The Right To Nullify This Government by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

10 08 2011

Every couple of years the same drearily predictable charade repeats itself. This time we’re really going to limit government! Or so they tell us. We on the Right then dutifully compose our letters to the editor, attend rallies, and vote for candidates without whom, we are breathlessly assured, we shall all revert instantly to barbarism. And no matter who wins, the federal government grows and grows. The Right gets a bunch of pretty speeches, and the Left gets the victories. The passive approach of crossing our fingers and hoping Washington will follow the Constitution has not worked.The only surprising thing about it is that anyone could have expected it to work in the first place. It is long past time for those of us who want to confine the federal government to its constitutional limits to try something different. The time has come to revisit nullification, the quintessentially American mode of resistance against federal lawlessness that Thomas Jefferson urged as an essential ingredient of our political system. In the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, Jefferson insisted that the states needed a way to defend themselves against unconstitutional exercises of power by the federal government. Jefferson’s fear was that if the federal government had a monopoly on defining the scope of its own powers, it would be constantly discovering new ones. Likewise, James Madison urged in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 that the states were “duty bound to resist” when the federal government violated the Constitution. (The reader will not be surprised to learn that Bill Clinton held no White House soiree in honor of the two hundredth anniversary of these documents in 1998.) These principles were used for honorable purposes throughout antebellum American history. Virginia and Kentucky used them on behalf of free speech. The New England states employed them against unconstitutional searches and seizures. Numerous northern states used them against fugitive slave laws, provisions of which they considered unconstitutional notwithstanding the Constitution’s fugitive-slave clause. More than six decades after Jefferson penned the immortal words of the Kentucky Resolutions, the legislature of Wisconsin quoted them word for word in defense of its defiance of such laws. Do American schoolchildren read about any of this? The question answers itself. They are about as likely to read that I, Tom Woods, am the king of England. But all of a sudden, out of the clear blue, nullification is back. Fiscal conservatives and civil libertarians joined hands in 2005 to oppose the REAL ID Act, which involved the

T. Woods

centralization and standardization of identification procedures. They had no idea how successful they would be. Two dozen states pledged to defy the law. Stung by this degree of resistance, the federal government gave up trying to enforce the Act. Now, states are banding together to devise resistance measures against Obamacare, cap and trade, and a whole raft of constitutionally offensive legislation. Several states have already instituted Firearms Freedom Acts, which pledge the state to prevent the enforcement of federal gun regulations when the guns in question have never entered interstate commerce. (Color me skeptical that the recent Supreme Court decision means Americans’ Second Amendment rights are safe forever.) So far, most conservative radio and television hosts have shied away from the issue. That’s a shame, to be sure, but it doesn’t change much. The Tea Party folks are going to nullify with or without them. Within six months these same media personalities will be huffing and puffing to catch up with what has been going on right under their noses. But you, dear reader, ought to get in on the ground floor. The Tenth Amendment Center, for example, is sponsoring a tour of America called Nullify Now! (NullifyNow.com), which will bring these important ideas to major American cities and force them back into the American political discussion where they belong. My new book, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, gives you all the ammunition you need to understand and defend nullification as an essential defense mechanism for a free people. And my “Interview with a Zombie” YouTube video shows you how the mainstream media will handle the issue, and how we should respond. The rebirth of nullification is not welcome news to everyone. MSNBC and the New York Times do not want us to say or do these things. They like the situation just the way it is: we make lots of noise, and they rack up the victories. They are happy if we persist in the same failed and flawed strategy that has gotten us exactly nowhere. I for one would prefer not to give them the satisfaction. It’s fine to hold conferences, write letters to the editor, and sign petitions. But at some point it becomes morally (and practically) necessary to do more than just wring our hands about the behavior of the federal government. At some point we in our states must say: we are not going to do it. Never did I suspect that the American people would grow angry and politically aware enough to put these great principles back on the table. Ideas I once covered as a historian I am now discussing as a commentator on current events. This is the healthiest development in American politics I have seen in my life. Everyone reading these words owes it to the cause of freedom to be a part of it. We have been played for fools long enough.





