The Money Trail

Rothschild is quoted as saying, "I don't care who the government is, let me control the money and I will control the country."

... And, so it goes. The enemies to your freedom do not necessarily lurk behind closed doors in Washington D.C. (although you will find many there), nor are they necessarily engaged in some nafarious conspiracy plotting the overthrow of government.
No, the enemies of your freedom live next door and are found in every city and town in America. "We have met the enemy, and they are us." And, while there is a conspiracy [An agreement, manifesting itself in words or deeds, by which two or more persons confederate to do an unlawful act, or to use unlawful to do an act which is lawful. - From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)], they do not want to overthrow the government - they want to change government for their own agenda and they want you to pay for it.

In 1954 The Ford Foundation President H. Rowan Gaither told Norman Dodd, investigator for Congressman Reece's Committee, that their objective "was to alter our life in the United States so that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union." The Soviet Union no longer exists as we knew it. What has emerged is a much larger globalist entity.
Virtually every major name in banking from Rockefeller to Rothschild to Robert McNamara (president of The World Bank) has spoken of the reality of an interlocking global economy - that what happens on Wall Street one minute is felt in London or Tokyo the next, that the complex jigsaw puzzle of world economy is moving into an oscillating ball that will eventually unify nations and currencies in the global marketplace, and that the economic forces of the earth are moving relentlessly toward a unified world system.
If Rothschild was right about controlling the money, you control the country, then it is pretty easy to see how Communism can fail so conveniently for the New World Order and how basically the same people who were communists then, are now Socialist Democrats and still running things.

The average American Citizen isn't going to give up his Constitution for some World Government too easily. We and our ancestors have fought too long and shed too much blood for it to give up easily.
The plan is for Americans to give up their freedom willingly. Socialist reform is the only way that a one world order can be established without a direct military confrontation.

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans ..."
Bill Clinton (USA TODAY, 11 March 1993, page 2A)

They want "your money."

For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. - 1 Timothy 6:10

Much of the hostility toward private wealth comes from the hatred of its ability to insulate the citizen from the will of the state. Money empowers resistance; it gives one the ability to buy some gold coins, for example, and thereby hold a measure of independence from the monetary monopoly of the state; to send children to a private school and avoid the brainwashing of the public education monopoly; to open a foreign bank account and provide oneself with protection against legal confiscation schemes.

Government Sponsored Racketeering
Why do you suppose the federal government waged what was essentially an all-out war on entrepreneurs early in the century? The enemy was degradingly called the "mob" and their product was alcohol and gambling. The socialists in government won that war and the federal government now controls and profits from the burgeoning alcohol and gambling business.

Putting fear into the minds of its citizens and falsifying the facts have always been the modus operandi of those wanting to install a Socialist-Democratic society in America. The word "survival" is never far from the lips of those who wish to impose state power in order to protect us from disaster, named or unnamed.

The buzzword of the nineties is "crisis."

Suppose that we were to enter a major depression as bad or worse than 1929. Then suppose a party comes along and says "Vote for us and we will take you into the New World Order, have world trade, put you to work again." Do you think if you and your children were starving that you might be willing to give up your freedom so that you might feed them? Well, that scenario may not be in the far too distant future.
It seems the current rage is a Y2K Crisis that some predict will cause widespread outages of computers controlling everything from the banks to electric utilities. For some, namely lawyers, they see it as a gold mine. "This is the tobacco, the silicone breast implant, and the asbestos abatement problem all rolled into one -- times three," said David Stewart, who is not a lawyer, but is traveling the country advising lawyers on the opportunities awaiting them. The Gartner Group in January estimated the costs of possible Year 2000 litigation would exceed $1 trillion, and the Senate Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem has identified litigation as one of its seven priorities.
We are told we have a "health care crisis" - justifying the government takeover of one-seventh of the U.S. economy. It was the so-called "health care crisis" that forced most Americans into health-maintenance organizations or other kinds of managed care plans. Now we're told that because the country has attained most of the savings (read "profits") it could from the transition, health care costs are likely to double over the next decade.
We are told we have a "ecological crisis" - justifying the government to impose far reaching new regulations on businesses.
We hear of a "crisis of family values" and that "it takes more than a family to raise children." The Children's Defense Fund (CDF), which promotes an amoral approach to sex education and other means of destroying the very moral values which most parents want to pass on to their children, agrees with the Clinton's and wants to redefine the family believing government can serve as surrogate parents (the "village"). That means that kids would no longer be primarily accountable to their parents. To whom would they be accountable to? The answer, of course, is the state. The benevolent state. The "VILLAGE," then, would transcend the Orwellian "Big Brother" role and become surrogate parent. It would grant your children "rights" and be their legal guardian.
Believing that it takes more than a family to raise children, Clinton's Big Government, "Village", has turned the rhetoric to focus on children. In almost every speech, on about any topic, in just about any context, Bill Clinton uses that "powerful" emotion-filled statement,"for the children."

