Comment: I agree we agree in the end

(See in situ)

I agree we agree in the end

The Austrian School of Economics was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and the William Volker Fund, the same people who created the United Nations and wrote the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The way the elites operate is they don't fight you directly — they create a controlled opposition which then coopts your populist cause, creating a patsy, in this case the Pauls, who are then defeated, leaving you with nothing for your efforts. (There is no better way to win a conflict than to control both sides. I'm sure Sun Tzu can verify this, but I cannot confirm it.) This delves into how the elites work. Sure, Rockefeller sought overt government help, but that is on the surface. The insidious way the elite operate is through NGOs (non-governmental organizations) — tax-free organizations which construct public policy under the guise of objective or scientific wool in the name of so-called "philanthropy" (as opposed to genuine charity). These "experts" are people you never voted for, but they are held up as leaders to be followed, because their findings are "objective", allegedly. Surely, John D. Rockefeller created the fiction of "fossil fuel" so that his petroleum could supplant ethanol and methanol in the fight to become the fuel of choice in the dawn of the automotive era. Regarding the 15% cut in the military-industrial complex, more or less, we are in agreement, the point being that the cuts Ron Paul proposed were greater elsewhere in the budget than in the military. So much for our anti-war monger hero. Regarding the Federal Reserve, Ron Paul preaches for an audit. What if that audit is rigged, which we know it will be — will it advance our cause when the "auditors" conclude no harm was done, as the 9/11 Commission did, or will the failed audit merely obstruct further moves to break the back of the Federal Reserve? Ron Paul proposes to end the Fed and subject the U.S. money supply to a basket of currencies, be it gold or silver (both of which the globalists have been hoarding for decades, even raiding national treasuries for their supplies) or tulip bulbs or original versions of Star Wars laserdiscs, etc. Tarpley advocates nationalization of the privately-owned Federal Reserve, which is seizure of its assets, put under the control of Congress, the duly elected representatives of We the People. Congress then issues credit, not debt, at 0% interest for any production of tangible assets the American people pursue, from small businesses that make widgets to infrastructure public works projects such as monopolistic water supplies or underground cables, etc., but not financial institutions such as banks. Regarding Tarpley's prediction of Mitch Daniels as Romney's VP — he also predicted Petraeus, and probably others. His predictions were not intended to define what will be, but rather to expose the deficiencies in those individuals and how they would serve as useful tools in the globalists' scheme to destroy us. A prediction can be correct and yet ultimately be wrong — for example, the movie The Dead Zone (1983) illustrates this. Actions can be taken which force the elites to fold their cards. Nonetheless, Romney's selection of Paul Ryan is no respite. To most voters, Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, and Ron Paul are the same guy. They don't know one from the other. Paul Ryan comes in to preach the gospel that you continue to pay taxes, but you should get less of that money back from Uncle Sam in the form of Social Security and Medicare. Ron Paul set the stage for that, corrupting the youth to cheer such a suicidal message. The essential difference between Tarpley and Ron Paul is that Tarpley believes in expansion, that your standard of living should be better than your parents', whereas Ron Paul believes in austerity of the money supply, which he admits is one half of every transaction, and ultimately the American economy. Regarding tariffs, I have not heard Tarpley discuss them. I brought them up because they are authorized in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The only two historical justifications given for the institution of the income tax were the payment of war costs (after the Civil War) and the reduction of tariffs (later in the 19th century). As we know, all the income taxes we pay now go to the Federal Reserve, which then loans that money back to Congress — a most diabolical perversion we agree must be stopped.