Speaker 1: This is the Olympic Files and I'm l oh, THEO
Speaker 1: don't sound so happy. What we're going to do today,
Speaker 1: and THEO will lead off with this, is to kind
Speaker 1: of direct our study toward the Constitution and the kind
Speaker 1: of information about the Constitution that we weren't taught in school.
Speaker 1: There's two things that you keep hearing people say, especially
Speaker 1: around the time of the presidential election. But the two
Speaker 1: things they get down to is, well, we have to
Speaker 1: vote in good government and we have to get back
Speaker 1: to the Constitution.
Speaker 2: We must get back the Constitution.
Speaker 1: But what we're trying to say is one we barely
Speaker 1: ever had good government, if at all, and we never
Speaker 1: really had the Constitution to lose it to try to
Speaker 1: get it back.
Speaker 2: Theo's going to lead off with this.
Speaker 1: And we have a number of sources to also share
Speaker 1: with you, and we'll see how it's time. We have
Speaker 1: to get this done within an hour. If not, we'll
Speaker 1: just pick it up where we left off in part
Speaker 1: four of What's Upon a Time, the fairy tale about Amror.
Speaker 2: So go ahead, THEO.
Speaker 3: Well, here's a quote from James Montgomery. I think this
Speaker 3: was in addition to his two books, he has a
Speaker 3: series of answers to emails that he put up in
Speaker 3: text form on the Internet. And I think this came
Speaker 3: from that. So here's Montgomery, and this sums it up.
Speaker 2: Quote.
Speaker 3: We are living an illusion of reality supplied to us
Speaker 3: in contradiction to reality. We are taught that we have
Speaker 3: a constitutional republic, enumerated rights in the Bill of Rights,
Speaker 3: guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the
Speaker 3: Declaration of Independence. If this was reality, our government would
Speaker 3: not be dysfunctional and in turmoil. This same illusion causes
Speaker 3: the turmoil in society. People are told they are free,
Speaker 3: but suffer under a yoke of oppression. They know there
Speaker 3: is a prompt them, but can't put their finger on
Speaker 3: the problem. And all right, unquote, and then Montgomery identifies
Speaker 3: the problem, and all the rest the problem is it
Speaker 3: was a big con job.
Speaker 2: All right. I don't know how.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry for stepping on you there. I just what
Speaker 1: I wanted to say is I'm unaware of how much
Speaker 1: information you have.
Speaker 2: I'll only say this to you.
Speaker 1: I have about a page and a half that at
Speaker 1: some point later on, I just want to make you
Speaker 1: aware of that that I'd like to read. And that
Speaker 1: comes from the book Sources of the Constitution of the
Speaker 1: United States Considered in relation.
Speaker 2: To Colonial and English History.
Speaker 1: It was written by c Elis Stevens in eighteen ninety four.
Speaker 1: And I think you're familiar with that, are you not?
Speaker 1: The Oh yes, yeah, okay, and I think that's very
Speaker 1: important for that to be out there as well. I'll
Speaker 1: save it to the last if if you're loaded with
Speaker 1: info to share, also will give the links to that
Speaker 1: particular book which you can read online.
Speaker 2: I did have it was.
Speaker 1: Which I got out of inner library load, but it's
Speaker 1: all there to be read online.
Speaker 2: So anyway, let me throw it back to you. You
Speaker 2: know where you're going.
Speaker 1: And so would that proviso that I'd like to get
Speaker 1: that in there later on, please go ahead?
Speaker 3: Well okay, So the seventeen eighty seven Constitution was not
Speaker 3: what it was cracked up to be, and our so
Speaker 3: called founding fathers were not who we thought they were.
Speaker 3: You know, they were a bunch of aristocrats, lawyers and
Speaker 3: freemasons and the like who rested control of the country
Speaker 3: in their hands. And they had more money and more
Speaker 3: slaves than other folks. So they they protested enough against
Speaker 3: the taxation that was going on from Britain, and they
Speaker 3: what they finally did win for themselves is they ended
Speaker 3: the taxation for themselves, you know, old school mercantilism like that.
Speaker 3: What it was is the mother country would set up
Speaker 3: a colony and then they would forbid that colony from
Speaker 3: establishing any manufacturing base that that would compete with the
Speaker 3: mother country in trade. And it's but they would just
Speaker 3: use that uh, that daughter country, the colony as as
Speaker 3: a market to sell the wares of the mother country.
Speaker 3: Of course today we've figured out another way around that,
Speaker 3: but that's for some other show. So yet there was
Speaker 3: enough that these aristocrats, these founding fathers, they they wanted
Speaker 3: to compete in manufacturing, so that Gustavus Myers also covers
Speaker 3: that the revolution was really about largely about the growing
Speaker 3: manufacturing during base in the colony. They were growing restless
Speaker 3: at any rate the seventeen eighty seventeen eighty seven Constitution.
Speaker 3: One very vital thing that did not happen was King George.
Speaker 3: When he was dictating the terms of the seventeen eighty
Speaker 3: three peace Treaty. King George did not grant to the
Speaker 3: United States allodial title to the land. He only recognized
Speaker 3: the colonist's use of the land. And that's vital that
Speaker 3: that means to as Montgomery says, were still are a
Speaker 3: British colony that never changed. Okay, So regardless of that,
Speaker 3: we did get I suppose a few rights and many
Speaker 3: privileges from that seventeen eighty seven Constitution. As we covered
Speaker 3: last time, the so called Reconstruction era in did all
Speaker 3: of that. It killed the seventeen eighty seven Constitution, that contract.
Speaker 3: It ripped it up forever. The Reconstruction did when it
Speaker 3: denied several or many of the states a right to
Speaker 3: a republican government. When you do that, you rip up
Speaker 3: the contract and deny it to all the states. We've
Speaker 3: been under military rule since the Reconstruction. Now, what I
Speaker 3: think we're going to get into in this show is
Speaker 3: moving forward in time. In nineteen seventeen, an act was
Speaker 3: passed under Wilson's administration, the Emergency War Powers Act. And
Speaker 3: then in nineteen thirty three, this is the biggie. That's
Speaker 3: when FDR was told by the international banksters to take
Speaker 3: that nineteen seventeen Emergency War Powers Act and add that
Speaker 3: the United States citizens were now enemies of the state,
Speaker 3: and James Montgomery covers. He covers this pretty exhaustively. I
Speaker 3: would say the historical the secret historical background. The banksters
Speaker 3: at first came to Herbert Hoover and said, you're going
Speaker 3: to do this. You're going to pass this act, and
Speaker 3: we're going to do this and declare the people that
Speaker 3: the enemies of the state here, so they're going to
Speaker 3: be on the hook for all of the debt and
Speaker 3: to tighten the screws on them. And Hoover wouldn't do it.
