Project Failsafe – FAQ

<goshi.anunnaki@gmail.com>

George Paul Molson

PROJECT FAILSAFE

DISCONTINUED

Why Project Failsafe?

We perceive a need for an alternative to the centralized bank system currently being offered by the global elite and desire to create an opensource decentralized alternative to the now globalized Fractional Reserve Central Banking Model which has become replete everywhere except sovereign native land.

What is Project Failsafe?

An opensource framework for decentralized non-fractional banking. A failsafe system is one that keeps working if the primary system fails. Project Failsafe is here to act as a lifeboat in case instability or hyperinflation occurs in the primary bank system.

Why not Fractional Reserve Banking?

The reason money goes down in value over time (inflation) is that Banks print more, devaluing the currency already in circulation. Banks make money of of something called “The Spread” – the difference between the rate the economy denominated in a currency is growing and the rate the dollar is falling in value. For Example, if the economy is growing at 2.5%/year and money is falling at 3%/year then the spread is 2.5%+3%=5.5%/year. Inflating the money supply is the primary revenue model of banks and constitutes a stealth tax on all resources denominated in the currency being inflated and is typically the largest tax imposed on an economy after Income Tax and in some cases exceeds it. What is inequitable about this is that banks do not offer social programs like the government when it charges income tax but rather the profits from this stealth tax of inflating the money supply are returned to investors. Banks have literally been empowered to print money out of fiat nothing.

Virtually all nations now participate in fractional reserve banking and all are in debt; some quite substantially and a nation in debt is not truly sovereign but rather at the mercy of bankers who can change the policies and priorities of the nation by the terms they set when loaning money to the nation. “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws” — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild. Today’s banks are centrally owned by a handful of illuminati banking families who collectively own the majority of debt the nations owe them. Ironically, most of the money that the nations are now in debt for was Fiat (printed out of nothing, not backed by any real asset) and the practice of Fractional Reserve Banking is what deprives most nations of their true sovereignty and reduces their financial health reducing the government’s ability to look after their citizens. The situation is so severe in some developing countries that some poorer nations cannot even afford to feed their people due to the amount of bogus debt they have been issued through this iniquitous system. The reason that we describe it as such is that it the money that nations have been given that they now owe with interest was for the most part printed out of nothing so if fairness would prevail the banks could literally be repaid by simply printing unbacked paper money to pay back or cancel their unbacked paper debts. The global banking elite are currently our hidden masters.

What does this have to do with the war and global public safety?

The reason America went to war in the Middle East has to do with oil imperialism and the fact that America, as a corporation, was on the brink of insolvency due to the amount of debt they incurred since the Fed was given its charter.  Executive Order 11110 was issued by U.S. President John F. Kennedy on June 4, 1963 and that would have dismantled The Fed, however his order was never executed; instead he was. The global banking elite possesses modus operandi behind who had incentive to execute him revealing that the global banking elite is literally more powerful than the President in the event the President tries to free the nation from their disastrous influence.

What does this have to do with the PetroDollar?

The primary institutions and families that have profited from the wars in the middle east are the central bankers and do so through something called the PetroDollar. Basically, if someone wants to purchase foreign oil from the middle east they have to do so in US dollars and this artificially increases the price of the dollar. The more the US dollar is worth the greater the extent the Fed can print more money without inflation incurring. This is how American bank owners have profited from the middle eastern oil acquisitions throughout the middle-eastern wars. The most culpable group of people and those who profited the most from the middle eastern wars is a global cabal of international bankers. The reason the US dollar has not rallied as a result of the Petrodollar is that central bankers have simply printed more money at the same time that the dollar would otherwise rally which is how they cashed out their oil acquisitions in the Middle East.

Why Project Failsafe?

The for Project Failsafe is a working remedy for the centralised system we regard the Illuminati global bankers are creating for us. Basically, the established power brokers seek a centralised system where every person cannot buy or sell unless they have an account which is registered with central banks which work together to make one monopolistic global system that everyone has to be connected to either directly or indirectly in order to make a purchase or sale. This results in a system where no one can buy or sell without an account (directly or indirectly) of the central bank and was even foreseen and warned about in the Bible. Religious arguments aside we regard that such a system is not in the public interest as it undermines true choice for consumers and centralises power excessively.

