I am shocked, just shocked, at the following news

Trustee: J.P. Morgan Abetted Madoff

Why would a fine, upstanding patriotic American corporation like JP Morgan Chase, that wonderful institution of those warm humanitarians the Morgan and Rockefeller families, be involved in fraud, in ignoring the "warning signs" of a clear swindle?

I don't know about you, but I am imagining interesting punishments for the bankers and major stockholders, and the management, of this company, and the families that lurk in the background... enough is enough. It is time for America and Americans to wake up, and to quit idolizing the robber barons of laissez faire capitalism as heros; it is time to recognize them for what they are: pariahs, and parasites, and above all, criminals.

Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. James L. Kelley on March 28, 2011 at 12:26 am

    “The Witch” by W.B. Yeats

    Toil and grow rich
    What’s that, but to lie
    With a foul witch
    And after, drained dry
    To be brought to the place where
    Lies one long sought
    With despair.

  2. marcos anthony toledo on March 4, 2011 at 11:31 am

    Dear Justina this March4 the problems you outline are nothing to what the Republicans are dreaming up. With Scott Walker in Wisconsin and his plan to renstate slavery in all but name and his fellow Republican governors same wishs it back to the seventeen and eighteen centuery for us if they are not stoped. We will be lucky if all we get is serfdom if they forfeild their plans. By the way I also have a blog it,s http://martinpadway.blogspot.com there are a few post there you might find interesting.

  3. Mary linderman on February 9, 2011 at 11:49 am

    After that quote from Casablanca I had to watch it on you tube. Very cute.

  4. gypsyheart on February 6, 2011 at 10:53 pm

    Hey, Karl Marx was basically right about the rapaciousness of “big capital”,
    and Lenin was basically right about the growth of that sector into imperialism
    and fascism. I am not a communist but must admit those guys saw clearly.
    Whence comes the General Uprising in the West??

    • Justina on February 6, 2011 at 11:25 pm

      Probably from people who don’t have some axe to grind of a
      greater than themselves drunkenness on mass movements
      and ideology who are stumbling onto the reality, that Marx
      & Co. recognized, but exploited for their own reasons.

      Someone once said, “under capitalism, man exploits man.
      Under communism, it is just the reverse.”

      Marx was an oddball. Frankly, the behavior reported reminds
      me of some of Hitler’s tantrums. It is almost like both were
      semi possessed or inhabited and guided. Before Marx,
      atheism existed in socialism, but was not standard, Marx
      kept beating everyone down till that atheist plank got put on
      the Communist International platform. Some of the planks
      like justice without fees were just common sense that
      are wrongly denounced because they are inconvenient
      to some, and happened to be in the platform.

      Marx seems to have written more than he published, and
      what he published was strictly geared to break his rivals.
      All he did was to one goal, not the supremacy of the
      working class, but the supremacy of himself.

      Even his claim that the League of Just Men was some
      fighting revolutionary group whose organization style
      and whatnot needed copying was nonsense. There
      is a PhD dissertation Karl Marx and the Communist
      Manifesto by Elliot Erikson (my late father), which shows
      this. As for the League, police reports of the time show
      they were nothing more than a coffee klatch and don’t
      figure in riots or anything. Here is a link to part of it,
      the files named k-marx-e-erikson


      Someone made a case once, for Communism and Big Capitalism
      being two arms of the same thing, supposedly tracking back to
      the British East India Company. Given how the British ruling classes
      and wealth tended to value each other i suppose anything could be
      tracked back to someone connected to the British East India

      Lyndon La Rouche made a case for Communism being what he calls
      a Frankenstein monster, something created for a purpose other
      than what it thought it was for, but which got out of control. Might
      be something to that. (La Rouche is nuts. Also, by constantly
      campaigning for president repeatedly on the argument that electing
      him was the only way to save Western Civilization in general and
      the United States in particular from whatever then current crisis was
      looming, and he wasn’t elected and we are all still here, he effectively
      proved himself to be the most unnecessary man in history so to speak.)

  5. Justina on February 6, 2011 at 10:21 pm


    vinnie and the truthers, you can see, especially if you stop and
    start click it, that the collapse is NOT from the bottom, the lower
    parts remain intact, edges sharp, until the collapse reaches
    them, it is from the TOP DOWN.

    the way the top sort of peels away would fit the flex, not melt
    but bent, NOT MELT but soften enough to slip off the struts
    that the cross beams are balanced on and as it pancakes
    down, the outer beams are pushed aside.