Speaker 3: He was the lame duck. He was on his way out.
Speaker 3: He said, basically, I'm not doing this, and so it
Speaker 3: came to FDR. Actually FDR passed. Initially FDR just wanted
Speaker 3: to do it, and then he tried having them have
Speaker 3: Hoover Hoover do it. Hoover said, no way, and so
Speaker 3: finally it came back to FDR, and he was entering
Speaker 3: the White House at that time, and he was forced
Speaker 3: to do that. The nineteen thirty three what.
Speaker 1: Was that law called.
Speaker 3: It was a tweakage of the nineteen seventeen War Powers Act,
Speaker 3: but I forget what the thirty three Act was called,
Speaker 3: but that was just devastating and we've been enemies of
Speaker 3: the state ever since.
Speaker 1: All right, I'm gonna throw this out there only because
Speaker 1: I don't know if I can remember either. Are we
Speaker 1: talking about trading with the enemy?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, all.
Speaker 1: Right, because you had the Banking Act that also, they
Speaker 1: all were in concert to create this kind of situation,
Speaker 1: which I would say is clearly adversarial between the government
Speaker 1: and its citizenry.
Speaker 3: Yeah, okay, it was the nineteen seventeen Trading with the
Speaker 3: Enemies Act. Okay, in nineteen thirty three they changed it,
Speaker 3: tweaked it so that, hey, guess what, the US people,
Speaker 3: they're the enemy. That's us now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like I had said before. Yeah, you can't
Speaker 1: be too overtly that that way, because obviously you're going
Speaker 1: to raise more than suspicions of the people, you'll raise
Speaker 1: their ire as well. Right now, I think what has happened.
Speaker 1: We've always had the two party system. Okay, we understand that.
Speaker 1: But we're to a point now and I have to
Speaker 1: confess that I was also bitten by this. If I
Speaker 1: voted that I was an independent. I never classify myself
Speaker 1: as a Republican or a Democrat or anything else, or
Speaker 1: a libertarian.
Speaker 2: None of that. But it was in the old days, if.
Speaker 1: I voted Democratic and a Republican did something that I
Speaker 1: thought was horrible, I'd bang on the Republican whoever that should.
Speaker 2: Be, whatever president that might have been at the time.
Speaker 1: Now, if something that I didn't really understand that I
Speaker 1: thought was questionable that a Democrat put through, I would
Speaker 1: try to make some kind of justification or rationale for it. Oh, sure,
Speaker 1: and that's what goes on today. People understand that government
Speaker 1: is not responsive and something is quite wrong with it.
Speaker 1: But also, at the same time, as we stated before,
Speaker 1: the acrimony between Republican and Democrat supporters is the worst
Speaker 1: it's ever been, so much so that it's pure hatred,
Speaker 1: and that one votes not for their own person but
Speaker 1: against the other parties person.
Speaker 2: That keeps people.
Speaker 1: From understanding that no matter what party reigns, everything is
Speaker 1: going along a singular path to a definite end, and
Speaker 1: they can't get that because they're so blinded by hatred
Speaker 1: for the other party. And of course, a lot of
Speaker 1: talk shows out there there are there solely to keep
Speaker 1: stoking that. I mean, there are times when I'll pass
Speaker 1: through a Rush Limbaugh's show or something to hear something
Speaker 1: and I might be I don't know, in a supermarket
Speaker 1: or waiting online someplace, and I'll hear someone in discussion
Speaker 1: with someone else parroting that same stuff, and I'm like
Speaker 1: to shake my head because the people are so so
Speaker 1: propagandized and they don't even realize it. So going back
Speaker 1: to what you were saying, and I'll throw it back
Speaker 1: to you. There has been an adversarial needs but and
Speaker 1: I think it's actually becoming more evident. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, people are more blinded. So it's it's just
Speaker 1: kind of like in the same proportions. And the truth
Speaker 1: of the matter is it's finally going to come out,
Speaker 1: but by the time the whole trap is sprug, people
Speaker 1: will not have had a chance. So let me throw
Speaker 1: it back to you. You know, there's other stuff I'm
Speaker 1: thinking about, but let's get back to the to the trail.
Speaker 2: Please pick it up the.
Speaker 3: Well, let's get this on record. If people want to
Speaker 3: go look this up. And that's one thing. If you
Speaker 3: don't want to just have a purely emotional reaction, what
Speaker 3: you want to do is you want to do your homework.
Speaker 3: If this sounds completely radical and crazy to you, don't
Speaker 3: do the knee jerk purely emotional thing. Go and check
Speaker 3: it out first. See if we're crazy. You're going to
Speaker 3: be surprised by what you find. More than surprise. Okay,
Speaker 3: let's document this. The books you want to check out. Okay,
Speaker 3: the stuff that I just mentioned regarding the nineteen thirty
Speaker 3: three Act where FDR and the banksters made you and
Speaker 3: me the enemies of the people. That is the focus
Speaker 3: of the James Montgomery book, A Nation defeated in victory.
Speaker 3: That's where Montgomery goes into that. Now, the other stuff,
Speaker 3: the Revolutionary War era stuff, is mostly covered in his
Speaker 3: other book. The United States is still a British colony.
Speaker 3: Now some of that subject matter does overlap, But just
Speaker 3: so you know, those are the two you want to
Speaker 3: look up, depending on what you want to focus on.
Speaker 3: And you know, traditionally and historically when you're telling something,
Speaker 3: when you're reporting something, you want to have two witnesses. Well, there,
Speaker 3: as you know, there is another witness to this, and
Speaker 3: that's the informer. You can check out his stuff as well,
Speaker 3: and a lot of that is online, or you can
Speaker 3: buy his books, or at least you could until recently,
Speaker 3: I don't know what the.
Speaker 2: Status that is. All right, they're still there.
Speaker 1: Again, they could be purchased through the website think or
Speaker 1: beeton dot com, because what has to pay for the books,
Speaker 1: either by body order or I mean, you just can't
Speaker 1: do it on a live folks. But you can't go
Speaker 1: through that think orbe dot com and find out how
Speaker 1: to do it. It's going to be between you and
Speaker 1: the author, and it's going to be done by bail.
Speaker 3: Maybe you can help me on this one. I actually
Speaker 3: am reading right now the essay you sent me by
Speaker 3: the Informer that deals with what happened in nineteen thirty
Speaker 3: three and what they did borrowing a perverting that nineteen
Speaker 3: seventeen Act, the War Powers problem. But I'm about two
Speaker 3: thirds of the way through it, maybe maybe one half.