We have a "crisis in the education of our children" - bringing on humanist solutions through the control and manipulation of our childrens minds.
We have a "hate crime crisis," so Attorney General Janet Reno wants us all to get our minds right. In her own chilling words, "the Justice Department and the Department of Education will soon distribute a hate crimes prevention manual to help teachers get young people to understand that they should celebrate their differences and not fight over them." Homosexual activists are already in the schools ... soon they may get your tax dollars to teach your children, too.
We have a "pediatric disease crisis" fueling the governments takeover of the tobacco industry. Of course, it too is being justified as "for the children."

Tobacco and Second Hand Smoke

Cancer, heart disease, children's welfare, good health?
Wrong!
It's all about money, control, and jurisdiction!

Those greedy folks who want to control you through the control of your money are absorbed in convincing you that because of a contrived health problem associated with cigarette smoking and the heaping of guilt on smoking parents of their childrens health, you should willingly give them more of your money. So, Americans are expected to blindly accept higher taxes to pay for more failed government programs, increased government intrusion into American businesses, and higher insurance premiums to line the pockets of insurance industry CEO's.
Currently the U.S. Congress is attempting to pass $500 billion in new taxes over the next 25 years to pay for new bureaucracies giving non-elected officials jurisdiction over the tobacco industry.
The current propaganda campaign being waged against the tobacco industry amounts to extortion by the U.S. government, insurance companies, and many others in the health related professions. They are simply coercing your money from you through the spreading of fear and in some cases lying to the American public in exchange for higher taxes, higher insurance premiums, and higher medical fees.
The rest of the story

Obesiety

How we measure people's weight has recently been changed to use the BMI (Body Mass Index) to determine who is overweight. Of course, those who are overweight pose a greater health risk and as a result in the not-too-distant future, expect insurance companies to begin rating their policies based on BMI.

Insurance

One industry that seems to be common in most of our "so-called" crisis is the insurance industry. Take a objective look at any of the crisis were supposedly facing and you'll find insurance companies and attorneys in the middle of the fray. I wonder if anyone ever considers the possibility that there is NO crisis beyond the fact that greedy insurance companies don't feel like they are getting enough of your money? I would venture to guess there is no family who has not been touched (ripped off) by their insurance carrier.

You don't have to go far to find documented cases online. Take for example, the eleven year-old whose HMO delayed giving her important medical tests for her frequent headaches, letting a tumor grow unchecked for four years. According to the youngsters parents, the HMO had an incentive program in place to pay bonuses to physicians who avoided "excessive" care. The list of other cases of abuse by HMO's goes on-and-on.
The conspiracy of insurance companies confiscating your wealth is not limited only to HMO's, nor is it limited to health insurance. More traditional coverage is also fertile grounds for insurance abuse - and that includes homeowners insurance, automobile insurance, any kind of insurance - it's industry wide!