    Jet engine fuel burning in a confined space, should soften
    not melt, SOFTEN SLIGHTLY steel enough to give way under
    its own weight.

    Indications of other explosions might be relevant to some
    augmentation effect weird technology.

    A drive through garage burned once that I knew of. The fire
    was unbelievably hot, because it was trapped under Spanish
    tile, which turned the upwelling heat and fire back down,
    reinforcing itself, while air coming through fed it oxygen.

    Same deal here.

    And it doesn’t matter HOW it came down anyway. To focus on
    technology of explosion is to get your attention shifted from
    what matters. The Bush-Bin Laden family-Halliburton connections
    to all this, the many many warnings incl. from Mossad that this
    was going to happen that were ignored, and yes, you can get
    American special unit to do whatever. I think there is a certain
    dream world quality about the lot of you, you think Americans
    won’t do whatever to Americans, bah humbug. Just turn on
    the news, look what people do to each other every day.
    Check some of the cold case and csi work focussed nonfiction
    programming. IF there were other explosives, most likely at
    the level of the planes’ hits to make sure the separation
    occurred as hoped for, you only need a few people of the
    sort who don’t mind derailing a train for the fun of it, and
    yes that sort of stuff has happened. Or very disciplined
    people used to doing that sort of stuff elsewhere and taking

    The real focus has to be what Peter Dale Scott called
    “parapolitics” not quack speculations. The latter only makes
    you look silly, and this failure of credibility is all it takes
    to keep this from driving some people out of office, and
    those associated with them out of appointed positions.

    It is not the means of the event that matters, it is the people
    that surround it, and the corrupt conflict of interest
    oligharchic relationships surrounding it that matter, and
    arguing about how the controlled media lies about the
    nature of the collapse keeps attention OFF of that.

    And having made fools of yourselves in public already,
    no one is going to listen to any analysis that does deal
    with what counts, it has to come from other sources.

    Someone find someone who accepts the standard view,
    whether it is entirely correct or not, that gives them
    credibility in public, who DOES focus on the parapolitics,
    and get this guy plenty of advertising.

  6. Justina on February 6, 2011 at 2:59 pm


    I never heard of these people, but I think I have stumbled onto
    a kind of view of things not unlike theirs. To judge by the first
    paragraph or so summation.

  7. Mel Hatfield on February 6, 2011 at 1:53 am

    Right on!!

    I must say, I assume you feel passionately about this, Dr Farrell. When one resorts to free-flowing, eloquent cynicism such as this, one has arrived at true truth, in my opinion. I would like to nominate you for membership in a society of which I have been a proud membef for years:


    A great man once said: “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member!” -Julius “Groucho” Marx (1890-1977)

  8. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 8:44 pm

    “Liberty isn’t something that’s created.It springs naturally whenever the heavy hand is lifted just as a seed will spring from the ground when the conditions are right and the soil fertile.”

    once the heavy hand of government is lifted altogether, the heavy
    hand of whoever is the strongest or the best at organizing, or who
    has the money to hire thugs (and the technology and guess who
    that is? the very people we are concerned about here) will descend.

    even if they disappeared, it would develop later. where is the heavy
    hand of government, to explain the mind control cults that are
    primitive societies with their initiation rituals and crippling customs
    and rigid roles of sex or bloodlines?

    where was the heavy hand of government in the late dark ages
    and early middle ages? it took centralization of power and of
    the separate power of money back then, in several loci, to break
    the heavy hand of feudal lords.

    where is all this virtue to come from that will keep liberty from
    becoming license? and if we are to have, shall we say,
    prescription heroin at dispensation points for addicts, where
    is the enforcement to come from to be sure it stays there,
    and that they don’t go and recruit more people to be like them,
    or to keep people from seeking them out and sampling what
    they got? What is to shut down the pop culture support of
    all this?

    What of all those people who die, not to mention the trouble
    they make for everyone else, because without run ins with
    the law, and enforced rehab a few times they never realize
    they need to change? I know people like that.