Speaker 3: But al are you able to elaborate on what that
Speaker 3: changes for us? When we are when we the people
Speaker 3: the people are declared the enemy of the states, what
Speaker 3: does that do to us? How does that change our status?
Speaker 3: What can we not do? What does that mean they
Speaker 3: can throw us in jail without habeas corpus if they
Speaker 3: want to. It's a privilege anyway, What does that change
Speaker 3: for us?
Speaker 1: I don't know that it doesn't change everything. It just
Speaker 1: I think in trench is even more the idea that
Speaker 1: one has a persona as an employee or a slave
Speaker 1: of the incorporation of the United States of America. When
Speaker 1: you play into that, obviously you have no rights. And
Speaker 1: the reason I won't want to get too deep into
Speaker 1: this is because this is when we go back to
Speaker 1: road lit law, the idea of a person and such,
Speaker 1: and that is something that has to be really laid
Speaker 1: out over a period of time, and I had done
Speaker 1: that with the informer. I don't know how many shows
Speaker 1: we did, but it just entrenches what I would say
Speaker 1: is the idea of not being so it en down
Speaker 1: with godly rights, if you will, and being really a
Speaker 1: subject of the government. As you had said, we have
Speaker 1: no rights. We only have privileges. And that's something that
Speaker 1: isn't very well known. And yet I found it interesting
Speaker 1: when your foreman and I were talking about this. It
Speaker 1: might have been two or three days later, and this
Speaker 1: is while A. Shrub Bush was still in office, went
Speaker 1: on c SPAN. I just had to be passing through the channels,
Speaker 1: and at that time the Gonzales was the Attorney general
Speaker 1: and he was answering a question after he had given
Speaker 1: a speech. So you don't really hear the question that well,
Speaker 1: because the mikes aren't out in the audience. But what
Speaker 1: he said was in response, he says, no, you do
Speaker 1: not have any rights, only privileges. And I hear about
Speaker 1: fell off the chair because here it is said out loud,
Speaker 1: but people don't hear that. They hear it, but they
Speaker 1: just make some kind of construct where it somehow would
Speaker 1: make sense or maybe he didn't really mean that, but
Speaker 1: that's what's said, and it happens all the time. And
Speaker 1: I know this is convoluted and where I'm going with this,
Speaker 1: but clearly it did put us at a it's I
Speaker 1: don't know, I don't want to say forever more because
Speaker 1: it's been like that, you know, to a certain extent.
Speaker 1: But remember also that when they had the Banking Act,
Speaker 1: that was a great theft, the probably the largest theft
Speaker 1: of real money there ever was.
Speaker 2: You know what I'm saying, Well, with the.
Speaker 1: Banking Holiday, and they told people they didn't want them
Speaker 1: transacting with gold and silver, So what you'all turn it
Speaker 1: in and we'll give it this fiance currency for it.
Speaker 1: I mean, that was the largest theft in America, and
Speaker 1: it was perpetrated by the government. That's bigger than a
Speaker 1: left hands for robbery from where was LaGuardia by the
Speaker 1: mafia or Kennedy rather? But so I'm dancing around us
Speaker 1: a little bit. But all I mean for me, what
Speaker 1: what that does is say, you know, forever, we will
Speaker 1: be separate from the government, and we will be seen
Speaker 1: in an adversarial status. And as I said before, it's
Speaker 1: it's it's like it's an abusive parent. I mean, the
Speaker 1: government will actually create a situation a lot of times
Speaker 1: it referred to as false flag and then and freak
Speaker 1: out the people, get them all, you know, worked up,
Speaker 1: maybe you can kill some and it'll turn around and
Speaker 1: provide a solution for it. And everybody hugs the government
Speaker 1: for stepping into becoming their protector. So I'll just leave
Speaker 1: it at that. Continue where you want to with that,
Speaker 1: because it's been quite some times. As I read that
Speaker 1: particular article, I do believe that that's on thinkerbee dot
Speaker 1: com as well. I'll take a look at. What I'll
Speaker 1: do is I'll leave that also available for folks to read.
Speaker 1: But go ahead, and I'm sorry thel that I took
Speaker 1: so much time that what you just.
Speaker 3: Described the government in essence beating the hell out of
Speaker 3: you and then offering to be your buddy, to be
Speaker 3: your protector. I mean, that's a protection racket.
Speaker 1: Isn't it.
Speaker 2: That's exactly and that's the you know, on.
Speaker 3: Another level, that is the process you see in interrogation
Speaker 3: rooms and torture dungeons. Remember the last part of the
Speaker 3: book nineteen eighty four where that was how O'Brien dealt
Speaker 3: with Winston Smith. One day he'd be torturing him and
Speaker 3: the next day he would be his protector. Some very
Speaker 3: bad people have figured out that that's what really messes
Speaker 3: people up, destabilizes the human psyche enough to where you
Speaker 3: become so confused and you just.
Speaker 2: Give in to them.
Speaker 1: Well, that's what's happened with the events that have occurred, especially,
Speaker 1: I would say because of it since nine to eleven.
Speaker 1: I think we've also seen it with this with the
Speaker 1: frequency of shootings. People are freaked out, They want somebody
Speaker 1: to do something, and they'll pass the draconian law that
Speaker 1: in the end will probably work against them.
Speaker 2: So you're right.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a situation where you know they'll provide
Speaker 1: the problem and they'll provide the solution. And this has
Speaker 1: been going on for some time, but especially since I
Speaker 1: would say post World War two when a boogey bet
Speaker 1: had to be created to keep that fear going. And
Speaker 1: one more example, okay, just to give you what we're
Speaker 1: talking about with regard to the government being an abusive parent,
Speaker 1: and I'm not we're not going to explain it here
Speaker 1: about nine to eleven and how that was allowed because
Speaker 1: that was allowed. Pearl Harbor was allowed, Elucidatius sinking was allowed,
Speaker 1: and the USS made sinking was.
Speaker 3: Allowed more than just allowed. Some of those were provoked,
Speaker 3: and some of those were even beyond that.
Speaker 1: Oh you know, I'm just being nice by just just
Speaker 1: saying it that way.
Speaker 2: No problem, Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1: But what makes me laugh is when the justification for
Speaker 1: going into Afghanistan just a little less than a month
Speaker 1: after nine to eleven, the whole mantra was we're safer
Speaker 1: here because we're fighting over there. And yet how many
Speaker 1: times in the last ten to twelve years haven't we
Speaker 1: been told that we've just narrowly missed another terror event
Speaker 1: and that these factions are still alive and working with
Speaker 1: in this country. And so what I'm saying to myself is, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're supposed to be safer here, but apparently we're not true.