• Your policy denies claims, delays payment, or only pays part of the charge. This is an all-too-frequent experience: "Eventually they covered a part of the bill, but it has taken a year to collect it. Meanwhile, we paid the whole thing out-of-pocket" is an often-heard refrain.
• Does your policy exclude entire organ systems from coverage, like reproductive, respiratory, or digestive. As one person on the Working From Home Forum said, "When I got my policy, it had riders attached which exempted any part of my body a doctor had ever looked at with more than a passing glance. Another rider exempted any problem of any kind having to do with a kidney or anything attached to it! But I had naturally passed a kidney stone about five years ago. I had no surgery or complications, but spent two days in the hospital."
• Have you or members of your group insurance made many claims? If so, rates are apt to be increased dramatically. After paying into an employer provided policy with Central Reserve Life for 5 years, I had a situation where I needed medical attention that only cost CRL $1,925 after my deductible and co-payments. They paid the initial claim but responded by increasing my deductible by 400%. In a policy that netted CRL probably $12,000, their response was to punish me when I used the policy for what it was designed for. Terms like "rip-off, conspiracy, and fraud, come to mind to describe this insurance company.
• Don't overlook the details! Willis Caroon provided the policy for Jennifer and her husband. When she delivered her first child, the proud parents excitedly took the baby home and contacted Willis Caroon with their claim. But, because they did not file the claim within 48 hours, the claim was denied and this new family was forced to pay the entire $5,000 medical bill. Technically, Willis Caroon could legally deny this claim because buried in the details of their coverage was the requirement to file a claim within 48 hours. It may be legal, but it's not right! It is a perfect fit of the definition of "conspiracy" cited earlier: [An agreement, manifesting itself in words or deeds, by which two or more persons confederate to do an unlawful act, or to use unlawful to do an act which is lawful. - From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)],

The complaints against Allstate Insurance Company, for example, go far beyond the confines of this web site. There are entire web sites available that document the abuses of Allstate. To counter their abuses Allstate hits the airwaves with advertising campaigns designed to manipulate public opinion in their favor. A recent campaign diverts the attention from their money grabbing tactics to make them look like a company that "cares" deeply about their policyholders. And, it must be working because millions of Americans, like "mind-numbed robots," send in their checks to Allstate.

Employer Provided Health Insurance

You buy your own auto insurance, your own homeowners insurance, and your own life insurance. Why, then, do we allow our empolyers to buy something as private as our healthcare? Because they can get a better deal for us? Because they care more about us? Or perhaps, as many would argue, if they didn't have insurance through their employer, they probably wouldn't have insurance at all. So, why doesn't the employer provide auto, home, and life insurance as well? Read on... I'll tell you why!
In 1957, the federal marginal income tax rate was 91%. Corporate executives, particularly those in the 91% bracket, told their employers they didn't want to be payed more money because they had to pay the government $9,100 in taxes for a $10.000 raise. So the corporate executives followed by the labor unions went to Washington and obtained the right that if their company paid for their healthcare, they wouldn't get taxed on the benefit. Middle class people and poor people have to earn $2 and then earn $10 to get 90 cents to spend on healthcare. , but if you're rich in the top half of the bracket, you don't have to pay for your healthcare.
So, if you're employed with an income in the upper half, and work for a company that pays your healthcare, the federal government ends up paying half your healthcare. The benefit you get, you don't pay income taxes on. In fact, the only reason employers pay our healthcare is because they pay non-taxable benefits on healthcare. Further, we are forced to buy healthcare from our employer because we get a 2:1 advantage over buying the insurance privately, because of the income tax deduction.
The working mother with three children working for a company that does not provide healthcare has to earn two dollars to buy her children $1 worth of healthcare.
We should immediately stop this unfair practice and should give a tax deduction to anybody who buys their own healthcare.
When we give a tax deduction to people who buy their own healh care, the first thing that is going to happen is that every employee working at a compnay that provides healthcare is going to get a pay raise! Assuming the employer has been paying $5,000 a year for your insurance and now pays you the $5,000, you can take that money and start shopping for PERSONAL health care insurance.
Assuming your healthcare insurance is now costing you $5,000 a year, by increasing your deductible, you can reduce your premium. For example, say you get a $2,000 deductible plan and reduce your premium $3,000, you are immediately ahead $1,000.
And, insurance consumers will pay more attention to what they are paying for. When they discover a particular drug, doctor, or proceedure is too expensive they will look for another option. People would start comparison shopping for health care matters (insurance, doctor visits, etc.). In the present health care system, who cares what the costs are? Why should you care since someone else is paying for it. If you were paying for it, you will be more involved in finding the lowest cost health care services and wouldn't stand for those people overcharging for their goods and services.
In other words, the health care industry would be forced to be more efficient and competition would drive healthcare prices down. Get the employer out of health care and allow entrepreneurs deliver a better product for a lower cost. Our brightest minds would start focusing on more efficient ways to deliver health care, doctors & hospitals would have new incentives to invest in new equipment, technologies and procedures. Service might actually come to the health care industry! Health costs would actually start going down.