Project Failsafe was a working demonstration of a non-fractional, opensource framework which multiple competing parties can run license free of charge and will act as the place to demonstrate how a working non-fractional financial institute should ideally be run. What makes us different is that we are advocating a non-fractional decentralised system in which true competition exists and consumers have true choice and privacy. We will never issue or require sub-dermal RFID chips which the global elite have already developed and could make mandatory one day, giving unchecked power to the global banking cartel and everyone in our network will have to back all deposits by real assets [ non-fractionally ].

Where will Project Failsafe operate?

Non-fractional currency goes up in value over time at the same rate as the asset backing it, leaving no room for non-fractional inflated currencies to compete with it. For this reason Project Failsafe will only operate on sovereign native land where it will not threaten the safety and viability of fractional currencies which could end in hyperinflation if faced with the threat of honest, fully-backed money. Precautions will be taken, additionally, to prevent excessive holdings from offshore holders that might threaten the safety of regions that are still subject to fractional tender. If a nation’s leaders decide, as The US founding Fathers and John F Kennedy did (and Ron Paul offered to do), that they should exit fractional reserve banking we may work with those leaders to facilitate a smooth transition off of fractional reserve banking.

What are the advantages to having an account with ANTEKK or being a Project Failsafe Participant?

Safety – because your money is backed by a real asset the currency will never experience hyperinflation.

Infrastructure – Upon agreeing to the terms herein stated you will be granted a license of our software (online and ATM) to facilitate the creation of your business. You will rebrand the interface of the website and ATM with your logo and set up business at your own privately owned domain.

Growth – Since accounts at ANTEKK / Project Failsafe Participants will be backed by a globally diversified index fund we predict that the value of our currency will grow at the same rate as the average of the global economy – currently about 4%/year. AVG will be backed by a global index fund with the liquidity of a tender.

Privacy – Accounts at different participating financial institutions using our framework will not be aggregated to a single point as is currently being done with the global illuminati framework currently being created.

I want to start a financial institution that uses your framework, what are the terms and benefits?

Terms: You may not engage in subdermal RFID implants to authenticate your customers. You must back all tenders you offer with a real asset such as Gold or most ideally a globally diversified index fund. You must respect the privacy of your customers and never surrender your private banking details except those required by law or in investigation of a suspicious account.

Benefits: You may use our opensource web and touchscreen ATM software on the terms stated above. You may integrate with one another to facilitate inter-institution transfers by connecting to our network. Other network benefits include guidance, support, and customer referral. We seek to create a healthy “ecosystem” of competing financial services companies so that consumers possess true choice and will actively offer people who sign up at ANTEKK.net the choice of easily transferring to a competing party so as to create a competitive market.

Referrals: All participants in our platform will get visibility and referrals through our network to ensure sufficient balance of power. ANTEKK will be our flagship domain but will actively and automatically allow for our customers to be transferred easily to a competing institution which can offer incentives for switching to a competing organization to ensure that we do not monopolize the market. Diverging from classical business sense we will seek to transfer existing customers to a wider array of competitors to de-monopolize the financial services sector. ANTEKK’s primary revenue model will be licensing Free Energy and our public service will be creating a competitive, non-centralized non-fractional financial services sector.

This is the reason Project Failsafe has been

DISCONTINUED

Is there an alternative to Project Failsafe?

Yes. Nationalising the revenue model of taxing the money supply through Fractional Reserve Banking may be superior to creating something new (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it). Project Failsafe exists moreso if such actions have already failed.

What will fund Project Failsafe?

Primary funding of Project Failsafe will come from the sale of Free Energy devices and although ANTEKK.net will be registered as a company, sales from Free Energy will be our primary revenue model and used to fund and facilitate the creation of a competitive market for non-fractional banking. ANTEKK will not own ATM’s or run a system unless it is in a region that does not have an existing system such as sovereign native land. Overlooking this policy could precipitate a run on the bank (if it ain’t broke don’t fix it, but do nationalise it).