Speaker 1: Nothing else has really happened. But what we're being told
Speaker 1: is it was going to. It was going to, it
Speaker 1: was going to, but we nipped it in the nick
Speaker 1: of time. So my thinking is, well, the problem is
Speaker 1: inside this country, not over in Afghanistan. It's got to
Speaker 1: do with immigration and some other things. So how are
Speaker 1: we safer here because we're fighting over there? And somehow
Speaker 1: that gets all forgotten about. People don't connect the two.
Speaker 1: They just want to be protected every time another terror
Speaker 1: event is supposedly for a supposed terror event is thwarted
Speaker 1: and we're left with all the measures that are put
Speaker 1: in there even though the event never happened. And the
Speaker 1: greatest example of that is at the airport, all that's
Speaker 1: being done to you to stop potential terrorists. You know,
Speaker 1: you could say, well, we never did have another event,
Speaker 1: that is true, but they never said that what was
Speaker 1: really even thwarted in a sense. But we still have
Speaker 1: to go through the whole YadA yadi to get on
Speaker 1: the plate. So again I've go too far with that,
Speaker 1: but that's what I'm saying. People don't connect the fact
Speaker 1: that we are not safe for here the fighting over there.
Speaker 3: As you know, and as we've talked about, one of
Speaker 3: the reasons why they are making airport or airline travel
Speaker 3: so uncomfortable is the same reason why gas prices are
Speaker 3: so high. And that is when a state, when a
Speaker 3: nation descends into fascism or communism, or or any totalitarian state,
Speaker 3: as the United States now is, then they the rulers,
Speaker 3: the real rulers. They always seek to control your movement.
Speaker 3: They don't like people moving around.
Speaker 1: Well, one of the earmarks of totalitary government is limited
Speaker 1: or don't you travel. So it's easy to see and
Speaker 1: this will happen over time. That I mean, I think
Speaker 1: it's funny that in the twenty first century air travel
Speaker 1: is worse than it was in the fifties. Secondly, forget
Speaker 1: about Amtrak. I mean, a lot of developed countries have
Speaker 1: light rail or in high speed rail and it works
Speaker 1: just fine. Here we got amtrak, another example of what
Speaker 1: happens when the government gets involved in commercial enterprises and
Speaker 1: it sucks.
Speaker 2: And what's worse than amtract greyhound.
Speaker 1: So you've got three forms of travel that are really
Speaker 1: getting you become more odious except the last who've always
Speaker 1: been bad. But air travels got to a point where
Speaker 1: a lot of people are saying, you know, forget it,
Speaker 1: and the other thing is okay, then what do you
Speaker 1: resort to the use of your vehicle?
Speaker 2: Well, what's going to happen there? Gas price is going
Speaker 2: to go through the sailing.
Speaker 1: So the idea is stay put and I'll definitely raise
Speaker 1: my head and admit that I'm of a casualty, if
Speaker 1: you will, of that situation because they've made it that unpleasant.
Speaker 1: I don't care to travel anymore. I really don't want
Speaker 1: to fly where it used to be great right now
Speaker 1: it's like and I guess that's one of the problems too.
Speaker 1: I have something compared to at a time, but it
Speaker 1: was kind of nice.
Speaker 3: The problem is a big problem is that the Americans
Speaker 3: who would classify themselves as patriots, they too see these
Speaker 3: modern problems that you and I see, but they think
Speaker 3: that if we can just take our country back and
Speaker 3: bring back our constitution, that things are going to be okay.
Speaker 3: And that's what this show is really about, is we're
Speaker 3: trying to tell them, no, it's really not going to
Speaker 3: be okay. We never we the little people, never had
Speaker 3: any country, and really the only reason we were left
Speaker 3: alone more in the past was because there was more space,
Speaker 3: and there was less surveillance, and there was more to
Speaker 3: do with geography than anything else. The Constitution never protected anybody,
Speaker 3: and it certainly never gave you title to your land.
Speaker 1: Well, that's the other illusion that you had opened up
Speaker 1: talking about, and that is you really don't own anything.
Speaker 1: You can pay off the mortgage, but you still have
Speaker 1: property taxes, you get behind in that, and you can
Speaker 1: lose your land, so you never really, you never really
Speaker 1: own anything. You have the color of ownership, but in
Speaker 1: the end it can be taken from you. And even
Speaker 1: if you're doing everything you're supposed to do. Let's say
Speaker 1: you paid off the mortgage on your house and you
Speaker 1: just you paid off the property taxes no matter how
Speaker 1: high they get, you're okay there. But if you can
Speaker 1: turn around and have imminent domain come through and bang
Speaker 1: it's gone, you're finished.
Speaker 2: Yea.
Speaker 1: And we've seen enough cases of that before to not
Speaker 1: even have to establish that fact.
Speaker 2: See, you really don't own anything. You just think you do.
Speaker 1: And one other word that going back to your original
Speaker 1: question about what did the war powers do? And I
Speaker 1: may look up while we're talking, if not, what I
Speaker 1: found interesting is this, if you remember last year, probably
Speaker 1: earlier in twenty twelve of the later Bayner was banging
Speaker 1: on the president for I guess it's not instituting but
Speaker 1: applying the war powers.
Speaker 2: You remember that at all?
Speaker 3: You had told me that, I remember that.
Speaker 2: I'll go try to fight.
Speaker 1: But anybody can do his search and probably come up
Speaker 1: with that. And again here I thought this was rich.
Speaker 1: Now the critics of Obama would say, oh, he's created
Speaker 1: war powers or he's instituting them, as if that was his.
Speaker 3: Own decision, if they only knew that's right.
Speaker 2: I mean, if they've been there forever.
Speaker 1: And Baynor, I think brought it up as a criticism
Speaker 1: of course, to agitate between Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 2: And yet they've been there forever.
Speaker 1: And I said to the other man too, you know,
Speaker 1: is that one of the reasons why we've never declared
Speaker 1: war since what December eighth, nineteen forty one. We're always
Speaker 1: at war and the war emergency war powers is something
Speaker 1: that circummits the Constitution.
Speaker 2: So there you go, like executive.
Speaker 1: Voters, that allows a president to act in a manner
Speaker 1: such as a dictator. And it's happened before and will
Speaker 1: happen again. So yes, that happened.
Speaker 2: Now. Also, I guess to sum up one thing, and that.
Speaker 1: Is this as it was with the creation of the Constitution,
Speaker 1: also having Congress more or less make us the enemies.
Speaker 1: It slaved us so that we would be, without knowing it,
Speaker 1: more responsive to placating shall we say, global money in
Speaker 1: the international bankers. If you remember, the Constitution was struck
Speaker 1: by the founders to cover their rear ends so they'd
Speaker 1: be at peace with the Crown, who obviously told them
Speaker 1: that if we don't get our return on our investment,
Speaker 1: we'll come over there throw a real war, and we'll
Speaker 1: also blockade you, and you'll understand what it's like to
Speaker 1: be in servitude again.