The Future of the Insurance Industry

We will surely eventually reach the point where the Insurance industry simply collapses leaving millions of Americans without coverage or their life savings. It has been a profitable confidence game for many years: create a crisis or scare ... convince people to pay for protection ... hike the prices of that protection ... and abandon the policyholder when the money runs dry. Perhaps, it has already begun.
Following the inability of General American Life Insurance Co. to repay as much as $6.8 billion in customer deposits, on Aug. 10, 1999 St. Louis-based General American was put under state regulators' supervision. Eventually Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. agreed to buy General American Life Insurance Co. for $1.2 billion in cash, resolving the Missouri insurer's inability to repay it's deposits. New York-based Met Life plans a ``stabilization program'' to deal with the deposits, known as funding agreements. What do you suppose that means? Rate hikes for everyone perhaps?

Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996

Number Portability
Have you looked at your phone bill lately? What you'll find are NEW TAXES!
My most recent phone bill (Feb. '99) from Southwestern Bell contains the following explanation:

"The Federal Telecommunications of Act of 1996 required local telephone companies to initiate measures that permit customers to keep their local telephone numbers if they change their local telephone service provider while remaining at the same location. This capability is commonly called "number portability."
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has ruled that the costs to provide "number portability" may be recovered through a monthly service charge. This service charge will be 48 cents per month."

My first reaction when I saw this new tax was, "What other local telephone services provider?" So, I called Southwestern Bell billing department to ask them about it. I spoke with Linda who very cordially told me she could not divulge that information about their competitors. She suggested I call the local operator and ask them. So I spoke with Frank who essentially repeated what Linda had told me and suggested I look in the Yellow Pages. Letting my fingers do the walking, I found a small obscure listing for a company that provided such service. So, I called them to inquire about their services. Guess what? They buy their lines from Southwestern Bell! What a deal ... get billed by another company that is going to mark up their costs from the established company (SWB) and get to charge an extra fee (or tax) to boot. (Do I hear 'conspiracy' anywhere?)
Okay, say I don't care about having "number portability" and want to cancel it. I call Southwestern Bell again, this time talking with April. She was again very cordial and tried her best to explain to me the new charge (within company guidelines of "what she can and cannot say.") Come to find out that even if I never use the "number portability" service, I still have to pay for it in order to have the privilege of calling someone else who might take advantage of the service.

When is "enough - enough?" These lying politicians in Washington tell us that they are reducing our taxes ... while they slip in all these additional fees. I asked April at Southwestern Bell if she had been getting many calls inquiring about this new tax. She said they had, but most people were satisfied after being told it was just another mandated tax levied by the Federal Government.
I'm getting a little tired (no, allot tired), of the government taxing, taxing, and taxing, all the while telling us they're reducing taxes. They are simply doing what Bill Clinton and the U.S. Senate legitimized: lying! My most recent phone bill from Southwestern Bell contains 36% taxes and fees! Someone please tell me how this is "for the children," or even "the right thing to do."

