I disagree with the idea that Kennedy was pro federal reserve. With paper notes, be they federal reserve notes or silver certificates the U.S. citizen or human individual was unable to hold, stockpile, and/or collect the silver personally by his/her own will. When the bill became law (pleasing the fed) Kennedy saw that enabling silver coinage gave the US populace, as human individuals, the ability to play both sides of the currency game for leveraging personal wealth gains as a natural born person without need for others' approval. If I exchanged all my federal reserve notes for silver coins I could still leverage their value as I would a silver certificate however, if those coins made of silver were in my possession I could see if either the value of the federal reserve note or the value of silver metal was worth more without need to exchange under permission at a bank or mint. This gave the average citizenry the ability to stockpile fungible silver rather than deniable silver certificates. After signing EO 11110 the federal reserve saw this as a betrayal or an underhanded move - just as the banks did when Lincoln tried to make greenbacks to pay off those same banks he agreed we as US corporate citizens (no longer free men born outside a circle of jurisdiction) owed the banks for the civil war debt. I still believe they were both killed due to putting the potential for interest free wealth rather than interest bearing debt in the hands of the individual. Just like the way Jackson was dodging bullets from the banks before them only to have the next president after him go in with the banks after he died making the US populace again ensnared into a debt from thin air trap. I'm saddened that James didn't see Kennedy's maneuvering in the light of personal wealth vs corporate wealth in regards to the fungibility of holding the metal coinage and the options that gives a person vs holding a certificate exchangeable for metal that merely equate to the notes of paper promises that can be denied. He did not replace silver certificates with federal reserve notes, he merely used that as a selling point to the federal reserve to placate their demands and pressure then moved all the silver to the people by way of coinage so the bankers would not be able to swoop in and use unbacked currency to procure all of the silver from the treasury using a zero balance bond swap. They are much different when you look at the benefit of the individual person rather than indebted paper notes vs promises on paper certificates to prevent citizens from having fungible silver. Presidents died and the nation was again swindled over the ability of an individual's leverage to live debt free vs citizens born into indebted existence! If I saved all my quarters, fifty cent pieces, and silver dollars out of my pockets in a jar over the past 20 years I would either have the value of an inflated currency or the value of the silver they contain come time to make a purchase where if I were to save all the federal reserve note fractions that we call quarters, fifty cent pieces, and silver dollars out of my pockets in a jar over the past 20 years they would be guaranteed to lose value every single year. Even worse is if I were to have put my savings in a bank over twenty years the banks would have profitted off of my savings that whole time AND told me how much or when I am able to withdraw what I earned AND would not deposit either silver or gold coinage into my hand even if I requested and /or depositted it into the bank in that manner. Do you think the weight of gold and silver they collected by the above means increased in value over a period of twenty years? Who do you think owns all the gold and silver these days? Bankers or shareholders of banks? It is theft of wealth from the individual person through multiple multifacetted layers over years of trickery. What do you think?
I disagree with the idea that Kennedy was pro federal reserve. With paper notes, be they federal reserve notes or silver certificates the U.S. citizen or human individual was unable to hold, stockpile, and/or collect the silver personally by his/her own will. When the bill became law (pleasing the fed) Kennedy saw that enabling silver coinage gave the US populace, as human individuals, the ability to play both sides of the currency game for leveraging personal wealth gains as a natural born person without need for others' approval. If I exchanged all my federal reserve notes for silver coins I could still leverage their value as I would a silver certificate however, if those coins made of silver were in my possession I could see if either the value of the federal reserve note or the value of silver metal was worth more without need to exchange under permission at a bank or mint. This gave the average citizenry the ability to stockpile fungible silver rather than deniable silver certificates. After signing EO 11110 the federal reserve saw this as a betrayal or an underhanded move - just as the banks did when Lincoln tried to make greenbacks to pay off those same banks he agreed we as US corporate citizens (no longer free men born outside a circle of jurisdiction) owed the banks for the civil war debt. I still believe they were both killed due to putting the potential for interest free wealth rather than interest bearing debt in the hands of the individual. Just like the way Jackson was dodging bullets from the banks before them only to have the next president after him go in with the banks after he died making the US populace again ensnared into a debt from thin air trap. I'm saddened that James didn't see Kennedy's maneuvering in the light of personal wealth vs corporate wealth in regards to the fungibility of holding the metal coinage and the options that gives a person vs holding a certificate exchangeable for metal that merely equate to the notes of paper promises that can be denied. He did not replace silver certificates with federal reserve notes, he merely used that as a selling point to the federal reserve to placate their demands and pressure then moved all the silver to the people by way of coinage so the bankers would not be able to swoop in and use unbacked currency to procure all of the silver from the treasury using a zero balance bond swap. They are much different when you look at the benefit of the individual person rather than indebted paper notes vs promises on paper certificates to prevent citizens from having fungible silver. Presidents died and the nation was again swindled over the ability of an individual's leverage to live debt free vs citizens born into indebted existence! If I saved all my quarters, fifty cent pieces, and silver dollars out of my pockets in a jar over the past 20 years I would either have the value of an inflated currency or the value of the silver they contain come time to make a purchase where if I were to save all the federal reserve note fractions that we call quarters, fifty cent pieces, and silver dollars out of my pockets in a jar over the past 20 years they would be guaranteed to lose value every single year. Even worse is if I were to have put my savings in a bank over twenty years the banks would have profitted off of my savings that whole time AND told me how much or when I am able to withdraw what I earned AND would not deposit either silver or gold coinage into my hand even if I requested and /or depositted it into the bank in that manner. Do you think the weight of gold and silver they collected by the above means increased in value over a period of twenty years? Who do you think owns all the gold and silver these days? Bankers or shareholders of banks? It is theft of wealth from the individual person through multiple multifacetted layers over years of trickery. What do you think?
Comments
Post a Comment