Speaker 3: Well, that's what the War of eighteen twelve was about
Speaker 3: when the bank charter, the National Bank Charter ran out
Speaker 3: in eighteen eleven.
Speaker 2: OK.
Speaker 3: So that was one reason. The other reason is the
Speaker 3: original thirteenth Amendment, which is an episode of history again
Speaker 3: right out of a Twilight Zone episode. I'm looking at
Speaker 3: a quote from Montgomery about that. Right now, you know
Speaker 3: how many members in Congress today are lawyers, a majority
Speaker 3: almost all of them. There was an original thirteenth Amendment,
Speaker 3: which the archives of that have were destroyed in the
Speaker 3: War of eighteen twelve.
Speaker 2: Well, we've got into that. Yeah, I think we were
Speaker 2: last night.
Speaker 3: You could not be a lawyer and be a part
Speaker 3: of the government today if there was still that original
Speaker 3: thirteenth Amendment.
Speaker 2: Also from a.
Speaker 1: That forward peace, he stated, President Lincoln then made us
Speaker 1: the enemy of the government by twelve stat. Three on
Speaker 1: nine in eighteen sixty two. And I believe I have
Speaker 1: these documents as well that we could put up. Let's see,
Speaker 1: and Congress continued to keep the status quo by the
Speaker 1: creation of the Reconstruction Act in eighteen sixty seven. Then
Speaker 1: in eighteen sixty eight, the Fourteenth Amendment placed the people
Speaker 1: of both the North and South under the control of
Speaker 1: the military rule. That's why we were saying the Reconstruction Acts.
Speaker 1: Whether the northern states didn't realize it, but they were
Speaker 1: hit with that as well. And we've been in that
Speaker 1: situation ever since. And the last sentence is the other
Speaker 1: banking system after getting a foothold in nineteen thirteen, referring
Speaker 1: to the creation of the Federal Reserve caused the demise
Speaker 1: of the Independent Treasury to complete the enemy status. Roosevelt
Speaker 1: finalized us as the enemies of the Bank in forty
Speaker 1: eight stat one March ninth, nineteen thirty three. Statue is
Speaker 1: short the statute. So that brings us full circle back
Speaker 1: to what you were talking about.
Speaker 3: Ahead, Well, do you recall in that informer essay you
Speaker 3: sent me there one pivot told historical figure that the
Speaker 3: informer keeps hearkening back to. His name was Whiting. Yes,
Speaker 3: and he was a secretary. Lincoln was so impressed with
Speaker 3: his legal Shenanigan. Lincoln made him the what was the
Speaker 3: title Secretary of War Power something like that, and Whiting
Speaker 3: was basically used as a He helped Lincoln to justify anything,
Speaker 3: any takeover of power on behalf of the federal government
Speaker 3: over states rights and individual rights. That again, that Whiting
Speaker 3: guy is a shadowy figure in history. I had never
Speaker 3: heard of him before. Obviously, he played a central role
Speaker 3: in the Lincoln administration.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's amazing because what about sixty years later
Speaker 1: you had another shadowy character that nobody really knows about.
Speaker 1: It was pivotal in forcing through without ratification, the Income
Speaker 1: Tax Amendment.
Speaker 3: That's also where right around the time you got the
Speaker 3: Federal Reserve Act and that nineteen seventeen trading with the
Speaker 3: enemies act.
Speaker 2: Well, the person you're talking about.
Speaker 3: Is it not House, No, Hopkins or House No.
Speaker 1: No, I'm thinking, well, where we got a couple of
Speaker 1: things going on here. No, I'm thinking about Folander Knox.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, okay, oh wow.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: He was Secretary of State under at Taft, and he
Speaker 1: kind of bridged the administration under.
Speaker 2: Teddy Roosevelt and Roosevelt.
Speaker 3: But oh both of them.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, Well, I don't think he served. I'll have
Speaker 1: to look at I don't think he served under Roosevelt.
Speaker 1: But at the time he was critical because he ran
Speaker 1: through the amendment for the creation of the income tax,
Speaker 1: which they had to have because because first he made
Speaker 1: the beast, which is the Federal Reserve, now he had
Speaker 1: to feed it. So he was in that critical time
Speaker 1: around nineteen thirteen. But all right, now, I remember too,
Speaker 1: Knox didn't serve under Roosevelt. But Knox was serving as
Speaker 1: a legal counsel to the robber barons. So here you
Speaker 1: have Teddy Roosevelt shaking his fist, talking about walks offully
Speaker 1: carry a big stick, doing all this kind of supposed
Speaker 1: anti trust busting, right anti.
Speaker 3: Now you're going back to like the nineteen hundred era.
Speaker 1: That's right, that's what Knox in a way was working
Speaker 1: in concert. But he was working on the side of
Speaker 1: the robber barons.
Speaker 3: But he was a powerful corporation lawyer.
Speaker 1: Yes, and he actually had started off under McKinley, under
Speaker 1: McKinley's law firm, and then he grew in statute. This
Speaker 1: all took place in Ohio, which is also where John D.
Speaker 1: Rockefeller started that whole thing, so that while Roosevelt is
Speaker 1: acting like a trust buster, Knox is taking care the
Speaker 1: situation for the robber barons, who in a sense didn't
Speaker 1: mind this because they had already gained their fortunes through
Speaker 1: the monopoly. So all this really did was this trust
Speaker 1: busting would stop anybody from coming in after and creating competition.
Speaker 1: So that's where Knox cut his teeth. And then later
Speaker 1: on he strikes the American people again because he passed through,
Speaker 1: and when you say ran through, he just proclaimed that
Speaker 1: it was done. They just went ahead and did it,
Speaker 1: so that the inc Attacks Amendment was never really ratified.
Speaker 3: Well, you know, that's the same way they pulled off
Speaker 3: the Reconstruction Act and including the Fourteenth Amendment. That is
Speaker 3: the same way.
Speaker 1: So that's where I was going with Folander Knox. But
Speaker 1: also you went back to trace this as well. And
Speaker 1: what we talked about shadowy characters besides Whiting. I mean
Speaker 1: there you have Filander Knox Nope, but great first name
Speaker 1: to Flander.
Speaker 2: Who that's a clue? Oh yeah, how apt so. But
Speaker 2: you also had the war hero Sherman's brother John also
Speaker 2: being a snake in a grass, becoming instructed on how
Speaker 2: to create what was what was it that he had
Speaker 2: going with the banker's Oh, the creation of the Federal
Speaker 2: Reserve system.
