Legal Reality

Bigger text (+) | Smaller text (-)
"It´s the Interest, Stupid! Why Bankers Rule the World"
It´s the Interest, Stupid! -- Really?! Is that so?!

9 November A.D. 2014

The title for the piece that is forwarded, thus also the subject line of the email received here, is this: "It´s the Interest, Stupid! Why Bankers Rule The World"  (See link below.)

Clearly, by changing that subject line for this note, this author directly challenges that concept, position, and assertion.

It´s not the interest.

Interest plays a part. Yes. But that is in no way "the" reason the bankers rule the world, if we even adopt the premise that the bankers do, in fact, rule the world.

Some of these financial article authors are very smart people, when it comes to certain things. The author of the piece below also happens to be an attorney and the present president of the Public Banking Institute.

But, either she really just doesn´t get it, or she´s part of the programme to keep the obvious undiscussed.

It´s not the interest.

It´s not the interest.

It´s not the interest.

Yes, even from Scripture we learn that the creditor controls/owns the debtor, and that it´s better to be neither one, but if one is going to enter into one of those two rolls, be the creditor, not the debtor. So, yes, there are powerful legal forces that apply against the debtor, and yes the debt burden is part of the problem.

But ...

That´s not "the" source of the power being exercised by the international banking cartel (which controls that part of the world in which we live, yes, but, fortunately not the world!).

We can talk about electronically pre-programmed elections.

We can talk about extortion and threats of murder. (How many political murders happen every year?)

We can talk about ownership of, thus editorial control over, all popular "news" sources, whether in print or the electronic type (internet, radio, tv, etc.).

But all that´s pure cover story, as well.

The interest plays a part, yes, but the interest is something over which no individual has any direct control; hence, a primary reason for promoting that as "the" cause is to advance the "programme´s message:" "You have no control."

The pre-programmed voting booths/machines play their part, but, so far, there´s been no successful lawsuit to get that practice stopped, and where there is a measure of control where the individual may seek a judicial remedy, no such remedy has yet appeared; hence, more of the, "You have no control" message.

Extortion and threats of murder (promoted by the actual events of murder; S-11, Murrah Building bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, the DC Madame´s case is one coming instantly to mind, and Vince Foster, and Sec. Brown, and now this ambassador fellow, as just a distant glimpse at the tip of the iceberg), are expected to be very powerful control mechanisms. As one reflects on that angle, one tends to realize, sooner or later, that the entire concept of "representation of the people" has long since been compromised by dark forces. To reflect on this angle of things, at all, is to come to the conclusion, "You have no control."

As for the "main stream media," there´s been information out for decades as to their back-room agendas and the reality that what they "report" is in support of the programme´s agenda rather than even thinking about reporting that which would exactly expose the programme or its present political shenanigans and the operatives in that activity as so blatantly anti-America. Why there´s still such apparent economic support in the marketplace for those plainly compromised sources of "information" is a very good question. Said very plainly, since we know they´re lying to us, every hour of every day, promoting their agenda rather than serving as the "watch dog" over "government," why are we still supporting it?

Either way on that, as we get the daily dose of pro-(Nazi-communo-fascist) government propaganda, huge in that daily/hourly message, which no doubt still regularly includes the "circus" reports of how this person or that person died in such a way as to bolster the message, "You have no control," we´re reminded in direct and subtle ways of the general theme: "You have no control." You have no control over your life, and you have no control over the media reminding you daily that you have no control over your life. With the total "censorship" control over that which is sent via email or posted to the net, which is triggered when certain terms appear in the discussion, certain things are not even allowed circulated via those forms of communications so as to give students of this issue or that topic or event the benefit of that perspective, confirming, in yet that additional way, "You have no control."

So, to say that none of that matters, is of course, to miss those points. Therefore, one can´t look at this system as say that "interest" has no cause in the problem. Of course it does.

But, this author is here to confirm the reality that the interest is in no way "the" cause. Never has been; never will be.

Part of the problem? Sure. Yes. Of course.

But, "the" problem??!

To say that interest is "the" problem is just one more way to promote the "You have no control" programme.