JFK vs. THE FED

30 07 2011

On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to  strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid. When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy — the author of Profiles in Courage — signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency — money — without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the united States of America. United States Notes” were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a “Federal Reserve Note” issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a “United States Note” from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy’s Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says “Federal Reserve Note” on the top while the other says “United States Note”. Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number. President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper “currency” circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes. Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new “money”. Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something. Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 “Silver Certificates” were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve’s control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the “powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance”. With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt: war (Viet Nam); and, the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank. Executive Order 11110 AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows: SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended — (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): “(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption,” and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made. JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE June 4, 1963 Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by: EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725; EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869; EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605; EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003; EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617 The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy’s 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy’s EO 11110. A search of Clinton’s 1998 and 1999 EO’s and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110. The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black’s Law Dictionary defines the “Federal Reserve System” as: “Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves.” Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: “Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors.”The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money: “Federal Reserve Act Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)”. The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the “money” we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: “The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Engraving to print them.” Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is! No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932: “Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.” Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it’s interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs’ 1990 book Crossfire:” Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy’s attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency. Kennedy’s comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks.” In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963, ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said: “The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight.” In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book… a true Profile of Courage.





Domestic Terrorist: Defined (Punishment of Patriots)

22 07 2011

What happened to this country? How did our founding documents, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, become so insignificant? The majority of the House of Representatives and the Senate have completely ignored the law of this land as they  introduce one piece of draconian legislation after another. When did it begin? Most of us have heard of The U.S.A Patriot Act, but from the people I have tried to talk to about it,they have no earthly idea what it is or what it means. This is saddening. The Patriot Act was introduced in the wake of the attacks of 9/11, and most people think it was written in response to the attacks. It was drafted years before, but it was so tyrannical that the only way it would ever have been passed, is in the event of a catastrophy, authored by a vietnamese immigrant, Viet Dinh, the Act grants unconstitutional surveillance powers to the executive branch. Warrantless searches and wiretapping on U.S. citizens, are only the beginning. Under the Patriot Act, if you are suspected to be a “terrorist”, you can be detained indefinatly, without the right to a trial. If the Patriot Act was put into law to combat terrorism, then why is it used on the American people? The answer there, my friends, is that it wasn’t. PNAC(Project for the New American Century), a neo-conservative think tank, has published many writings that would lead one to believe that 9/11 was a staged terror attack, only to be used as a pretext to introduce such legislation and the invasion/regime change in Iraq. One  PNAC  document, entitled, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, written by former Vice President Dick Cheney, talks about American military presence positioned around the globe and especially in the middle east. Cheney goes on to admit that this would be a hard sell to the American people and that it wouldn’t be as difficult if we were to have a catastrophic, catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor. Being that Dick Cheney, on the day of Sept. 11th, 2001, had complete control over NORAD(North American Aerospace Defense Command), the agency responsible for intercepting hi-jacked aircraft over North America, and was the only day in American history that a President or Vice president had control over this defense system. Rights and liberties of the American people have suffered erosion for the past 140 years, incrementally. Never has a Presidential administration been so blunt and shameless as the Bush-Cheney administration, but just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, on to the scene came a “savior”. A self proclaimed “man of the people”, Barak Obama, promised to support and uphold the rule of law and defend the Constitution of the United States. He told voters that he wouldn’t bend the rules and exclude himself from law as Bush did with signing statements. Since his election Barak Obama has broken every single promise he made during the 2008 Presidential campaign. He said the war in Iraq was a mistake and would bring the troops home immediately after his election, because he saw no sense in the occupation. Obama has more than doubled the military actions all over the world and we are now involved in five seperate conflicts. Will we see a return to the values of the Constitution? Or is it on the verge of degeneracy. In 2009, radio show host and political activist, Alex Jones, recieved a document published by the Missouri Information Analysis Center(MIAC), sent by an anonymous law enforcement officer. The document was literature used to train police to look for domestic terrorists. Sadly the information contained some of the most definitive descriptions of true patriots, Libertarians and Conservitive political activists. The Constitution tells us, that if the federal government becomes so tyrannical and over steps its boundaries, that it is our duty, not just a right, but our duty as Americans to overthrow said government and reinstall the Republic. This is why I believe the federal government tries to demonize the Constitution and those who live by it and believe in its core values. The MIAC report also goes on to say,” Those who wear t-shirts or have bumper stickers promoting Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Barry Goldwater, and many other Libertarian and right wing Conservatives. These are the people who have been and are fighting for the restoration of Constitutional limited government. Libertarianism and Conservatism are the essential core values of what this country started out as and what it was intended to be today. Don’t let these people destroy the very beliefs that made this the greatest nation in the history of the planet Earth. Stand up against tyranny and resist the demonization of true Patriots.