Speaker 3: Right, that's right. And this also is covered in the
Speaker 3: book by James Montgomery. A nation a country defeated in victory.
Speaker 3: I think I said nation earlier. It's a country defeated
Speaker 3: in victory by James Montgomery. Here he also covers that
Speaker 3: unknown history with I think it was John Sherman and
Speaker 3: he was a representative from Ohio. He was William to
Speaker 3: comes to Sherman's brother, right, And Montgomery features a personal
Speaker 3: letter from one of the Rothschilds in answer to a
Speaker 3: letter that John Sherman had told him had sent to him.
Speaker 3: The Rothschilds were I think the roth Childs were writing
Speaker 3: to another bank another banker in Europe, and they were
Speaker 3: telling them that this representative in the United States, John Sherman,
Speaker 3: had invited the Rothchilds in to get a piece of
Speaker 3: the pie on this coming really swindle, this financial swindle
Speaker 3: that was about to happen in the United States. It
Speaker 3: was eventually going to become the Federal Reserve. And you
Speaker 3: had John Sherman inviting the bankers in on that. So
Speaker 3: obviously John Sherman was not on the side of his constituency.
Speaker 3: And you know another thing you have with that, and
Speaker 3: you have talked about this before, is William T. Sherman,
Speaker 3: the famous general. His hands aren't entirely clean either. He
Speaker 3: obviously had some inside information just like his brother, because
Speaker 3: after that Civil War war between the States didn't to
Speaker 3: come to Sherman go out and just happen to buy
Speaker 3: a bunch of real estate where the railroad was going
Speaker 3: to be la laid down a little bit later, so
Speaker 3: that that land was going to be worth a lot more.
Speaker 1: Yeah, when he was going out and making the world
Speaker 1: safe from Native Americans. While he was out there, he
Speaker 1: also bought up land that yes that the railroad would
Speaker 1: pass through, and he made a killy that way as.
Speaker 2: Well as the other way, you.
Speaker 3: Got these guys with inside connections. I talked about last
Speaker 3: week how in the formation of Washington d C. George
Speaker 3: Washington and just a few other cronies had inside information
Speaker 3: and they knew beforehand that DC was going to be
Speaker 3: declared the capital. So they did the same thing previously
Speaker 3: in history. They bought up that land knowing it was
Speaker 3: going to be worth a lot more later. How is
Speaker 3: that representing your constituency being a friend to we the
Speaker 3: little people.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I have you throw this back
Speaker 1: at you, just to complete this Internox was an Attorney
Speaker 1: General of the United States with McKinley, so he did
Speaker 1: serve on the McKinley so he was he was actually
Speaker 1: protege by McKinley during his lawyering days. And of course
Speaker 1: now we see here that he was attorney general there
Speaker 1: he resigned, let's see in June of nineteen oh four,
Speaker 1: and then he did serve from nineteen oh four to
Speaker 1: nineteen oh nine as Taft's secretary of State. Let me
Speaker 1: check that he was secretary of State under Taft from
Speaker 1: nineteen oh nine to nineteen thirty. Okay, the resigning was
Speaker 1: something else, and I just as as a bio. I'm
Speaker 1: just drawing from right away because I just want to
Speaker 1: clear my head, which is very hard to do. But
Speaker 1: I didn't think I didn't think he had any office
Speaker 1: under McKinley, but he certainly did, and he did Undertaft,
Speaker 1: and he did under Roosevelt as well. But under Teddy
Speaker 1: I believe he was, let me see, attorney general. And
Speaker 1: that's where the residing comes from. He was an attorney
Speaker 1: general from one through four.
Speaker 2: So there you have it.
Speaker 3: You know what a bunch of dastardly deeds that guy perpetrated.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean here again, I mean the government gets
Speaker 1: fat off making deals with those who are the financial elite.
Speaker 1: But I would think it's it's it's correct to say that.
Speaker 1: What's the robber barons gained their untold millions, they proceeded
Speaker 1: to buy influence until they actually bought the people themselves,
Speaker 1: the senators and congressmen. And from that point on they've
Speaker 1: been running the show, very content to stay in the
Speaker 1: shadows and not be connected to anything. But after they
Speaker 1: gained power, you could see through the twentieth century things
Speaker 1: did not improve necessarily for Americans.
Speaker 3: What you just described, how the rich people get rich
Speaker 3: and then they buy the American government. That is factually
Speaker 3: documented exhaustively in the book The History of the Supreme
Speaker 3: Court of the United States by Gustavus Myers. And another
Speaker 3: book of more recent vintage, but still just as out
Speaker 3: of print that does that is The Rich and the
Speaker 3: super Rich by Ferdinand Lund. Isn't it interesting that these
Speaker 3: books which document the truth about our history are all
Speaker 3: out of print. It's rather coincidental.
Speaker 1: Well, it's also because they would not be picked up
Speaker 1: by major publishing houses.
Speaker 2: That's why why would that be?
Speaker 1: Of course, And as I had said, we had mentioned before,
Speaker 1: the character who owe the I gotta stop referring to.
Speaker 1: It's something other than his name. He's now passed on.
Speaker 1: But he took a risk by publishing those books. And
Speaker 1: another publisher that put out stuff that was not popular
Speaker 1: was Devin Adair, the nv O and Devin Adair, and
Speaker 1: they're the ones that published the book by Rear Admiral Theobold,
Speaker 1: The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor. So there were titles
Speaker 1: out there that did that. Some of them escape me
Speaker 1: right now, but they would never the real big ones,
Speaker 1: you know that you would see in the front of
Speaker 1: where there used to be bookstores So you know what I.
Speaker 3: Really appreciated about that book by Admiral Theobald. There are
Speaker 3: there are you know this, but there are three books
Speaker 3: that I that I know of that document that the fact,
Speaker 3: the undeniable fact that FDR and his cabinet and General
Speaker 3: Marshall knew that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor,
Speaker 3: and they knew days, if not weeks beforehand. They could
Speaker 3: have warned the Hawaiian commanders, but they did not want
Speaker 3: to do that. We know that, and it goes beyond
Speaker 3: that we provoked them, really so. But anyway, these three books,
Speaker 3: it's one of them is called Infamy by John Toland,
Speaker 3: a very respected World War II historian. The other is
Speaker 3: the most recent one is Day of Deceit by Robert Stinnett.
Speaker 3: But that one in the nineteen fifties that's totally out
Speaker 3: of print is The Rear. Admiral Theobald's book. Remind me
Speaker 3: of the title.
Speaker 2: Of it, The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor, The.
Speaker 3: Final Secret of Pearl Harbor. What I like about Theobalds
Speaker 3: is that guy. He starts the book smoking angry at FDR,
Speaker 3: and he ends the book just just as smoking angry
Speaker 3: at what they did to those men who died that day.