    Don’t talk about intervention, in such an environment where
    radical indepedence is the rule, such people would throw
    the interventionists out. Or worse yet, with no sense of
    propriety or fear of law to restrain those interveners who
    have some corruptibility themselves, the addict might
    convert some of them!

  9. Concerned Friend on February 5, 2011 at 7:31 pm


    A little education in Economics goes a long way.


    Also (with respect to Dr. Farrell), I agree that the JP Morgan firm/family are both a travesty and parasite of the american people, but they are in no way, shape, or form Laissez Faire Capitalists. They are simply corporatist facists/ crony capitalists who bank on their intimate relationship with the FED (and open lines of credit wink wink) to establish their own financial hegemony upon the world.


    Also, Dr. Farrell you should look into Free Banking Theory, as such a system is perfectly compatible with the theories in “Free Energy” systems that your work is concerned with, and I’m afraid Ellen Brown’s solution to end the banking monopoly would only serve to politicize the nation’s issuance of money. The right to issue money should be rightly given to the people. Whether that means a gold standard, a silver standard, or whatever commodity that is highly valued at the time, the right to issue money should go to those self-interest lies in safekeeping the value and liquidity of currency.

    There is a reason the FED doesn’t want legal tender laws to be repealed.

    • Joseph P. Farrell on February 5, 2011 at 9:17 pm

      Point well made and taken re. laissez faire capitalism and the banksters

      • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 9:29 pm

        The problem is not legal tender. That is something the Constitution
        mandates, and the writers were against central banks and knew
        enough of history to know what total non regulation and minimized
        to non existent government results in. A balance between bad
        alternatives was sought.

        The problem is monetized debt and fractional reserve banking.

        Legal tender makes commerce easier. You don’t have to argue
        anything but price, rather than price AND what it is to be paid
        in. Recognizing foreign coin at approximately the rate it is
        equal to in our coins would be a good idea also.

        but if people can issue their own money, you can have all
        kinds of fraud. If by “the people” you mean local or state
        governments that is one thing. but private issuance is just
        going to end up as a small time version of monetized debt.

        and why wait for the market to sort it out, while the “body
        count” figurative, in some cases literally, whether from
        violence or the lack of goods such a food and medicine
        because money recognized one place is not recognized
        another, piles up?

        • Concerned Friend on February 6, 2011 at 7:22 am

          “The problem is not legal tender.”

          Yes, it is. By legally mandating what can and can’t be used as money, you effectively set up major market barrier to entrance into the “currency” industry. Very effective for those in bed with the government, and who would like to institutionalize fractional reserve banking (i.e. the FED).

          “but if people can issue their own money, you can have all
          kinds of fraud.”

          Because government can’t be responsible for arguably the greatest fraud in history , correct (hint: it’s banking, and it’s centralized)? At least when you subject the heavily centralized industry of banking to market forces, you place those which wish to thrive in such an industry (following their own self-interest) in a position where the services and goods they produce (stable, liquid currency, or what ever the market demands ) must actually be wanted by people. Without the monopoly held over the banking industry, these people would actually have to WORK (*gasp!).

          “and why wait for the market to sort it out,”

          Because no man has the knowledge or power to use prices to coordinate the allocation of scarce resources to various locations and people all over the world. You should really take a basic course on economics.

          • Justina on February 6, 2011 at 1:22 pm

            The only reason the FED got where it is, is because of the
            perhaps legally dubious measure taken by the govt. of
            delegating to the FED the very money minting and creating
            powers that the Constitution reserved to the govt. and
            which would have protected us from monetized debt, as
            Dr. Farrell calls it, IF that clause in the Constitution had
            been followed.

            So the problem in this very phase of history and location
            we are talking about, came about PRECISELY BECAUSE
            of a failure of govt. retaining control, control that further
            would be affected in its application, by the people who hold
            the careers of the elected in their hands.

            When, on the other hand, people get appointed for life or
            something like that, they are out of reach.

    • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 9:23 pm

      Mises is full of randian crap.

      I am in full agreement with Dr. Farrell’s views in Babylon’s Banksters.

      I also have enough knowledge, 40 years I guess of miscellaneous
      reading of this and that, to know that total laissez faire doesn’t
      work, and total lack of government doesn’t work, except as the
      staging ground for the chaos that will necessitate strong measures
      which is ideal for bad people.

