Once more a selection of some of the best readers' questions to do with posts on Brane Space:Q. I was keenly interested in what happened in Colorado with the recent floods. What will happen there if the government shuts down on October 1st? - Veronica L., Toronto
A. Basically, a disaster would ensue, with FEMA funds then held up and the 40-odd miles of roads, highways and bridges that were destroyed unable to be completed. More than $2b of FEMA funds had been allocated to repair key highways such as 36, which connects many for example, to jobs in Denver. Until the key highways are repaired workers have to drive north to get 60 or more miles south to Denver - adding hours to their transport each day. With bridges in disrepair, as well as key highways, whole towns such as Lyons and Jamestown will remain islands with no one able to live there because there is no way to get supplies in, or even basic services. All in all a shutdown would be much worse for citizens of Colorado than most other states - exactly because of the destruction wrought in the flood disaster.
Q. Can you give me one reason not to go to Florida and teach your fat cracker racist brother some manners? I accidentally came across his website hate blog: http://mytalkandthoughts.blogspot.com/
and it made me so angry I had to get a beer to cool off. He calls black people every stinking name in the books, like 'jungle jooks', 'black fucks' and even says he can 'smell a nigger in a woodpile' while denying it's racist. All you have to do is see the shit on his site to see this cracker is racist to the bone. As one of my homeys put it, 'the boy is inbred Southern white trash', What say you about learnin' his fat cracker ass some manners? - Davantae Hoyte, (location withheld)
Q. I can actually give you several reasons. First, what you consider "teaching manners" may not be considered so by any cops down there. Second, he has " high powered weapons all with high capacity magazine clips" if you believe his bilge (he claims he needs them, as opposed to a .38 special because he "lives near Miami Gardens which is full of gangs", sic) Third, Mike is no where near as tough as he portrays, as I have it from a sound source, the same one that exposed he never really traveled out of the country while in service, other than on a ship (USS Coronado). The guy, just out of the Marines- actually fled from a looming bar fight (where another jar head wanted to start something in Miami) leaving my source behind to fend for himself. According to the source: "He ran his ass out of there so fast he left a cloud of dust behind." Fourth, he is not really "Southern" (born in Milwaukee) nor "inbred" (which would mean I am too) but he is rather ersatz or pretend Southern. This was probably from living in Mississippi a number of years, where he actually went broke from gambling in Biloxi casinos. So why he has such a hard on for that place and the Stars n Bars is beyond me.
My basic theory is the guy somehow became or always was a necrophilous personality. See more at:
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/09/more-on-necrophilous-personality.html
My best advice, is "let thy heart not be troubled" and simply avoid his website, just as you might stay clear of any toxic waste dump full of potassium perchlorate, benzene, atrazine, lead and dioxin. While the latter chemical waste dumps can be injurious to one's physical health, there are blog sites that can be injurious to one's psychological health. Mike's so-called 'straight talk' is among them, and it's more hate talk.
Q. I am somewhat confused. In your last post on Honoring JFK's accomplishments you included Kennedy challenging the Federal Reserve control of the money supply. But when I google "JFK and Federal Reserve" or "U.S. Notes" I pull up page after page claiming its a "myth" especially from one MacAdams website and from some South Carolina professor of economics, Edward Flaherty. Flaherty claims JFK actually wanted to increase the Federal Reserve notes not reduce them. What gives? - Terrence J., Roanoke, VA
What gives is that what I call obfuscation from the "ambiguation brigade", which wants to sow ambiguity to keep people confused. (John MacAdams site is one of the known disinfo sites, btw). But ask yourself this: If Flaherty and his contingent are really correct, why the need to have U.S. Notes printed in the year 1963 at all, some 50 years after the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913? Surely, if Federal Reserve silver certificates were intended to dominate JFK would not have printed some $4,292,893,815 (e.g. about $4.2 b) in such notes in 1963.
The full statement of his Executive Order 11,110 (which is still in effect to the extent any president could re-enact it if he or she wanted- but not one ever will after the Nov. 22 lesson) is:
AMENDMENT
OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN
FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority
vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered
as follows:
JOHN
F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963
Now, like Kennedy's National Security Action Memoranda the wording is deliberately obscure and generic. Kennedy was obviously wary and the cautious wording reflects that. But read between the lines and you see - in concert with Kennedy's actions - he is giving himself permission to issue silver -based notes outside the Federal Reserve system. Why do this at all? Because the Federal Reserve brokers notes into the money supply upon their creation. This means they emerge with interest on them which is passed onto the distributing banks - which in turn pass it on to borrowers (or savers) via the 'spread' - the difference between what banks earn in interest, say for a saver, and what they will actually give him. Or the interest they earn, and the interest they charge a borrower for a loan. In this way, mammoth debt is generated. Most of the debt that exists in the private sphere is based on interest - whether from home mortgages, car loans or whatnot. Kennedy knew all this which is why he had U.S. notes created interest free.