The reality is that we have 100% control over that programme. We´ve simply been threatened and coerced and extorted and otherwise talked out of using it. There´s all kinds of control, but if we´re "programmed" in our thinking to accept that there really is no control, we stop looking for that which is 100% within our control. (Think "Sun Tsu.")

Why do bankers rule the world?

Before getting to that, and the regular readers of these notes already know what´s coming, note that the question is basically a bragging point. From the "banking industry" attorney, who really is a very smart individual, comes this "message:" "You have no control -- the bankers rule the world!"

So, before we get into answering the question, we need to realize that even the question promotes the programme. The question isn´t, "Do the bankers rule the world?" It´s "Why?" It´s "How did they get to the position of ruling the world?" Thus, every time one encounters this line of analysis, one encounters the "programme´s message "You have no control."

Why do bankers rule the world?

If that´s true, and for practical purposes of those of us in "the States," as we are still prone to think about it, it is true for all practical purposes, then there´s one and only one way that could ever in a million years possibly happen, this side, of course, of the traditional "bullets, bombs, blades, and blood" activity known best by the name War, conducted, successfully, in the banks´ names under the banks´ flags, which formal War by the banks in the banks´ names under the banks´ flags has not (yet) occurred. That leaves one and only one mechanism. That mechanism is revealed by understanding that which seems obvious and simple enough to understand as to how any bank operates in any marketplace. How does any bank operate in any marketplace? By agreement. So, if it´s true that the banks rule the world, and for our practical purposes, that concept is close enough, for they definitely rule in "our" world here in "the States," then they got into that position one and only one way: those ruled by them have agreed to that relationship, commercially, one agreement at a time.

Why do bankers rule the world?

Because "federal" means "federal."

What does "federal" mean? It doesn´t mean "national," and it most certainly doesn´t mean "constitutional." If we´re talking about independent states interacting among themselves, then "federal" applies. In that context, "federal" means "by compact" or "by treaty."

If we´re talking about how a governmental system interacts with those it purports to exist to "serve," then, again, the term "federal" may very well apply. In that context, "federal" means "by agreement."

Why do bankers rule [our] world?

Because the law, even in "this state," fully recognizes the "right (not) to contract." Those who agree to be ruled by the bankers will be. It´s that simple.

So, if we´re looking at the "interest," and if all we´re looking at is the "interest," then we´ve just jumped over all the threshold questions and gone way to the end of the line of activity that involves banking institutions, one institution in particular. Many will "buy" the notion that interest is "the" reason, accept that they have "no control" in the matter, and "give up." This is Sun Tsu in brilliant operation. Those who "give up" because they actually believe the "programme´s" message of, "You have no control," have already been defeated.

A "federal" system operates "federally." That means, "by agreement."

But, there´s one more aspect of that to keep firmly in mind: "choice of law."

If we had a legit system, where "bankers" followed God´s Laws, because the people didn´t tolerate any alternative, then that which would circulate generally as Currency would be honest weights and measures, i.e., gold and silver Coin. The system that circulates honest weights and measures as the Currency is the system that is saying, "Our choice of law is the Law of the Land" (for all commercial activity that is normally conducted on the land, i.e., "all" domestic commercial activity).

In the illegitimate systems, where "bankers" are the gods, and who thereby set the laws, because the people love to deny and defy God, rebelliously, incessantly, then that which circulates generally as "currency" is "funny money," i.e., "debt instruments" lent out at interest. The system that circulates "debt instruments" as its "currency" is the system that says, "Our choice of law is the Law of the Sea," even for all commercial activity that would otherwise be treated under the Law of the Land, i.e., including "all" domestic commercial activity.

Thus, if the bankers rule the world, it´s because they´ve been "voted in," not collectively, but rather individually, by every transaction that uses "their" "funny money." With the use of "their" "funny money" comes the vote for "their" "choice of law."

No one can chose the "choice of law" for someone else. "Choice of law" is a very individualized decision.

No one can compel the choice of law. Why is it called "choice" of law? Because, to the genuine amazement of some, it´s a choice!

