One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

I believe that the true fundamentals of markets are unknowable by the rank and file because too many things are not as they appear.  The same can of course be said about politics.  The US government is not benevolent, the federal reserve is not honest and the US Dollar is not real money yet all of them purport to be these things.  At the end of the day, all the common man can do is ignore the rhetoric and look at the actual data. 

It is a clearly established principle with plenty of historical precedent that debasement of currency is dishonest and has the power to destroy a country.  I have predicted many times in these pages that the new leaders will at first have to behave honestly in order to get the herd to follow.  After so many years of getting tricked and screwed, the herd needs some real honesty to emerge; honesty is what will define the next leaders and the con men know this.  This principle is not new.  It is for this reason that the fate of the common man has gotten better over time. 


We used to have kings and lords with absolute power over us but over the course of a couple thousand years they have lost the ability to convince us that they were born into power; we now have to vote them into power.  They might still claim absolute power but they don't have it.  At least not in the USA where there is in fact a rifle behind every blade of grass.  The Bundy ranch incident was clear proof of this; all the king's horses and all the king's men who were armed to the teeth and had helicopters, snipers, communications gear and tractor trailers at their disposal were in fact turned back by rifles behind blades of grass (to say nothing of concrete walls).

Harry Reid, the liberal con man elitist from Nevada, called the militia who defended Bundy's property rights "domestic terrorists".   My view is that they are just patriots who have had enough of the con and are backing it up with the same level of physical force that is used to routinely rob and effectively enslave people.  So again, anyone can label anyone else whatever they want.  Terrorism and heroics were also difficult to discern from each other back in the days of the American Revolution.  George Washington was labeled a terrorist by the ruling class back then.  Patrick Henry led a small militia effort back then before widespread hostilities erupted which was not all that different from the Bundy ranch incident whereby some British overlord ("Lord" Dunmore) ordered the theft of the Virginia colony gunpowder.  Henry's "terrorists" stopped the theft of the gunpowder and the overlord paid 330 pounds recompense to Henry.  Lord Dumore then ran away in fear for his worthless life, thus abdicating royal claim and control over the colony of Virginia.

The ultimate act of conservatism and of patriotism is to release a nation from the bonds of a fraudulent money supply.  This truth brings into question the truth about ISIS.  We are told one thing by the US ministry of propaganda (AKA the Obama Administration and the Bush administration before him...) that ISIS is not just terrorists but in fact the definition of terrorism.  But reports are emerging that ISIS appears to be forming plans to return areas under its control to real money in the form of gold and silver coins.  Return to honest money is a conservative move even if done by those who are, for whatever reason, part of the Ridiculous Right. So is ISIS really a terrorist organization or just a group that has had it with being controlled by a much larger liberal occupation force?  I suspect the truth is somewhere in between, just as it usually is in these matters.