Paul is based on pure ignorance concerning the intentions of our Founding Fathers and the United States Constitution. The isolationist history of the United States is not only impractical due the modern nuclear world’s delicate balance of power; it never truly existed.
Perhaps a brief history lesson is in order.
Our Founders framed the Constitution to address the needs and issues that surrounded their establishment of an independent United States. Having just won a bitter war against the superpower of their generation, our leaders understood that the new country was in a delicate position. Still, their fear of a too-large central government prevented them from supporting our Constitution in its current form until the Articles of Confederation proved too weak.
Our leaders sought to protect individual rights and the ratified Constitution was amended to protect these natural rights of citizens and of individual states. Our leaders knew the immature United States would need time to pay its debts and set its new governing body into action before it could address issues concerning the world at large. Unfortunately for them, Islamists in the Mediterranean did not care to wait until the premature country was ready to fight.
Barbary Pirates had been attacking American ships previously, but only now as an independent nation (and without the protection of Great Britain or France) did the new country’s leaders find themselves confronted by a different reality than they had anticipated. George Washington’s warning against foreign entanglements was heeded as best it could be, but American lives were at stake and needed to be defended.
In March 1794, just a few years after the Constitution was ratified, the isolationist United States was already creating an offensive body of armed force, the United States Navy. This Navy was specifically created with the intention of being deployed halfway across the world to the Mediterranean Sea to defend American ships from foreign piracy attacks.
The United States fought its first foreign war from 1801-1805, when it was still in its infancy. The War of 1812 against Great Britain followed soon after. Peace did not last long, as the United States once again needed to settle its differences with the Islamic Barbary states in the Second Barbary War, fought against pirates who clearly believed and openly expressed that killing their infidel captives would earn them a spot in paradise. Not much has changed in the past 200 years, it appears.
The Barbary pirate attacks were unprovoked, as were the terrorist attacks on the USS Cole, various US embassies, and, most obviously, the attacks on 9-11.
Indeed, our glorious anti-war past appears to be but a myth.
Now, with the potential for Islamic fundamentalist control of nuclear weapons in the near future, “President” Ron Paul looking the other way would likely only facilitate a tragic end to our glorious experiment in democracy.
Sincerely,
The Commenter
Dear Commenter:
Thank you for your message and for the history lesson. And thanks for your interest in The American View. I must admit to being a little confused, however. I am not sure exactly what you are referring to when you mention my “defense of Representative Ron Paul” in your very first sentence. I have written two recent radio essays which mention his name and his statements regarding the Federal Reserve.
In one essay I said that Ron Paul was the only candidate who has seriously addressed the issue of the Federal Reserve and the dangers of central banking and fiat money.
In the other essay I pointed out that the singular goal of “must beat Obama” seems to be taking hold of the conservative talking heads and will, I argued, prove to be a vain effort since this strategy will likely replace Obama with another Obama.
I could be wrong, but I don’t remember discussing Ron Paul’s foreign policy in those essays or “defending” him against anything.
If I am wrong about this, please point to what I have written or said and I would be happy to discuss it further.
Sincerely,
Michael Anthony Peroutka