The "Liberty Dollar" champion, von Nothaus, was correct in one thing: we do have a choice regarding our medium of exchange. His counterfeits, though, aren´t "the" answer, because why? Because their "counterfeits."

What distinguishes his "Liberty Dollar" from generic silver rounds, which are transacted with and for every day without a hitch? What´s the difference? The difference is the term and the symbol for "dollar."

What von Nothaus did, despite very competent advice from very, very early on in his efforts, was "mix and match" the competing choices of law. Whether he realizes it or not, what he did was insist on trying to define, with his coins, the "weight" for the "dollar" and yet still use that Law of the Land concept for commercial activity in the "place" called "this state." The "place" called "this state" is a God-less, constitution-free, maritime commercial zone, and those who use "funny money" enter "this state" every time they use that "funny money." How did he keep insisting on trying to define "dollar" in terms of a weight? He kept associating a weight, measured in terms of troy ounces of fine silver, with the concept, label, term, symbol of "dollar." He mixed and matched choices of law. THAT was/is the problem. "Counterfeit" is simply the cover-story.

Why was he labeled as a "terrorist?" That gets well into the systemic understanding of the differences between the "banker´s world" and God´s world. If von Nothaus is properly, legitimately, "lawfully" characterized as a "terrorist," then it´ll be because what he was actually trying to do, even though this author greatly doubts this thought ever entered into von Nothaus´s mind, was overthrow the banker´s world and its present "governmental" system.
How do we get there? By understanding the differences in "choice of law" and what does and doesn´t "mix and match" between them. Without realizing that a "choice of law" even exists, a situation in which von Nothaus finds himself in terrific and plentiful company, he was encouraging people to transact in "this state" but with "honest weights and measures." See, that can be viewed as an "act of war." (Going the other way, is as well, i.e., the sucking out of general circulation of the last vestiges of honest weights and measures, so as to change the foundational "choice of law," is an act of war. It´s just not a war conducted by the traditional "bullets, bombs, blades, and blood" manner or means.)

To avoid that war, we simply have to know the differences well enough to apply them competently.

In the "place" called "this state," "dollar" is not defined, and that´s not accidental. The term "money" is defined. We can find a definition of "money" in every version of the "Uniform Commercial Code." But "dollar" is nowhere defined. What that means is that "dollar" is defined on a per-transaction basis. The parties to each transaction decide what "dollar" means. And, for so long as "dollar" is not defined as a weight measured in terms of grains of fine silver, that "dollar" may be used in "this state" for all (legal) purposes. (Using it for illegal purposes does nothing but bring the "choice of law" associated with that medium of exchange in on that transaction.)

Thus, where anyone intends to try to define "dollar" as a weight, especially a weight measured in terms of silver, one needs to get approval of the Treasury first, because they´re the only ones authorized in "this state" to mix and match the two foundational choices of law. Anyone else who does that is going to get clobbered, in the very same way that von Nothaus has.

The silver isn´t the problem. The association in one coin of (A) "dollar," whether by symbol or term, or both as in the case with the "Liberty Dollar," with (B) a weight measured in terms of "troy ounce(s) fine silver" is the problem.

If we presume the validity of the presumption in the question, i.e., if we presume that the bankers do rule the world (at least that part of it in which we find ourselves), and if we´re in "the States," it´s a valid presumption, practically speaking, then we do well to ask the question "How?", which is what the banking attorney author asks in her piece below. How did that happen? It´s a terrific question, and one that some can´t rest without understanding the answer. But, bless her brilliant mind, she´s either clueless or expects her audience to be (or both). The answer is in no way "the interest." How absurd! "The" answer is this: one transaction at a time, using "their" "funny money," i.e., by agreeing to the bank´s (preferred) choice of law.

It´s not the interest; it´s the choice of law.

To use their "funny money" is to vote for their "choice of law." To use their "credit" system is to use their "funny money," which is to vote for their "choice of law."

The medium of exchange is the "best evidence" of the choice of law for that transaction. Thus, in our present situation, a transaction using "dollars" is a transaction that votes for more control by the international banking cartel, and a transaction using anything else, whether troy ounces fine silver or barter or anything but "dollars," as such, is a transaction that votes for less control by the international banking cartel.