David and Goliath

17 07 2011

The mainstream media is afraid of Ron Paul. They intentionally distort his image and attempt to twist his words. Why would they do this? Ron Paul is one of very few politicians that speaks truth to the people and has consistently voted strictly by the U.S. Constitution. He has never voted to raise taxes. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget. He is a pro-life, pro-liberty, and pro-2nd amendment, fiscal conservative . Instead of pocketing the left over cash from his annual office budget(sometimes over $50,000), he gives it back to the U.S Treasury. No one else that I know of in Washington does that. Probably because they don’t even know how to run an office without going over their budget, and its this example that Dr. Paul sets that tells me what kind of man he is, and that he is fiscally conservative enough to run this nation. None of the other GOP candidates could hold a candle to Ron Paul, yet they receive much more recognition by the main news media outlets. Last fundraising quarter Ron Paul set a goal of raising $3 million. He exceeded that goal by $1.5 million for a total of $4.5 million, yet one of my favorite msnbc programs, The Morning Joe, reported the candidates progress and Ron Paul was totally left out of the standings for the quarter. In reality Dr. Paul was the 2nd highest fundraiser, next to Mitt Romney, who raised a reported $18 million(I doubt that). But The Morning Joe praised Tim Pawlenty as the 2nd under Romney with $4.2 million. It sickens me to see a man with such principle and value to be cast by the way side for the promotion of establishment candidates, by these mainstream idiots. I, along with many of members of the Ron Paul dedicated website, TheDailyPaul, have emailed the producers of The Morning Joe, expressing our concern of the misleading journalism portrayed by their show. We hope for the sake of truth that the members of the mainstream media will someday put the wishes of their controllers aside and report reality based information. I use this kind of censorship as a tool to reveal the very best people in politics. When someone like Ron Paul is ignored it is a pretty good sign that his message is making an impact and the controlled corporate media is attempting to suppress his advancement in the election. “Why would they pick on a 75 yr old man?” you ask. Well to put it quite plainly, the media is under the influence of huge corporations and powerful men and women in high places of government. These people make millions of dollars serving the corporate machine and the military industrial complex. President Eisenhower in his farewell speech to the country, warned Americans of the danger of misplaced power in the hands of few. Wars are profitable, therefore wars are desired by these powerful people high up in the military industrial complex. In 2008 Ron Paul ran for Republican nomination for President, and he was the only candidate that supported  a non-interventions foreign policy, while during debates Rudy Guiliani, Mike Huckabee, and John McCain promoted war and used scare-tactics of terrorist threats to sway GOP voters their way so that they may continue on with serving their New World Order agenda of war for profit. John McCain even lied to Ron Paul(and America) on stage at one debate, saying,” I had Thanksgiving dinner with the troops and they wanted me to tell you, “Let us win”. But in reality at that time and more so now, 78% of U.S. troops overseas were exhausted with fighting and saw no reason to continue, while at home we were all told by the media that we were still under grave threat by Al-Qeida and we needed to continue invading countries chasing this threat. You have to pay attention to the statistics and the evidence. In 2008 and now in 2011, Ron Paul received more campaign contributions from active duty troops than all other candidates combined. What does that tell you?








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.