Nationalisation of existing systems will be our first line of defence against the Illuminati bank cartel. Engaging in project Failsafe will not be our first recommendation to the nations but rather that they nationalise the process of printing money. Project Failsafe is a Failsafe system (what to do if this initial action fails; a lifeboat). This decision comes from the realisation that the current banking market has unduly jeopardised political stability, national sovereignty and public safety and so we seek to enter the financial services market only to create a competitive market of actors that do not adversely affect the political sovereignty or best interest of nations.

Antekk will rely on Free Energy to retain its solvency and will be an opensource solution provider to the nations and will not own or profit from the “franchises” / partners who are participating. We will make the vast majority of our profits licensing Free Energy and create an industry of financial service providers that will make a normal amount of profit, diverging from the current highly profitable, highly exploitative oligopoly of institutions engaging in and facilitating fractional reserve banking currently and only if nationalisation has not provided an adequate solution.

What do your touchscreen ATM’s look like?

Tell me more about the Global Banking Elite:

“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance” – Irish statesman John Philpot Curran

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws” — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild

“The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board as ministers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money” — Charles A. Lindbergh Sr., 1923

“Every Congressman, every Senator knows precisely what causes inflation…but can’t, support the drastic reforms to stop it [repeal of the Federal Reserve Act] because it could cost him his job.” — Robert A. Heinlein, Expanded Universe

“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it’s profits or so dependant on it’s favors, that there will be no opposition from that class.” — Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

“All the perplexities, confusions, and distresses in America arise, not from defects in the Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, as much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation.” – John Quincy Adams

“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless.” – Abraham Lincoln, from a November 21, 1864 letter to Colonel William F. Elkins

 “Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But, if you want to continue to be the slave of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit.” – Sir Josiah Stamp, President, Bank of England (2nd richest man in England)

 “By this means government may secretly and unobserved, confiscate the wealth of the people, and not one man in a million will detect the theft.” – Lord John Maynard Keynes, “Economic Consequences of Peace”

 “Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its powers, but the truth is that the Federal Reserve System has usurped the government. It controls everything in congress and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will.” – Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency

 “For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But he didn’t. Most of his thoughts were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the Council on Foreign Relations One World Money Group. The United Nations is but a long range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power. The One-World government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.” – Curtis Dall, Son-in-Law of F.D.R., 1936

 “History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.” – James Madison

 “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power of money should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson

“If all the bank loans were paid up, no one would have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of currency or coin in circulation. This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial banks for our money. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money, we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp upon the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible – but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it is widely understood and the defects remedied very soon.” – Robert H. Hemphill, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

 “In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the ‘hidden’ confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.” – Alan Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom

“Power concedes nothing without demand.” – Frederick Douglass

“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government, all under their control. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.” – Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976

“The eyes of our citizens are not sufficiently open to the true cause of our distress. They ascribe them to everything but their true cause, the banking system; a system which if it could do good in any form is yet so certain of leading to abuse as to be utterly incompatible with the public safety and prosperity. The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson

“The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International bankers.” – Congressman Louis T. McFadden (Rep. Pa)

 “The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on it’s favors, that there will be no opposition from either class.” – Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

“The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight. We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence…” – John F. Kennedy at Columbia University, 1963

“The Illuminati bankers rule the world through debt, which is money they create out of nothing. They need world government to ensure no country defaults or tries to overthrow them. As long as private bankers, instead of governments, create money the human race is doomed. These bankers and their allies have bought everything and everyone.” – Henry Makow

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented.” – Major L.B.Angus

 “The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it.” – John Kenneth Galbraith, in his book “Money: Whence It Came, Where It Went”, 1975

“The Federal Reserve is answerable to no one.” – Ronald Reagan

“The Great Depression was not accidental, it was a carefully contrived occurrence. The international Bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all.” – Louis McFadden  

“The only thing that is neccessary for evil to triumph is for men of good will to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke

Banksters – Do Not Empower to Travel beyond the light-speed framework

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Declaration of Sovereignty – Oct 8, 2014

POA Court <poacourt@peterborough.ca>

Wed, Oct 8, 2014 5:15 AM

 

DECLARATION OF SOVEREIGNTY

 

I, Goshi Anunnaki, unsigned agent of the legal title GEORGE PAUL MOLSON, declare myself a sovereign bound only by the single statute of lawfulness within the constraints of the human condition effective when the Moon enters the penumbra of the Earth tomorrow night on This Planet (approximately now).