      But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones. I have
      never forgotten the pitiable situation of a Chinese man I read about,
      who having paid the taxes to one warlord, whose perimeter he
      was unfortunate enough to live on, and the border shifted slightly,
      was tortured with barbed wire because he had no money to pay
      the other warlord with.

      This is what happened when the Chinese monarchy fell. One
      heavy hand gone, replaced by many heavy hands.

      As for Mises et. al., they are the ones whose theories mandate
      the deregulation and privatization that simply put more power
      into the hands of the very people you want to get rid of.

      A semi directed market is not the problem. the problem is when
      anyone is allowed to have a govt. or regulatory role, who
      himself or herself or extended family or private organizations
      he or she is a member of, has interest in the outcome.

      • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 9:39 pm

        Here, have a look at who helped shape this mises favoring
        mentality. And like I said, never underestimate the
        bad taste of the American public. Or her novels would
        never have sold. Despicable heroes, one of them a rapist.
        And by the way, a rape murder serial killer was an early
        hero of hers. And her idea of morality and high values
        was to adore her whims.


        though I couldn’t stomach the excerpts of her novels,
        her analyses of some leftists and others wasn’t half
        bad. But there comes a point where she flops and
        badly. By the way, her philosophy along with that of
        Nietzsche, Ragnar Might Makes Right whatever his
        last name was, was among the hellslew that went
        into making Anton La Vey’s satanist philosophy.

        Even the Temple of Set had to face some reality, in one
        of their publications they announced that even though
        everybody is a god and they all naturally tend to seek
        supremacy they need to rein it in and act a bit more
        properly and orderly for the TOS to function or however
        they phrased it.

      • Concerned Friend on February 6, 2011 at 7:33 am

        “Mises is full of randian crap.”

        Mises work predates Ayn Rand’s work. Although admittedly they were friends when both lived in NYC, it was actually Mises work in economics that inspired a lot of Rand’s own beliefs, although her philosophy is entirely of her own making. Way to promote guilt by association.

        “But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones.”

        How about no warlord, and a system of property right protection (with property rights starting with one’s own right to their body) ?

        “As for Mises et. al., they are the ones whose theories mandate
        the deregulation and privatization that simply put more power
        into the hands of the very people you want to get rid of.”

        Erroneous. The Austrian School of Economics is hated by both the left, the right, Big Business (well pretty much BIg anything). Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps because the kind of economic system they advocate (or rather advocate would exist sans government intervention) would spell the end to their hold of power over the market, and in turn people (for what makes up the market? People).

        “A semi directed market is not the problem. the problem is when
        anyone is allowed to have a govt. or regulatory role, who
        himself or herself or extended family or private organizations
        he or she is a member of, has interest in the outcome.”

        The government and its various agencies and departments will always attract those who desire power with virtually no sacrifice (except perhaps morals). That is why the Founding Fathers desired a limited government. Limit the government, and you limit the corruption*

        *= Although a true, market-basked anarchy (Anarcho-Capitalism) could never exist outside of uncontested territory. So where do we get uncontested territory? We would need an energy system, a field propulsion system, a- oh wait 🙂

        Keep up the good work, Dr. Farrell.

        • Justina on February 6, 2011 at 1:33 pm

          “Mises work predates Ayn Rand’s work. Although admittedly they were friends when both lived in NYC, it was actually Mises work in economics that inspired a lot of Rand’s own beliefs, although her philosophy is entirely of her own making. Way to promote guilt by association.”

          Because her influence on the American right, which is however
          indirectly enormous, leads to favoring this sort of free market and
          no controls.

          Boom and bust, harmful to all involved, has always been a feature
          of markets uncontrolled by anything. Consider the tulip bubble in
          the Renaissance or late medieval whichever time it was, it burst.
          Real estate markets, should never have existed in the first place,
          bubble, and bust. Real estate should not be a commodity the way
          it is, not that it be inalienable, which means it can’t be sold, but
          it should not be the sort of thing it has become. Neither should it
          be the way it was under feudalism, where few owned and everybody
          leased or subleased.

          Then of course the Market Crash of 1929 which led to some controls
          that, had they been in place, might have prevented or mitigated it.

          Dr. Farrell has an interesting theory, that to some extent these cycles
          operate anyway, up and down, and that some people knowing this
          can time and increase the disaster to their benefit.