Universal Service Fund
The "Gore Tax," which is now being collected (upon directive of the Federal Communications Commission) by telephone companies, amounts to 5% of all interstate long-distance charges, which will, as AT&T is explaining to its customers, "give schools and libraries access to advanced services like the Internet." American Enterprise fellow James K. Glassman says of the Gore Tax, "The educational benefits are more uncertain, and 80 percent of schools are already connected to the Internet anyway." Less than 2% of telephone tax revenues are actually being designated for "connection fees."
The Universal Service Fund is a vehicle for maintaining universal service in the telecommunications sector. In order to support telephone service in high cost areas, this fund, which is supported by long-distance service providers, pays subsidies to local exchange carriers (LECs) in proportion to their subscriber line costs. Subsidy payments from the USF were started in 1986, and its initial eight-year plan came to an end in 1993. The Federal Telecommunications Act, passed in the Spring of 1996, called for major changes in the telecommunications industry. The act placed an emphasis on competition and deregulation, and included new rules on who could tap funds in the Universal Service Fund (USF). The act went on to include changes in how the USF could be used. The Universal Service regulations were published in the Federal Register on June 17, 1997 and took effect on July 17, 1997 - just in time for the "budget deal."
For the first time, the 1996 Act includes schools and libraries among the explicit beneficiaries of universal service support. The legislative history indicated that Congress intended to ensure that eligible schools and libraries have affordable access to modern telecommunications and information services that will enable them to provide educational services to all parts of the nation.
K-12 schools and libraries are eligible for discounts of 20% to 90% on telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections. Funds will be distributed from a single, common universal service fund that has a cap of $2.25 billion per year for the entire United States. Any unspent funds carry over for use in the next year, with slightly different carry forward rules in the first two years.
The FCC has subsequently voted to raise the Universal Service Charge or “Gore tax” as its become known on telephone users by $1 billion. If memory serves me, Article 1, Section 8 of Constitution still says only “Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes.” How is it that the FCC now has this authority?
Rural Health Care
The FCC is encouraging the growth of telehealth in rural areas by making telecommunications rates for public and non-profit rural health care providers comparable to those paid in urban areas. The annual cap on federal universal service support for health care providers shall be $400 million per funding year. Telehealth is the use of communications technologies to provide and support health care at a distance. Examples of telehealth include the use of communications to provide patient treatment, often via still images or video, and the exchange and distribution of public health information.
Only certain health care providers are eligible to receive supported services under this FCC act. (i) Post-secondary educational institution offering health care instruction, including a teaching hospital or medical school; (ii) Community health center or health center providing health care to migrants; (iii) Local health department or agency; (iv) Community mental health center; (v) Not-for-profit hospital; (vi) Rural health clinic; or (vii) Consortium of health care providers consisting of one or more entities . Only public or non-profit health care providers shall be eligible to receive supported services.

Internet Tax

Perhaps you've seen the ad or received an email stating:

The above alert has been labeled a "hoax" and "urban legend" by some. See: CIAC Internet Hoaxes | Internet Surcharge Hoax. [NOTE: the CIAC page appears to be sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy - who better to be a watchdog over the federal government.] But, the facts can speak for themselves... the FCC, not Congress recently ruled on this exact topic and it was not "hoax." Read about it yourself: Unraveling The Compensation Edict| FCC Says ISP Calls Are Federal Matter. Folks, they may not be getting additional fees (taxes) in the next several months, but you should know they have their eyes on the "deep pockets" of the Internet and will incrementally raise prices (increase taxes) disguised as some other kind of fee.
If the phone companies have their way, you WILL end up paying more for basic service. Right now you're paying for Internet access plus local phone charges incurred while dialing up the ISP's POP. The FCC has ruled that calls to ISP's should be considered interstate transmissions, so ISPs may have to pay fees to local phone compies for using their wires. FCC Chairman William Kennard denies that consumers will end up paying higher rates. Right now, the charges are being waived as an exception, but given the huge stakes involved, you can count on a long drawn-out legal battle.

Rising Cost of Safety

Apparently, insurance companies just are not satisfied with how much of your money they are getting. Eyeing the fact that for the first time in history, more sport utility vehicles are sold in the United States than passenger cars and that they are the fastest-growing segment of the auto market, these folks are beginning to gleefully count more of your money - as theirs.

Known in the industry as SUVs, many consumers buy sport utility vehicles, at least in part, because the vehicles are safer in collisions than midsized cars. But, your safety comes at a price ... higher insurance rates. 35 insurance companies have already raised their premiums on sport utility vehicles and several other are considering similar action.