This decision comes from a recognition that I do not have the means to comply with a large list of statutes that no common man among us could be aware of all, and I have already been issued a ticket for which I did not even know the existence of 4/5 statutes in question, nor do I believe that they should exist, and so would like to be transparent in my inability to comply with all the statutes of the state, but rather the single statute of lawfulness that is written upon our heart.

I offer you a document for your notarization of my Shebala (Starship) Tekknology and my formal endorsement for the indigenous people of all Kanatas (Globally) to build and use for personal or public use within their cultures. This formal declaration is for the payment of reparations owing due to the uncorrected errors of our forefathers. Please accept it in absence of the unlawful portion of the tickets you have issued me, as I do not seek to finance unlawful statutes, but will more than willingly offer you something of much greater value as it addresses the unpaid debts of the Financial Entity occupying the land that I was born on. I do not intend to waive any future patent rights by virtue of sharing this technology with you, but rather am giving it to you to notarize and disclose to the indigenous people within Canada.

-Goshi Anunnaki

<goshi.anunnaki@gmail.com>
Canada (The Occupation), Planet Earth

P.S. Several Months ago I requested and was denied a single folder of notarization for both my Patent and for the Key to the City (see The Brock Rock) at the Courthouse, the Police station, and City Hall… What law is there when no government agency is willing to keep any records but their own?

The “First Principles” Libertarian Model

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Originally Posted October 14, 2008 — George Molson

This is a continuation of The Cause of Inequality in “Free-Market” Capitalism

The American Heritage Dictionary defines a libertarian as follows:

“One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state”

Put plainly, libertarianism is a school of thought that values civil liberties and free markets as opposed to government intervention on both personal and economic issues, and demands that governments and businesses be held responsible for all major externalities that they create. Following these principals I would like to put forward that responsible government should address any externality that it is responsible for creating, including those resulting from the creation of private property entitlements. This will surely come as a major divergence from the sentiments of many “classical” libertarians who rightly acknowledge private property as a basic personal freedom, however, I strongly maintain that in order to stay true to libertarianism’s primary emphasis of individual rights, we must be sure to uphold the rights of everyone.

To avoid confusion with the views of many other libertarians who may disagree with this model that I am putting forward, I would like to call this model the ‘first principles libertarian model’, as it returns to the first principals of civil liberties and government accountability for all externalities that it creates. For the purpose of this paper I will refer to traditional libertarianism that offers no remedy for the externalities created by private property entitlements as ‘classical’ libertarianism.  It should be pointed out that the first principles model is also consistent with historical inequalities; historically land was held in commons and great inequality was created as the commons were enclosed. It is also true that, in most cases, little or no compensation was offered for the lost equity in land as it was privatized, and the modern welfare state arose only later out of the recognition of the inhumane inequality that resulted.

I would like to offer that the first principles model has the potential to address the major criticism of classical libertarianism, namely that if brought to its logical ends and all government taxes except for the military were eliminated, and a purely laissez-faire economic model was adopted, income disparities would rise well above current levels, countless people would starve, crime would go out of control, and civil society would cease to function.

There are several places in the world which bear a greater similitude to the classical libertarian economic model than most developed nations. They are countries where taxes are significantly lower and there are few government sponsored social programs, and it has consistently resulted in poorly educated populaces, tremendous economic disparity, and heavily armed gated communities for the rich while many people live in squalor. It did work in America while they had free land to give out, however excessive economic inequality arose in subsequent generations and the modern welfare state was demanded. I regard that if the system had paid it’s private property externalities the residual wage it would have created would have been a superior solution.