          ““But one reliable warlord is better than many competing ones.”

          “How about no warlord, and a system of property right protection (with property rights starting with one’s own right to their body) ?”

          Who is going to enforce this? no govt., i.e., no controller, and you
          got no enforcer.

          Warlordism develops in that vacuum. Eventually some dog gains
          top position, and to make economy run smoothly if for no other
          reason, enforces such rights.

          what do you mean right to your own body? if you mean freedom
          to have no strings sex, homosexual actions, never mind whether it
          is long term orientation or fooling around, or “pansexual” with animals,
          or abortion for nonmedical reasons, then you are making an enemy
          out of God Himself.

          If you mean right to work, like no enforced joining of unions, fine.
          Unions were what forced uncontrolled, unregulated business and
          industry of the 1800s and early 1900s to provide the better pay
          and conditions, that later became built into law and custom and
          we take for granted.

          But then the unions got corrupt, uppity, charging high membership
          fees (and for a day laborer etc. ANY fee may be too high) and mafia enfested. So its time to take them down – not all the way, they are still useful, but a notch.

          • Concerned Friend on February 7, 2011 at 6:12 am

            “Who is going to enforce this? no govt., i.e., no controller, and you
            got no enforcer.

            Warlordism develops in that vacuum. Eventually some dog gains
            top position, and to make economy run smoothly if for no other
            reason, enforces such rights.”

            When did I call for anarchy? The position I advocate for is more in line with a minimalist style government (read: limited government).

            “what do you mean right to your own body? if you mean freedom
            to have no strings sex, homosexual actions, never mind whether it
            is long term orientation or fooling around, or “pansexual” with animals,
            or abortion for nonmedical reasons, then you are making an enemy
            out of God Himself. ”

            It’s called freedom of individuality, and you deny this you are no better than the elite/facist leaders who will justify intrusion on individual liberties in pursuit of “the greater good”.

            “Unions were what forced uncontrolled, unregulated business and
            industry of the 1800s and early 1900s to provide the better pay
            and conditions, that later became built into law and custom and
            we take for granted. ”

            -For god’s sake, get an education in economics/economic history. Not what the political pundits tell you.

            “But then the unions got corrupt, uppity, charging high membership
            fees (and for a day laborer etc. ANY fee may be too high) and mafia enfested. So its time to take them down – not all the way, they are still useful, but a notch”

            -Centralized power always corrupts.

    • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 9:31 pm

      self interest, eh? what do you think drives the banksters and
      the sort of people whose self interest is in “do unto others
      and run like hell?” Why do you think we got the FDA?
      We need to purge it of corrupt influence not eliminate it.
      Same thing with anything else.

  10. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 5:38 pm

    first off, just how do you expect to create Jeffersonian liberty
    in the anarchistic no controllers at all scenario?

    secondly, you are addressing matters I have already addressed.
    laws can be passed, lawsuits done and enforced. People can
    be forbidden to be jobs that relate to jobs they or immediate
    relatives have. The overlapping directorate and payoff etc.
    can be addressed, some of it has been in the past. We have
    the tools, we have to use them.

    merely eliminating all controls means back to the law of the
    jungle in short order. And that is the context that these people
    really want, to eliminate whatever they have to weasle with to
    evade control over, and be able to control us directly with
    goon squads backed up by high tech, not to mention the
    manipulation game of getting people to make certain decisions,
    and then, well, it was THEIR choice. A choice made while
    trusting the wrong advisors, or in absence of any workable
    alternative. Many such choices.

    Can you spell feudalism? Can you spell primitive tribal and
    extended family warlordism?

    Let’s not reinvent the wheel, we need merely redesign it and
    use it better.

    • vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 7:49 pm

      Liberty isn’t something that’s created.It springs naturally whenever the heavy hand is lifted just as a seed will spring from the ground when the conditions are right and the soil fertile. All Jefferson and others did was to recognize and point out this amazing fact that we might also recognize the spontaneous order of life that erupts all around us wherever man is allowed to act on his own behalf.
      But you still don’t seem to see that the cross pollination that goes on between big govt, big business and big finance can only lead to ever more corruption and that the safeguards that are suppose to protect from harmful practices, give rise to them instead. Why do you think the worse kind of person is drawn to politics, if not for the power and wealth that can easily be amassed by placing oneself in the service of the special interests? Mosca points out to us that the persons that can least be trusted are the ones most animated to go into public life. Why else would anyone spend millions for a job that pays less than two hundred thousand a year? Are we to stretch our belief that they’re so spirited to serve the public at large that they’d waste millions just to do so?
      Do you really for even a moment think that in this age of plunder and waring that we’ve really advanced beyond the jungle whose laws are embodied as part of the statutory and regulatory predations we’re forced to pay for?
      Who are the right advisers we should be trusting and how should we be able to know they’re the right ones to cast our trust upon? And why should we trust them to begin with? Remember Joe Izuzu?
      Feudalism? Why that’s the exact end game that the globalists are aiming at with their population reduction and re-wilding the planet initiatives. A small well controlled population, chipped and living in tight communities, serving their globalist nobility is the outcome they’re aiming at. Take a look at the Aaron Russo interview where he tells about what Nick Rockefeller told him about the plan the elites have in store for us. Very telling stuff.
      Now, I’m afraid you’ll have to excuse me, but I don’t think we want to continue to bore everyone else, so I’ll excuse myself and withdraw from any further comments lest this degenerate into another Justina and Vinnie show. As always, I do appreciate you or your considered thoughts and comments.

  11. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    that is merely what happened in this country. and some others.
    but before those people were all that well connected, they
    were doing their best, incl using violence and getting away
    with it, to drive out competition.

    elimination of competition is in the interest of anyone except
    the purchaser, and once the competition is eliminated there
    is no where else to go. this goes on all the time, and is the
    economic theory behind much Mafia activity.

    What you describe is merely the more developed version.

    And all the more reason to have controllers, who can mitigate
    this, because the educated electorate will interfere in their
    careers and force laws and enforcement of them.

    I repeat, (1) we have the tools we need already, the kind of
    information now being promulgated by such blogs as this
    and some books and movies. We need to USE them, and
    to do so effectively means to start by doing more educating
    of as many people as we can about what is wrong, what
    needs changing, and how to do it, and NOT arguing that
    there should be no possible controls, no one exists except
    individuals – bullshit, ever see a mass movement or a mob
    or a crowd of nasty bully children at work, the sum is
    greater than the whole of its parts.

    (2) remember the easiest way to enslave someone is to
    promise him total freedom. This was the advice of L. Ron
    Hubbard the founder of Scientology, and he ought to

    • vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 4:41 pm

      The controllers will be bought off and the regulators will be regulating the industries they come out of. Look no further than the revolving door between the corporate cartels and the federal govt. Think it’s just by chance that the folks who came from Goldman, Sax and took positions at treasury might have had some self interest in all those guaranteed loans that were given out? How about big pharma and the defense industries? Is there a pattern we’re seeing?
      A while back I asked who controls the controllers? I think that’s a question in need of answers or we’ll always come out with the wrong solution.
      I don’t mean to keep beating a dead horse, but the problem is the centralization of political power and the marriage between it and big finance and business. The only way to put an end to this arrangement is to take away the power to create money substitutes out of thin air and to return the power back to the individual to chose what he/she decides to accept as payment and to direct their own lives without some form of top down control.
      It’s not like you have another choice between individual liberty in the best Jeffersonian tradition, or dictatorship and tyranny. When you despense with the first alternative, you’ve automatically set in motion all the things that will eventually lead to the final solution. Chips anyone?

  12. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    What businessmen do, whether to build a monopoly or cartel,
    is to ELIMINATE COMPETITION. No one wants competition
    to beat them, or even drive them out of business. Sure,
    government can grant a monopoly status, it can also make
    it illegal and bust up cartels and have laws against anti
    competition agreements.

    Adam Smith noted that competition elimination and other
    conspiracy against the people was what businessmen’s
    associations did in his time.

    And once you have a gentleman’s agreement that incl. extended
    family and friends and blackmail victims and dependents and
    favor owers and so forth who are supposed to be protecting
    people against thugs, your hired thugs can operate at will and
    the law can’t touch them. In the old days before modern forensics
    this could happen more easily for anyone not just business.