Speaker 3: Whereas both Toland and Stinnett, at the end of their
Speaker 3: book they throw in this little, this weird, incongruous couple
Speaker 3: of paragraphs where they try to kind of justify what
Speaker 3: FDR and his cronies did in a way. They say, well,
Speaker 3: we had to get into the war anyway. And and
Speaker 3: they they FDR and his boys they didn't expect such
Speaker 3: a large loss of life at Pearl Harbor, but they
Speaker 3: knew that there was there had to be some loss
Speaker 3: of life. You never got that from Theobal. Theobal just
Speaker 3: he just said this was wrong, and it was wrong
Speaker 3: and should never have taken place.
Speaker 2: But I just went to Amazona to take a look.
Speaker 2: Believe it or not.
Speaker 1: They're offering the hardcover A Final Secret of Pearl Harbor
Speaker 1: for twenty one dollars.
Speaker 3: Is that a used one?
Speaker 2: That's uncollectible? The used one? They said a dollar? Ah
Speaker 2: really and three nine shipping. That's okay.
Speaker 1: No, it's not being printed anymore, no, no, no, And I
Speaker 1: didn't need to say that that it was out there
Speaker 1: be published again. No, but it can't be accessed. And
Speaker 1: I think anybody who's that interested you will not be
Speaker 1: disappointed by that book. And what's even further interesting about
Speaker 1: what Theobold shares because it was laughable. I mean what
Speaker 1: he said is that the cabinet got together with Roosevelt,
Speaker 1: and that's that famous line I can't forget is that
Speaker 1: when they real that when they knew they were going.
Speaker 2: To let Pearl Harbor sucker room.
Speaker 1: I mean Pearl Harbor, the jap sucker. Oh that's politically
Speaker 1: incorrect or socially, isn't it's the Japanese. When the Japanese
Speaker 1: were going to sucker the United States, supposedly at Pearl Harbor,
Speaker 1: they all the cabinet agreed that they appreciated there would
Speaker 1: be a substantial loss of life.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, they appreciated it.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: The other thing about that was is that Tom Dewey,
Speaker 1: who was going to run against Roosevelt in forty four
Speaker 1: because he had made his bones by being a big
Speaker 1: mark I was hit mob killer.
Speaker 2: But that's a bad choice of words.
Speaker 1: He was very effective in defanging the mob, the mafia
Speaker 1: and on that he was going to run.
Speaker 2: In forty four.
Speaker 1: He also was aware, I mean, this is the biggest
Speaker 1: secret that it was never kept. He was aware that
Speaker 1: Roosevelt in the cabinet had four an aloge, and he
Speaker 1: was going to use it with running against Roosevelt. And
Speaker 1: he was told by his own party, by the Democrats,
Speaker 1: and by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that he said
Speaker 1: anything about that, that he would be indicted for sedition.
Speaker 1: So he lost in forty four. And I assume his
Speaker 1: sins were that great that even though he won in
Speaker 1: forty eight, he lost in forty eight against Truman. That's right, right,
Speaker 1: So Dewey made the mistake of sharing the secrets. Was
Speaker 1: going to share the secrets with the people, and that
Speaker 1: was not going to happen. It's the next book I
Speaker 1: think is interesting because he has images of transmissions that
Speaker 1: were going back and forth between the Germans and the Japanese,
Speaker 1: and it was kind of like, in a sense, ironically
Speaker 1: funny that the Japanese said at dispatch to the Germans
Speaker 1: in May of forty one saying, I think America, the
Speaker 1: United States has broken our code. And of course they had,
Speaker 1: so the United States knew exactly what was going to happen,
Speaker 1: and also the Japanese fleet. Contrary to public consumption, what
Speaker 1: they have been told is that the Japanese did not
Speaker 1: maintain radio silence coming across the Pacific, and there were
Speaker 1: Dutch and British listening stations on islands strewed across the
Speaker 1: Pacific that knew they were common.
Speaker 2: It was laughable.
Speaker 3: So Stannette he covers a few things that aren't covered
Speaker 3: in Theobald's book and Tolan's book. One that stuck out
Speaker 3: with me was, okay, all those books discuss how they
Speaker 3: that we've the United States has broken had broken the
Speaker 3: Japanese code. Stinett proved has some new corroborating evidence for that.
Speaker 3: But uh, and all those books also of course document
Speaker 3: the common knowledge that FDR put a trade embargo on Japan,
Speaker 3: provocative trade embargo, especially oil, and also that we had
Speaker 3: frozen their assets, their monetary assets, another provocative move. But
Speaker 3: Stinet documents there something else that is was previously hidden
Speaker 3: was suppressed history here that FDR had implemented this this
Speaker 3: plan where for a period of time he they the
Speaker 3: US was sending uh, their their fastest ship, some kind
Speaker 3: of cruiser. They would send a soul cruiser on this
Speaker 3: secret mission deep into Japanese waters, and they called them
Speaker 3: pop up missions or something like that, where the American
Speaker 3: cruiser would just show up in an obvious act of
Speaker 3: provocation deep into Japanese waters. And then once they were cited,
Speaker 3: the American cruiser would beat the hell out of there,
Speaker 3: would get out of there. But they did that several times.
Speaker 3: That again was to provoke the Japanese.
Speaker 1: Well, it gets even better, and then we better get
Speaker 1: back to close out with the constitution. But in the
Speaker 1: book The Suppressed Truth about the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
Speaker 1: by Burke McCarty, which was published somewhere in the late twenties,
Speaker 1: in that book, McCarty wrote that at the present, doing
Speaker 1: a bit of dealing with the present before she got
Speaker 1: into the past, that at the present time that the
Speaker 1: Jesuits were in Japan to instigate anti America sentiment for
Speaker 1: a future war. She wrote that in the twenties, and
Speaker 1: of course Billy Mitchell ran his mouth. He knew that
Speaker 1: we were going to fight the Japanese sooner or later
Speaker 1: he ran his mouth and got court martialed for it. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, again, that was a kangaroo thing. But so,
Speaker 1: I mean, it was laughable that this was going to happen.
Speaker 1: And of course, how many servicemen and women were rambushed
Speaker 1: in that situation.
Speaker 2: In fact, they had a.
Speaker 1: Sortie that was out just on a regular mission. Actually,
Speaker 1: you know, the United States Actually we're landing while the
Speaker 1: Japanese were attacking, and they're coming down in the middle
Speaker 1: of this, like what is going on here? So you know,
Speaker 1: we don't need to make light of it. But I mean,
Speaker 1: that's how pathetically tragic this whole thing is. And again,
Speaker 1: this is what we're referring to as the government creating
Speaker 1: a terror event for a purpose, which is usually get
Speaker 1: everybody pissed off, to go off of want to kick
Speaker 1: somebody in a butt. Was what we saw happened in
Speaker 1: October of two thousand and one, and we're not back yet.