Metabolic Thresholds – The Importance of Dose & Schedule

Rat poison is Warfarin, so what benefit could it be to humans? At the correct dose and schedule it can treat blood clots and acts as a blood thinner beneficially.

From Wikipedia:

Warfarin, sold under the brand name Coumadin among others,^[1] is a medication that is used as an anticoagulant (blood thinner).^[4] It is commonly used to treat blood clots such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and to prevent stroke in people who have atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease or artificial heart valves.^[4]

What is of more relevance is that almost all substances with an active ingredient have the same properties to a varying degree. In the same way if you were to drink half a glass of wine daily it would probably be advantageous to your health as the body can metabolise alcohol at a low dose, but take too much quickly and it acts as a toxin. Staying below the metabolic rate can turn vice into virtue in terms of it’s effect on the body.

Before 1914 in America all drugs were allowed and when current drug policies were recommended the medical establishment responded by explaining that this was an attack on generic [ patent expired ] medicine. It was already established that cocaine-hydro-chloride was the most effective treatment against melancholia (now known as depression).

If you’re wondering why the “sky did not fall” when these drugs were legal, it’s because when something is legal it’s issuer is liable and this helps to ensures that providers only sell drugs within their metabolic threshold and that accurate information is provided (if the correct framework is in place).

Additionally at the correct dose and schedule receptor loss was not experienced which is what creates the debilitating side-effects if taken at a higher, toxic dose. Metabolic rates were issued in accordance with BMI [ Body Mass Index ] and metabolic threshold was determined by multi-regression, measuring long-term receptor loss. What this plot and line of best fit established is that receptors only denature when a toxic dose is reached.

Other medications that were used before prohibition of drugs also reveal:

• LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamide) at low dose increases neuro-plasticity (the brains ability to learn new information) and is only a hallucinogen at a dose orders of magnitude higher than what is needed to improve memory

• Cocaine-Hydrochloride at a low dose (that takes about a month to accumulate in the human body) is an effective antidepressant,  performance enhancer (increases memory, focus, drive, and hand-eye coordination and performance in sports) and was included at a dose of 9mg / bottle in Coca-Cola for nearly a century.

• A low but regularly administered dose of Heroin (Diamorphine) helped patients recover faster from emotional pain, whereas morphine was found to be more effective for physical pain. It was widely used for patients who were experiencing bereavement before prohibition. The metric used to determine its proficiency was days absence from work after bereavement of spouse or child. I think that’s about as objective a metric as can be used.
  
• Methamphetamine  [ sold as brand name NoBull™ and was available in any quantity before prohibition; Cattle Tranquilliser added to water ] is a chemical compound that binds to and activates both sigma receptor subtypes, σ1 and σ2, in the brain and like it’s chemical cousin Methylphenidate (Ritalin) blocks the dopamine transporter resulting in accumulation of FOSB if taken above the metabolic rate which determines its toxicity. Adjusted to the correct potency it also treats ADD and was used for the same purpose before it’s more newly patented alternative Methylphenidate (Ritalin) became the approved treatment (formerly Methamphetamine was used because it was more effective and had less side effects adjusted for efficacy but its also true that it was used far less and was not as heavily marketed). Dose and schedule for both Meth’s determine toxicity and both can be taken without major long term side effects if taken below the metabolic rate and act as a stimulant increasing concentration. It appears that the one with an active patent received more political support and the generic got outlawed. Can you guess why?

Current policy is possessed by a black and white thinking fallacy that drugs are either good or bad rather than determining at what dose and for what condition to determine what is advisable. It’s kind of like asking whether shiny metal objects are good or evil – more needs to be known before we can establish what would constitute sound discernment.

How did we get into this mess? There is a clinically bad interaction between money and medicine in the current system.

<update>

 

I did my research and came to a similar conclusion several years ago. It’s amazing to see such videos come into being and gives me hope that this planet is still capable of being objective in some amount.