The Executive order meant effectively that, for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there.
And so, over time, U.S. notes would gradually increase in number (like an organism conferred genetic advantage in a biological environment) and gradually make the Federal Reserve paper redundant. At that point, interest-bearing currency would be a thing of the past. Thus, the demand for Federal Reserve notes would disappear. Again, IF the skeptics are correct, why were so many non-interest bearing U.S. notes floating around in 1963 and being made in 1963? Yes, the U.S. Notes did originate earlier, in the Lincoln era, and this was because the printing of money at that time was done according to the Constitution - the U.S. Treasury as the only legal creator - and no Federal Reserve existed. When the FR came into being in 1913, then logically- if the skeptics are correct- the printing of U.S. notes would recede into the background owing to the paramountcy of the FR notes. So if one plotted a graph of notes and value printed, it ought to be something like at least a linearly decreasing function with time. But what one finds is suddenly increased gradient in 1963!
Here's another thing the skeptics don't consider: The power of perception to override reality. Author Donald Gibson, in his monograph: Battling Wall Street - The Kennedy Presidency, notes that overriding all central banks (say like the Federal Reserve in the U.S.) is the Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland. Also, as Gibson puts it, this über-Bank would (p. 72): "have little tolerance for a president who interfered with their decisions or made their interests secondary to the needs of nations or of people in general."
More critically, is how Gibson shows the internal linkage of the central banking monolith to the intelligence community (ibid.). Since these interests already had it in for Kennedy, after firing Allen Dulles (after the Bay of Pigs), and rapprochement with Castro, a putative kill order from that über-Bank is not beyond consideration. Why would such an order arise? It could have if the Bank of International Settlements, not fully understanding the intricacies of the U.S. system, really DID believe JFK was undermining its Federal Reserve link in the U.S. via issuance of U.S. Notes. This theory, while not widely held, jibes with Michael Parenti's take ('The Gangster State' essay) that Kennedy could well have been assassinated even if his affronts to embedded power, i.e. in the military, intelligence, central banking spheres, were only "imagined" or exaggerated. Thus, so fearful were the powers that be of being one-upped, that the mere misinterpretation of JFK's actions could have warranted Executive Action. These exaggerated or misinterpreted perceptions would have doubtless been reinforced by Kennedy's already documented real actions, including: his threat to U.S. Steel in the spring of '62 to cut its defense contracts if it raised steel prices, his firing of Allen Dulles after the Bay of Pigs, and his refusal to invade and bomb Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis - as well as making a secret deal with Khrushchev to remove U.S. Jupiter missiles in Turkey. And we won't even get into NSAM 263 to withdraw all personnel from Vietnam by 1965.
My point is that - even if the skeptics are right on the surface- it still doesn't mean that banking interests were not complicit in the need to see Kennedy eliminated, or to have provided the funding - including for the cover up. Is this subject complex? Yes, but that's exactly why so many of the elites don't wish Americans to examine it too carefully!
Q. In your blog post with the answers to the Caribbean algebra 2 questions, there was one, 8(b) with a simultaneous equation, but you didn't really show how to solve it. Could you provide some details? - Maurice V., Speightstown, Barbados, W. Indies
A. Yes. Recall that the two equations were set up as:
7x + 5y = 11.60
5x + 3y = 7.60
Now, we need to eliminate at least one variable, say 'y' and solve for the other one. To do this, we examine the equation set and see we can get rid of the y variable by multiplying through the top equation by 3 and the bottom by 5. This will yield:
21x + 15y = 34.80
25 x + 15y = 38
-----------------------
Now, subtract the bottom from the top and obtain:
- 4x = - 3.20
then: x = -3.20/ -4 = 0.80 or 80 cents.
We merely need to substitute this back into one of the equations to get y, i.e.
5x + 3y = 7.60
5 (0.80) + 3y = 7.60
or:
4 + 3y = 7.60
and: 3y = 7.60 - 4 = 3. 60
y = 3.60/ 3 = 1.20
Or: y = $1.20
No comments:
Post a Comment