The rest of the story

Greed and discontentment in the workforce

The main beneficiaries of minimum wage legislation are the labor unions, whose members are able to negotiate pay scales at higher levels than they could without the laws. It is no coincidence that union officials have been the most vocal supporters of minimum wage laws. What union people do you know that works for minimum wage?
Read about a recent real life example.

What's the real agenda behind the war in Yugoslavia?

Need you be reminded again? It'sMoney.
Or, to be more specific ... oil, black gold, texas tea. Apparently, there is a wealth of oil and minerals in the Caspian sea. According to a June 23 story on UPI, the US Trade and Development Agency announced on June 2 the US had awarded a $588,000 grant to Bulgaria to carry out a feasibility study for an oil pipeline. Under the proposed plan, Caspian oil would be shipped by tanker from Black Sea ports in former Soviet Georgia and then pumped by overland pipeline across Bulgaria, Macedonia and Albania.
The huge oil reserves under the Caspian Sea has been a coveted prize for years. The Third Reich waged the bloodiest battle ever fought, the siege at Stalingrad in an attempt to gain control over access routes to these oil reserves during World War II.

What's the bottom line on global warming?

Money, of course.
Why do they want to control international energy use and have government control of industry?
To raise your taxes to pay for it!

"The evidence of global warming keeps piling up, month after month, week after week. How long is it going to take before those people in the Congress get the message? People are sweltering out there. .. The future holds significantly higher temperatures still unless we do something about it." - Vice President Al Gore

What evidence? Is it Mr. Clinton´s recent assertion that "the five warmest years recorded since the 1400s all occurred in the 1990s"? Mathematical statistician, J. Gart, rightly asks, "As the early readings necessarily predate the European ´discovery´ of the Western Hemisphere (1492), Australia (1606), and New Zealand (1642), please make it clear whether the temperatures recorded by the Aztecs, Incans, Australian aborigines, and Maoris are in centigrade or Fahrenheit or whatever."

The science is uncertain. Scientists cannot tell us how much and where temperatures will increase or, for certain, whether they will increase at all.

Part of their evidence for global warming is complex computer models that spew out misleading conclusions. These same computer models, when fed the facts of past weather patterns, cannot accurately spit out what actually happened. Of course, basic facts like since 1890 the continental U.S. ground temperature has not changed are of little consideration or that during the 30 years between 1940 and 1970, when we pumped out more CO2 than any other time, there was no global warming.

It's on the basis of no evidence that the recent Kyoto Treaty was signed. It will be very costly to American families, fuel and electricity costs will go up and jobs at energy-intensive industries are likely to be lost. It will export American jobs. While economic growth and job creation will be severely impacted in the United States, other nations will be free to continue emitting, growing their economies, and competing for jobs.
It will not improve the environment. By 2015, greenhouse gas emission from developing countries will exceed those of the United States and other countries impacted by the treaty. Overall, global emissions will continue to grow. If global warming is real, the Kyoto Treaty is not a solution.

"The real threat to Mr. Gore´s Kyoto dreams is if Americans begin to doubt there´s any real threat. If no one can be sure that humans are causing the Earth to warm, or even how much of a problem it is if it does warm, what´s the point of breaking a political sweat? This is why Mr. Gore and his aides are so dismissive and caustic toward anyone who doubts their claims or disputes their evidence." - The Wall Street Journal

"Every month this year has delivered new evidence of global warming and El Nino has given us a picture of what the future may hold if we fail to act." - Al Gore

People have been becoming increasingly aware that the problems of external security which are facing their national governments are problems facing the world today - ozone depletion, air pollution, acid rain, nuclear accidents, over-population, drought, famine, international terrorism, international trading, multinational corporation, international communications, etc. - cannot be controlled or solved by individual national governments. So men are beginning to look beyond their national governments to a higher denomination of government - a world government with legislative, enforcement, and judicial influence on a world scale.

Gun Control

Because of an epidemic of crime on our streets, we are told to give up our guns.

"Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control, to Sen. Howard Metzanbaum, The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.