– George

George Molson
Founder of ANTEKK

</update>

Cracks Along the Seams

Originally posted October 15, 2008 — George Molson

Western civilization may seem to be in a great position of dominance but cracks along the seams are starting to emerge. The growing tension between Western nations and many middle eastern countries should be seen as an early warning that our intervention is not always welcomed (to say the least). Our modern day bureaucracies have become corrupt and now pay little more than lip service to the ideals of liberty and freedom that have defined our founding constitutions. Growing prison populations, often for victimless crimes are a tremendous eyesore to the ideals of freedom and liberty. Overextention of intellectual property, and government created monopolies are impeding innovation and missing key opportunities to improve the way that information is disseminated globally, and is reducing the scope of what our democracy could be. Drastic environmental destruction is taxing our biosphere to levels that are most likely unsustainable, creating an environmental debt that we are leaving to future generations. Falling real wages for most people, and the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, not just within Western nations but globally are early warning signs of systemic problems with the prevailing economic paradigm, and left to its own devices will result in growing tensions between economic classes. Government and corporate collusion has given birth to the now prevalent fractional reserve banking system which, with the endorsement of the IMF, has been reproduced globally, and opens up economies to currency failures while depleting the reserves that define the real value of any promissory note.

It’s time for the West to return to the age-less wisdom of the principles of self-ownership, responsibility and personal liberty. They are not only values that have, at times, defined us, but will sustain us in the future by offering pragmatic solutions that can be realistically implemented.

Intellectual Property, Telecommunications and the Artificial scarcity of Wireless Bandwidth

Originally posted October 15, 2008 — George Molson

For almost 40 years the sole phone company in America offered nothing but a black telephone. This is because Bell Telephone was a government protected monopoly. The technology required to create a wireless telephone network was experimented with by Nikola Tesla as early as 1900, and the technology to implement a wireless telephone network existed shortly thereafter but could not be implemented due to the government enforced monopoly resulting from the very broadly defined patent on the phone. This is an example of how the overextension of intellectual property rights, and excess government intervention is capable of blocking critical developments in society. The lesson here is that while intellectual property rights can offer incentives for greater research and development, the overextension of intellectual property rights can be an impediment to innovation. Care should be taken to ensure that intellectual property rights do not over extend their value to society.

Even in today’s supposedly competitive telecommunications market, there exists a tremendous potential to implement policies that would radically advance the internet, telecommunications, and the method of mass media dissemination. This potential lies in opening up the wireless bandwidth, a resource that is over 90% unutilized and is kept artificially scarce in virtually every nation as a result of government intervention. If even an additional 5% of the wireless bandwidth was opened freely it would almost instantly open the option for very affordable (by today’s standards) high-bandwidth wireless internet access to become ubiquitous. Such a move would open the possibility for anyone to access almost unlimited DVD-quality television programming via the internet at a very low cost, and  nearly unlimited phone bandwidth would drop the cost of making phone calls (even globally over the internet) to being almost free. Moreover, since anyone could create their own internet radio station or television station, it would create a dramatic democratization of the media and revolutionize the nature of the internet. It should be noted that some of these measures are already being realized to a smaller extent, however the cost of wireless internet bandwidth is still far too high to be a viable replacement for cable TV, and cell phone bandwidth is absurdly overpriced given the availability of unallocated wireless spectra. Such a move would deeply cut into the profit margins of the major media providers and telecoms who are heavily dependent on the artificial scarcity of bandwidth, and its resulting effect of raising the cost of advertising space today.

Several explanations of why governments may be so reluctant to open the wireless spectrum exist. The best that I have heard is that keeping bandwidth artificially scarce creates monopolies that generate tremendous profit due to the lack of true competition. These monopolies pay large sums of taxes to governments, making it counter-productive for governments to cut off their own source of revenue. In this sense governments act in their own self-interest, even against the interest of the public, of which it is their supposed purpose to serve. Another reason that governments may be reluctant to open the wireless spectrum is that it would create a radical decentralization of the media, making it harder to control. In both cases opening up the wireless spectrum would bring tremendous benefits to the public, both economically and in providing easier access to the media. If it is true that “freedom of the press belongs to those who own one”, then it is also true that democratization of the media would hold broad implications in favour of democracy. For example, it would become far easier for many small groups to form their own media outlets and access a very large (global) audience with far fewer barriers of entry.