Speaker 3: Well, this I think will kind of bring it back around.
Speaker 3: That is, FDR and Churchill were working hand in hand.
Speaker 3: Churchill knew damn well that FDR was going to get
Speaker 3: this country into war on behalf of Britain. And there
Speaker 3: was a remember that one. I think he was an
Speaker 3: American guy, American soldier named Tyler kent Over in England.
Speaker 3: He found out about that and he tried warning his
Speaker 3: superiors and he was thrown in jail. They shut his mouth.
Speaker 3: But like you say that the metaphor of Master Blaster
Speaker 3: from that movie Thunderdome. The United States was set up
Speaker 3: by Great Britain to be the hit man, the thumb man,
Speaker 3: the thug, and it really took fruition later on in
Speaker 3: the twentieth century, but really that was the design all along.
Speaker 3: We never were really cut loose, and as James Montgomery says,
Speaker 3: we were always were still a British colony. We just
Speaker 3: were given this delusion that we were independent.
Speaker 1: Remember something too, that is, the American people were not
Speaker 1: too cool about going to war in World War One,
Speaker 1: and even though Lucidania happened years before our entry, it
Speaker 1: still was a very sore subject and worked.
Speaker 3: It played an integral role in that dam.
Speaker 1: Yes, and so to Wilson. But in World War Two
Speaker 1: America still was not kind of keen on going over.
Speaker 1: But what happened was with the declaration of war against
Speaker 1: the Japanese.
Speaker 2: What that did was.
Speaker 1: There was a tripartite agreement between Japan and Germany and
Speaker 1: Italy that an attack on one was an attack on
Speaker 1: the other. So when when we declared war against Japan,
Speaker 1: we automatically had war with Germany in Italy, and then
Speaker 1: Germany acted in the manner that it had to to
Speaker 1: keep the tripartite agreement, you know, vital. So in a sense,
Speaker 1: then the declaration of war the Japanese was a backdoor
Speaker 1: way of.
Speaker 2: Now having war with Germany.
Speaker 3: Well, sure, why not? Wall Street had financed Hitler's regime
Speaker 3: in Germany. So now the banksters that did that on
Speaker 3: both sides of the world, they could profit from this
Speaker 3: war because of course they're going to loan money to
Speaker 3: both sides and get the usury from both sides.
Speaker 1: All right, we keep saying we're going to get back
Speaker 1: to the constitution, but then we're also thinking about who
Speaker 1: backed the Bolsheviks, which is funny. You know, the supposedly
Speaker 1: anti capitalist the Communists were set up by Western bank
Speaker 1: money and implements as well. And of course, as soon
Speaker 1: as it was clear that the Bolsheviks would rest control
Speaker 1: for good from the Mensheviks and the ours, immediately there
Speaker 1: was a humanitarian legation sent over to Russia, some humanitarian group,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think one guy, like a couple of doctors.
Speaker 1: The rest were all heads of the industrial companies in
Speaker 1: the West and include International Harvester and the folks. Also,
Speaker 1: if you want to check out a good source on
Speaker 1: what was going on with as THEO just mentioned wall
Speaker 1: Street's involvement in Wars and in our with our supposed enemies.
Speaker 2: There you go. Antony C.
Speaker 1: Sutton has a number of books out there dealing with
Speaker 1: the subject. They are most of them are online.
Speaker 3: Well, the two that would be most relevant there Wall
Speaker 3: Street and the Rise of Hitler and Wall Street and
Speaker 3: the Bolshevik Revolution.
Speaker 1: Yes, when last I looked, it was also one Wall Street.
Speaker 1: What did you just say the first title.
Speaker 3: Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler.
Speaker 1: Okay, Uh, there's also Wall Street and something with FDR.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, there's one another one on FDR.
Speaker 1: That one was not online when I look. It hasn't
Speaker 1: been for some time. But you can't get that in
Speaker 1: a library, so wealth yeah, good luck is it's Sutton's book.
Speaker 1: But anyway, I did want to mention that also, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you why we're coming up to the end of this,
Speaker 1: so we're gonna bring it to a halt. The bit
Speaker 1: about Steven's book that's online that I would like to
Speaker 1: deal with. Then we can open with this the next
Speaker 1: time around. But I also want to let people know
Speaker 1: that there are other critics throughout the years, throughout the
Speaker 1: last several decades that have not been happy with the Constitution,
Speaker 1: and that would include Lessanders Spooner, who has written The
Speaker 1: Constitution of No Authority.
Speaker 2: Let me just take a look at that real quick.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was a real voice in the wilderness. He
Speaker 3: dates back to the eighteen hundred.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I had one site bookmark that has now been suspended.
Speaker 1: But he pops up in another place at least once.
Speaker 1: I haven't taken a look. Give there are others, and
Speaker 1: again we'll put those links up. But he has written, yeah,
Speaker 1: the Constitution of No Authority, which I believe is a
Speaker 1: segment of a book called No Treason.
Speaker 2: That's Les Sanderspoon. Or also we have.
Speaker 1: Albert Knock, another non household name, who wrote Our Enemy
Speaker 1: the State that was back I guess so where in
Speaker 1: the early part of the twenty nineteen thirty five, that's
Speaker 1: what it came out. So those are other people with
Speaker 1: discussions and arguments that weigh against the validity of the
Speaker 1: Constitution and its application. As well, as I have mentioned before,
Speaker 1: Toward an American Revolution can be written read online also
Speaker 1: by Jerry Friesia, who I have said is a Marxist
Speaker 1: and states such, and of course that's a problem too.
Speaker 1: But his criticism of the Constitution and his support for
Speaker 1: those criticisms are valid and they should be looked into
Speaker 1: as well. So how about we call it a day.
Speaker 1: We'll come back with part four and we'll go back
Speaker 1: and take a look at the Constitution THEO. I'll give
Speaker 1: you a party shots before we close up.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the one so called founding father that had some
Speaker 3: kind of merit, obviously was Patrick Henry. And he took
Speaker 3: one look at this monstrosity to call the constitution that
Speaker 3: they came up with, and he said, amongst other things,
Speaker 3: he said it squints towards monarchy. He did not like it,
Speaker 3: and yet he went ahead and signed it. Anyway. Why
Speaker 3: did he do that?
Speaker 2: He was a lawyer, That's what I have said. Above
Speaker 2: all things, he was a lawyer. He was in the brotherhood.
Speaker 2: All right. That'll wrap it up for now. Back with
Speaker 2: part four with What's upon a Time