    We need people other than just mob reaction and looting of
    stores that don’t compete but cooperate too much, and who
    sometimes lower prices long enough to drive an independent
    out of business and then raise them again, something I think
    AT&T is trying to do now to some extent as it can, we need
    a control force that can use guns and lockup if the court
    orders are not obeyed.

    The problem is not, shall we have controllers, it is, to keep
    them honest and the laws just. That is what democracy and
    free press is about, and we need to use those tools.

    L. Ron Hubbard once said, that the best way to enslave
    anyone is to promise them total freedom.

    And some of the libertarian approach, is suspiciously
    similar to the Illuminati program in its early proposed

    • vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm

      What you’ll notice happened with the consolidation of monopoly capitalism/corporatism at the turn of the last century and the so called Progressive Era, is that it began the creation of the American empire as envisioned by Rhodes and Milner and the Round Table group to bring together the British and Americans to create an anglo/american empire that was financed from the banking houses in the City of London, and that would spread its tentacles around the globe through the creation of various commercial and maritime agreements based on an expanding debt based, fiat currency that would eventually entangle all nations so they could be controlled financially as well as through the use of military force. Is any of this sounding familiar?
      We might note too that the incorporation of the nazis within this establishment poses no problem either as it was the design of Hitler as well as many in Britain to work together to place the world under the control of “Aryan” rule. Hitler had no desire to go to war with England as his target lay with destroying Soviet communism. It explains both the false war, where the British were allowed to escape at Dunkirk and the mysterious overture that Rudolph Hess was trying to carry out during his failed mission. I think this is a link that could do with far more exploration and expansion.

  13. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    But they WERE laissez faire capitalists in practice, and abused
    all the power that that freedom gave them in the 1800s and early
    1900s before controls were effectively in place.

    controls that laissez faire don’t like. and this crew was part of
    the whole privatization scam that made control more difficult,
    and increased plausible deniability by increasing a confusing
    range of targets for complaint.

    The irony of laissez faire, is that no one really reads Adam
    Smith, or they wouldn’t see it like this. Laissez faire was something
    he invented along with the so called invisible hand, which Calvinists
    and others have misequated with God and have a religious attitude
    towards, even if they are technically atheist free marketers.

    Adam Smith was arguing for free trade, no tariffs, in inventing
    this idea. The point was to build so much common interest between
    England and its often rivals, that war would hopefully be unlikely
    or even impossible. (Internationalist pinko commie red peacenik
    hippie creep.)

    As for the home front, he remarked that buisnessmen’s
    associations never meet, except to fix prices and otherwise
    conspire against the rest of the people, and should be outlawed.

    • vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 3:01 pm

      No they weren’t. They were monoploy capitalist who used government to grant them monopolies in their industries and to shut out the competition. If you read Kolko and others who’ve researched the progressive era, it becomes clear that it was during this time that the Hamiltonian ideal of the American system of central banking, fiat money, high tariffs and expansive govt spending on internal projects was the big winner. With the passage and creation of the federal reserve bank in 1913, the scene was set for the financing of two world wars and an endless expansion of the central govt with it’s welfare/warfare programs into every area and aspect of both the economic and private lives of the American people. People love their fascism and it seems will ignore the facts of history to defend it.

      • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 3:28 pm

        never mind all that ancient history. Look at what has been going
        on over the past 30 years. And big government isn’t needed for
        warfare and so forth either. That went on among primitives all

        I repeat. The Scientology founder once said, that the easiest
        way to enslave someone, is to promise them total freedom.

        • vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 7:18 pm

          Things don’t spring full blown into existence and to understand the present, we do well not to take lightly the things that brought us to the present state of affairs, lest we learn nothing and keep repeating the same mistakes.
          Interesting you quote Ron Hubbard, who was one of the masters at mind control and who promised just that to the members of his church, to the same result.
          You might also be interested in looking into the link between him, JPL founder Jack Parsons and Aleister Crowley.

          • Justina on February 5, 2011 at 7:29 pm

            I agree in theory about understanding the background,
            and I already know about that last bunch
            of unspeakable undesirables you mention.

            My point is, that this situation is created over and over,
            throughout the centuries, on local and primitive and
            larger than local.

            Right now we have a situation where all we have to do
            is rework some of the machine. Not destroy it outright.