1974 Medical Study – Cannabis Cures Cancer

&nbsp;

Injecting mice with lung cancer with cannabinoids retarded tumor growth. The effect was dose dependent.

What Your Government Knows About Cannabis And Cancer — And Isn’t Telling You

&nbsp;

The National Cancer Institute did a follow up study in 1975:

J Natl Cancer Inst. 1975 Sep;55(3):597-602.

Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids.

Munson AE, Harris LS, Friedman MA, Dewey WL, Carchman RA.

Abstract

Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta9-THC), delta8-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta8-THC), and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD). Animals treated for 10 consecutive days with delta9-THC, beginning the day after tumor implantation, demonstrated a dose-dependent action of retarded tumor growth. Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with delta8-THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size. CBD showed no inhibitory effect on tumor growth at 14, 21, or 28 days. Delta9-THC, delta8-THC, and CBN increased the mean survival time (36% at 100 mg/kg, 25% at 200 mg/kg, and 27% at 50 mg/kg, respectively), whereas CBD did not. Delta9-THC administered orally daily until death in doses of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg did not increase the life-spans of (C57BL/6 times DBA/2)F1 (BDF1) mice hosting the L1210 murine leukemia. However, delta9-THC administered daily for 10 days significantly inhibited Friend leukemia virus-induced splenomegaly by 71% at 200 mg/kg as compared to 90.2% for actinomycin D. Experiments with bone marrow and isolated Lewis lung cells incubated in vitro with delta9-THC and delta8-THC showed a dose-dependent (10(-4)-10(-7)) inhibition (80-20%, respectively) of tritiated thymidine and 14C-uridine uptake into these cells. CBD was active only in high concentrations (10(-4)).

PMID:

1159836

Some people have trouble reading medical literature. Here’s what they are saying:

Lung cancer growth decreased when mice were fed: delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta9-THC), delta8-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta8-THC), and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD)

After 10 days the tumors growth slowed down depending on dose given. After 20 days primary tumor size decreased.

Cannibinoids were effective in treating one type of leukemia (friend) but not another (murine leukemia)

Verify that what I am saying is true:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1159836

See Also:

https://cannabisparalaeducacion.org/medicina/medical-college-of-virginia-thc-study-1974/

Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Review of the Scientific Literature.

Famous Libertarian Quotes

Ron Paul the Righteous

Originally Published October 15, 2008 — George Molson

“Libertarianism is a philosophy. The basic premise of libertarianism is that each individual should be free to do as he or she pleases so long as he or she does not harm others. In the libertarian view, societies and governments infringe on individual liberties whenever they tax wealth, create penalties for victimless crimes, or otherwise attempt to control or regulate individual conduct which harms or benefits no one except the individual who engages in it.”
– definition written by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service

“In popular terminology, a libertarian is the opposite of an authoritarian. Strictly speaking, a libertarian is one who rejects the idea of using violence or the threat of violence — legal or illegal — to impose his will or viewpoint upon any peaceful person. Generally speaking, a libertarian is one who wants to be governed far less than he is today.”
– Dean Russell, Foundation for Economic Education, 1955

“Libertarianism is, as the name implies, the belief in liberty. Libertarians believe that each person owns his own life and property, and has the right to make his own choices as to how he lives his life – as long as he simply respects the same right of others to do the same.”
– Sharon Harris, President, Advocates for Self-Government

“Libertarianism is what you probably already believe: Libertarian values are American values. Libertarianism is America’s heritage of liberty, patriotism and honest work to build a future for your family. It’s the idea that being free and independent is a great way to live. That each of us is a unique individual, with great potential. That you own yourself, and that you have the right to decide what’s best for you. Americans of all races and creeds built a great and prosperous country with these libertarian ideals. Let’s use them to build America’s future.”
– David Bergland, 1984 Libertarian Party presidential candidate and author of Libertarianism in One Lesson

“Free minds and free markets.”
– slogan of Reason magazine, a prominent Libertarian publication