To "vote out" the banking cartel from this nation´s life, completely, first there´s got to be a disuse of "dollar" as a description of the medium of exchange and a disuse of "funny money," which is a per transaction decision, and then the term "dollar" has to be defined, nationally and in each STATE, which would then stand a chance of again being a State, as a weight measured in terms of grains of fine silver. Just understand that it´s economic suicide to define "dollar" as something legit where 99.9% of the marketplace is still addicted to "dollars." Turning the marketplace into "crime, inc." isn´t a (good) solution. First, the marketplace must be drained of "dollars." That´s not going to happen overnight, and it´s not something that will happen by depending on someone else to do something. Everyone interested has to commit to that goal and then put that into action every day. THEN, it´ll be sensible to define the unit of account in terms of a weight measured in terms of grains of fine silver.

Where the People lead, the "leaders" will follow.

How does that understanding change the message of "You have no control?"

For those who have already given up, it won´t change a thing. It´ll just give those who have already given up another excuse for having already given up.

For those who are still interested in making a difference, i.e., for voting for something, someone, other than stooges bought and paid for (one way or another) by the international banking cartel, there are still ways to make that difference, and it´ll start with finding ways to trade with those small businesses that provide quality goods and services and who accept honest weights and measures in exchange for those quality goods and services.

If it´s not enough to realize that honest weights and measures is what is consistent with God´s Laws (the origin of the Common Law is Scripture), then maybe a bit more self-ish and personal view will start to work. Every transaction using "funny money" is another vote, one for each "dollar," in fact, in favor of more "interest," more controlled "elections," more controlled "officeholders" no matter what may be the case before entering in upon such elected offices, and more of the slide into tyrannical despotism, with foreigners calling the shots, i.e., being the tyrannical despot.

There´s nothing special about silver. If one has something else to trade in barter, that´ll work just fine, as well. Anything but "funny money" is going to work just fine, so long as the "choice of law" of the transaction isn´t that of the "place" called "this state." If the transaction is based, in any way, on "dollars," then the transaction is also sucked up into the "choice of law" of the "place" called "this state."

The bankers are most certainly not "in charge" as a result of their line of work, or the apparent amount of "profit" generated. It´s not the existence of "funny money." It´s most certainly not the interest (alone). It´s the choice of law that is associated with each and every transaction that uses their "funny money." The "default" "choice of law" for everything in "the States" right now is the banker´s choice of law. They got there by taking over the medium of exchange. Once that was accomplished, then they started rewriting the laws to their favor and benefit. And, here we are today. That´s how they ended up in their position of control. They´ve been working at that since at least 1965 (well, 1933, really, under FDR; well, 1913, really, when the banks came in, along with their "money supply control" mechanism called "income tax;" well, 1787, really, when the banking interests successfully scuttled the would-be "constitution"), and that´s not going to change back over night. Neither will they just roll over when pressed on this point. They´ve killed, murdered, massacred, a lot of (innocent) people to get what they have. But, what is that position? All they can do, really, is propose the agreements. They can never compel anyone to enter into those proposed agreements. Ever.

It´s "your" country, and "your" life. No one else can live it for you. Those who prefer tyrannical, law-less despotism will want to change nothing. Just keep doing what the system says to do, and don´t ask any questions. Be comfortable and let "santa clause government" take care of you. Those who prefer to be loose from tyrannical, law-less despotism will need first to become individually self-governed. Where the party in the mirror is self-governed, disciplined, under God´s Laws, then there´s a chance that a community of self-governed may develop.

It´s so very, very easy to blame someone else for our national problems, but, in the end, the problem that exists today is 100% commercial in nature, which means that it´s 100% individual in nature. Those who feel they are necessarily subservient to the international banking cartel probably are, and if so, it´s by one and only one reason, which is understood best by understanding the term "federal."

"Federal" means "federal," as in "by agreement."