            I keep quoting Hubbard to get it through to you, if you
            hear it often enough you may get the idea, that
            the cry of FREEDOM! LIBERTY! LAISSEZ FAIRE!

            is just the cartelist etc. version of Hubbard’s game.

            Right now they have to shimmy around controls that
            they have to keep scrambling to get or keep hold of.

            Rather than create a situation, where they need do
            little or no work at all, make it too slippery for them
            too much work and too public and too much easy

            One thing we should do, is legalize all recording,
            audio and video, by everyone, while penalizing any
            alterations of it, the only legitimate reason to fear
            bugging. Perhaps only crude tape and some
            untamperable digital programs that give off warnings
            when tampering to give a false impression has
            occurred, should be allowed for this.

            Think of all the crap that can be caught and broadcast!

        • Concerned Friend on February 6, 2011 at 12:36 pm

          “never mind all that ancient history.”

          -“Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.” -George Santayana

          • Justina on February 6, 2011 at 1:35 pm

            I do remember the past, and I refer to it often, that bigger
            picture that shows that the problem is not govt. but
            oligharchy, and the kind of warlordism that will break out
            once you got your anarchic situation with everyone armed
            to the teeth with phased array energy weapons.

            My point was, that we need to look at what we got right
            now, what is the situation now, and not from the perspective
            of “principles of economics” some of which are dependent
            on conditions that don’t always pertain.

  14. vinnie on February 5, 2011 at 2:07 pm

    If I can interject. The Rothschild’s, Rockefeller’s, Morgan’s and other commercial pirates are hardly laissez-faire capitalists. The system they’ve perfected and rigged is commercial credit/corporatism. Good old fascism, the marriage of big government, international banking and international corporate cartels.
    The only alternative is the decentralization of power through market forces, including money, banking and credit. Either the individual in the fullness of his natural liberty, or an all powerful, centralized state. Take you pick.

  15. Justina on February 5, 2011 at 1:00 pm

    which reminds me of something I said in my little screed,
    A Possible History of Life on Mar at my blog

    “Alien is a film worth remembering briefly, as a paradigm. Remember the
    context in which all that broke loose? A huge supranational multi planet
    based corporation, who wanted the xenomorph for its weapons department.
    Something that would make the modern multi nationals with their security
    forces and de facto semi control over governments, green with envy.

    Something that might well become a reality this century.”

    Maybe J. P. Morgan derived operations are working in this direction
    already. God help us! never mind xenomorphs, just the idea of such
    a setup in the first place! Remember how Bechtel is always so bad
    to its workers? Anyone see the photo of those guys stirring uranium
    soup with a loincloth and no shirt in India or somewhere? And the
    Alaska pipeline, at least one woman who worked there was pressured
    into prostitution. That she wasn’t honorable enough to die rather than
    put out is not the issue. That there were people willing to use her
    and people willing to coerce her IS the issue. The weak need
    protection against the strong. That is why we need government, that
    if it gets corrupt can be changed by voters who are pissed off at
    failure of oversight. Bechtel was started by a good Calvinist
    church going man, a Baptist, and extreme Calvinism is like
    baptized social darwinism. God supposedly rewards virtue with
    worldly wealth, and the poor and the exploited are just being
    punished by God. Bah humbug. Such theorists never noticed
    that God warned Job’s comforters, who talked along this line,
    that things weren’t quite that simple. Similar stuff in Proverbs
    is way out of context, and ignores such things in Proverbs
    as how it is better to eat bitter herbs on a roof corner or some
    other ratbag condition, than in a spacious house with a
    querillous woman or for that matter trouble maker of either

  16. Gary Hunter on February 5, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    Wasn’t it J.P. Morgan who effectively buried Tesla?…and also excised his discoveries from the textbooks?

    • Joseph P. Farrell on February 5, 2011 at 12:36 pm

      One and the same. And there is some evidence that Morgan lurks in the background of other physics goings-on.

  17. Donna on February 5, 2011 at 11:44 am

    “quit idolizing the robber barons of laissez faire capitalism as heros”

    Been thinking a lot about Napoleon Hill. Much of his theory of positive thinking was based on the sugarcoated examples of those robber barons.

    • Joseph P. Farrell on February 5, 2011 at 11:47 am

      Yup…precisely. Think and Grow Rich… oh yeah, and while you’re at it, hire thugs to beat up the competition…

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events