“As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives, and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power.”
– from the Preamble to the Libertarian Party Platform

“Libertarians are self-governors in both personal and economic matters. They believe government’s only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. Libertarians value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic and social diversity.”
– Carole Ann Rand, Board of Directors, Advocates for Self-Government

Abolishing Corporate Welfare

 

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Originally Published October 15, 2008 — George Molson

While many right-wing politicians are eager to point fingers at welfare recipients as a major cause of high government taxation, they fail to acknowledge that corporate welfare, in most nations, exceeds social spending. Abolishing corporate welfare would free up vast amounts of resources while creating a more even playing field for businesses. In fact, whenever a government provides funding to one corporation over another, they give the recipient of the subsidy an asymmetric advantage over their competitors. New initiatives that serve the interest of the public and provide above market advantage potential compared to existing service are the programs that are lawful for politicians to fund.

Often these subsidies are offered on the presupposition of creating jobs or improving labour rates, however, given that corporations are primarily accountable to their investors (by law), subsidies are more often returned to investors and high-ranking officers in the companies who possess large salaries and stock-options. Corporate welfare goes hand in hand with party donations, corruption and cronyism. Consequently most major political parties who, for the most part, are heavily dependent on soft-money donations from corporations and international investors, are in a position of great conflict of interest. The complete abolishment of corporate soft-money donations (more commonly known as “bribes”) would restore accountability and open up the political process to many politicians who currently receive fewer corporate donations but still offer great potential as candidates.

It could also be argued that, in an environment where so much of a candidate’s success is tied to the success of their (mostly) corporate donations, a true democracy based on the principle of one-person-one-vote cannot be achieved, but rather that candidates will have to alter their agendas to fit the demands of their corporate funders in order to compete with their other more highly funded rivals who receive backing by many of the same corporate donors. A libertarian approach favours the complete abolition of corporate welfare, a position that neither left-wing or right-wing parties have been willing to adopt to date.

Free Mobility of People and Capital

Originally posted October 15, 2008 — George Molson

“Free Trade” is nothing more than a politically correct term for the absence of taxes, tariffs and government intervention. Several free trade agreements such as NAFTA have offered free trade as a concession to transnational corporations, and by virtue of doing so eroded the portion of the tax base that was paid by corporations thereby forcing the government to raise taxes on labor or impose sales taxes that are ultimately paid by consumers. Consequently, whenever one hears the term “free trade”, the first question one must ask is, “free trade for who?” Overall it can be said that more free trade for cross-national-corporations (CNC’s) has meant less free trade for individuals. It is quite reasonable to ask why corporations are now being offered free trade at a point that individuals are taxed more than ever. Moreover, free trade of capital has not been matched with free mobility of people, giving corporations an asymmetric advantage over workers who are less mobile as a result of government intervention in the form of maintaining borders.

A libertarian vantage point mandates both free mobility of people and capital, however it should be pointed out that current policy only offers free mobility of capital. Free mobility of people would offer a mechanism for a global equalization of wages, and offer a valuable new freedom to people everywhere: the freedom to live and work wherever they please. While it is true that suddenly opening borders to unfettered immigration would overwhelm the infrastructures of many (mostly developed) nations, it should be noted that if free mobility of people were practiced historically it would have resulted in a more equal distribution of wealth globally thereby reducing the sudden impact of opening borders currently. Moreover, free mobility of people would offer a peaceful method of keeping governments accountable as people would tend to migrate away from nations who have governments that are unaccountable to their people. The reluctance to embrace free mobility of people is also deeply rooted in discrimination that goes unrecognized under the guise of nationality; racism is discrimination based on race, sexism is discrimination based on gender, nationalism is nothing but discrimination based on nationality. If we are to pay more than lip service to the ideal of equality we must be willing to challenge the notion that it is justified to treat people differently simply because of where they happened to be born, a factor that not a single person alive has had a choice in.

Posted in Economics, Politics & Ethics, Strategic Thinking.

 Americo, CAFTA, Cross National Corporations, Free Trade, Global Mobility, Libertarian, NAFTA