In "the States," well, today, the STATEs, the bankers are in control but only because each individual subject to that system has so agreed to be. It´s not the by-product of the banking industry (i.e., interest); it´s the banking system´s (proposed, offered) "choice of law."

It IS a choice, one that hasn´t existed under any prior "Beast" system. We´re not used to exercising that choice, and most won´t even try at this stage. A few will, and those few will blaze the path to whatever recovery this nation is ever going to experience, this side of the re-manifestation of Messiah.

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas

Subscribe / unsubscribe : [email protected]

Referenced article:

Ellen Brown
Global Research, November 08, 2021
Web of Debt

Its the Interest, Stupid! Why Bankers Rule the World

NOTICE: Harmon L. Taylor, and other presented entities are not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.

More & Other Information - Resource Pages
AntiShyster Magazine Attention Signing the Constitution Away
Aware Belligerent Claimant
Bonds Citizenship / nationality related items
Education Graphics
Health related
Howard Griswold
Jerry Kirk Jurisdiction
Law related items Lee Brobst
Lewis Mohr Luis Ewing
Money Reading Material
Reading Room Stuff
Tax matters Travel related
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it is fast, free and secure!

Freedom-School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
This enterprise collectively is known and generally presented as "" - "we," "us" or "our" are other expressions of used throughout. "You" is in reference to the user / visitor.

This is the fine print that so important. Freedom School and other information served is so for educational purposes only, no liability expressed or assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to or condone unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and
defend all Law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for [those] men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance. Support is not offered.

Freedom School is a free speech site, non-commercial enterprise and operation as
there is no charge for things presented. site relies on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.

The noteworthy failure of [the] government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and any and all [third] parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or anyone else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements appearing on this website are not factual or otherwise in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification. is not responsible for content of any linked website or material.
In addition, users may not use to engage in, facilitate or further unlawful conduct;
use the service in any way, or manner, that harms us or anyone connected with us or whose work is presented;
damage, disable, overburden, or impair the service (or the network(s) connected to the site)
or interfere with anyone´s use and enjoyment of the website.

All claims to be settled on the land - Austin, Travis county Texas, united States of America, using Texas Common Law.
All parts of this contract apply to the maximum extent permitted by law. A court may hold that we cannot enforce a part of this contract as written. If this happens, then you and we will replace that part with terms that most closely match the intent of the part that we cannot enforce. The rest of this contract will not change. This is the entire contract between you and us regarding your use of the service. It supersedes any prior contract or statements regarding your use of the site. If there exists some manner of thing missing we do not forfeit our right to that thing as
we reserve all rights.
We may assign, or modify, alter, change this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the site or material contained within.

GOOGLE ANALYTICS: While we do not automatically collect personally identifiable information about you when you visit the site, we do collect non-identifying and aggregate information that we use to improve our Web site design and our online presence.
Visitors to this site who have Javascript enabled are tracked using Google Analytics. The type of information that Google Analytics collects about you includes data like: the type of Web browser you are using; the type of operating system you are using; your screen resolution; the version of Flash you may be using; your network location and IP address (this can include geographic data like the country, city and state you are in); your Internet connection speed; the time of your visit to the site; the pages you visit on the site; the amount of time you spend on each page of the site and referring site information. In addition to the reports we receive using Google Analytics data, the data is shared with Google. For more information on Google´s privacy policies, visit:
Here is Google´s description of how Google Analytics works and how you can disable it: "Google Analytics collects information anonymously, and much like examining footprints in sand, it reports website trends without identifying individual visitors. Analytics uses its own cookie to track visitor interactions. The cookie is used to store information, such as what time the current visit occurred, whether the visitor has been to the site before, and what site referred the visitor to the web page. Google Analytics customers can view a variety of reports about how visitors interact with their website so they can improve their website and how people find it. A different cookie is used for each website, and visitors are not tracked across multiple sites. Analytics requires that all websites that use it must update their privacy policy to include a notice that fully discloses the use of Analytics. To disable this type of cookie, some browsers will indicate when a cookie is being sent and allow you to decline cookies on a case-by-case basis."

Presentation Copyright© 2007, 2021
All Rights Reserved


Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional        Valid CSS!