May 2011


Dear friend of Radio Liberty,

“Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience and are left to the common refuge which God has provided for all men against force and violence.”
John Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government

It has been said that the only things government makes are criminals out of innocent people and corpses out of living human beings. To that list we might add the following: Government is adept at manufacturing “crises” to justify expansions of its own power. Those emergencies often result from messes that the government itself has made; government, after all, is the only human enterprise that profits through failure.

Where no suitable emergency or crisis can be found, the government ruling us can depend on its opinion cartel to manufacture one, or at least to infect the public with the impression that one exists. This process is actually fairly easy to explain and recognize: Whenever people organize to resist or beat back an expansion of government power, an appropriate “crisis” will materialize to validate precisely the power grab that is being opposed.

The famous advice scripted by Shakespeare and offered by the dying Henry IV to his son and heir, the future Henry V – “be it thy course to busy giddy minds in foreign quarrels” – is a well-known, if little-appreciated, application of that principle, one that has been followed consistently by the Power Elite for many decades.

As one example, consider the way that the UN-directed Korean War – which, incidentally, never ended – was used to consolidate the National Security State here in the U.S. The Framers of the Constitution ardently opposed large standing military establishments precisely because they recognized, as Madison put it, that “of all the enemies of public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded” because it “comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; and from these proceed debts, and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.”

By 1950, America’s traditional character as an independent commercial republic was forcefully re-asserting itself as the nation recovered from World War II. The so-called “isolationist” element – that is, people who subscribed to George Washington’s view that we should eschew foreign quarrels and pursue peaceful commerce with all nations, while defending our own – was finding traction and taking the battle to the “internationalists” who sought to use our wealth and military power to create a UN-administered global order.

The policy framework for the drive to create “world order” was a classified 58-page document called NSC-68. (1) That document was a blueprint for a lengthy strategic confrontation with the Soviet Union. It envisioned the creation of a permanent, globally engaged military establishment, radical enhancement of presidential authority, the use of diplomacy and economic aid to encourage widespread involvement of other nations in “regional or broader associations of states consistent with the United Nations' Charter” – such as NATO – and progress toward the ultimate goal of “the effective control of all armaments by the United Nations or a successor organization.” From that time forward, America’s foreign policy would be defined in terms of “collective security,” rather than the preservation of independence.

NSC-68 was finished on April 14, 1950, but not declassified until twenty-five years later. Elements of the program, and the broad outlines of its policy priorities, were shared with Congress and, to a lesser extent, the public. Not surprisingly, even those limited glimpses of that blueprint for “world order” prompted fierce opposition by people who wanted to preserve American independence.

Roughly three months after the classified blueprint was finished, the Korean War erupted – a development that delighted the architects of NSC-68. By instigating the war, observed Dean Acheson, the abominable figure who served as Truman’s Secretary of State, “the Russians presented a check which was drawn on the bank of collective security” – one that would be paid in the coin of bloodshed and lost liberties. But that price was one that Acheson and his ilk were eager to pay; this is why he expressed relief that “Korea came along and saved us” – that is, it saved the ambitions of the “collective security” cabal from the resurgence of “isolationism.”(2)

Similar “crises” or “threats” reliably materialize whenever and wherever the designs of the Power Elite are imperiled. The consistency of this process, in matters both grand and relatively small, is among the world’s genuine wonders. Here’s a smaller but very telling example of how this works in domestic matters.

The so-called Transportation Security Administration was created only a few years ago, but it has managed, in that brief period, to become one of the most loathed appendages of the Leviathan state. Petty criminals, bullies, and perverts are over-represented in the personnel pool from which the TSA recruits its gropers and fondlers.

Public revulsion over the ritualized molestation endured by Americans who fly – such as the groping of young girls and children, the humiliation of people with health conditions that require the use of adult diapers or colostomy bags, and the irradiation of passengers by “backscatter” X-ray machines – has grown to a crescendo. Several states and other jurisdictions have attempted to enact measures intended to end TSA’s rampage. Rep. Ron Paul has proposed a measure to end the immunity presently enjoyed by the TSA’s latex-gloved goons. (3)

But – wouldn’t you just know it? – the people responsible for afflicting the public with the TSA have identified a new “threat” that supposedly validates its necessity. It seems that al-Qaeda, that all-powerful and only dimly seen Enemy, is promoting the surgical implantation of bombs in the bodies of suicide terrorists! This means, of course, that unless Americans continue to endure the prodding, poking, groping, fondling, and scrutiny of strangers at airports, terrorists will eventually succeed in smuggling an implanted bomb aboard a jetliner, with apocalyptic results. At least, that’s what casual consumers of official propaganda – who “know” only what they read in headlines, or, more likely, hear in nibble-sized soundbites – will believe.

As it turns out, these urgent disclosures – which are always “sourced” to conveniently “anonymous” official functionaries – are a matter of pure speculation distilled from unspecified “web chatter” or fabricated out of the musings of supposed experts on government contract.

“It’s more than aspirational,” insists one unnamed “expert” who spoke to the Wall Street Journal. “They’re trying to make this happen.” “They,” in this instance, are identified as “Militants from al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch,” who are involved in an uprising against that country’s vicious Washington-supported dictator. This means, of course, that anti-American terrorism emanating from Yemen would be a form of “blowback” – and a very useful one for the purposes of those creating a corporatist garrison state in the U.S. Notes the Journal: “[T]he specter of militants carrying bombs within them – perhaps stitched into the abdomen, breasts or buttocks – is prompting additional security measures at U.S. airports and overseas airports serving U.S. destinations, the Transportation Security Administration said in a written release.”(4)

Rather than going away, the TSA is doubling down – and writing itself an institutional blank check to cover the wager. “These measures are designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same activity at every international airport," warned TSA spokes-bureaucrat Nicholas Kimball. "Measures may include interaction with passengers, in addition to the use of other screening methods such as pat-downs and the use of enhanced tools and technologies."(5)

What this means, of course, is that the TSA is giving itself license to do anything to any passenger at a time of its choosing – and that it will justify these new invasions and impositions by invoking a conveniently amorphous and unspecified “threat” the details of which supposedly must be kept from the public.

Rather than being limited to the airport, furthermore, the agency is expanding its self-assigned mandate to torment Americans to include practically every potential mode of transportation or commerce within this supposedly free country.

Sometimes an acronym says it all. This is certainly true of the Transportation Security Authority’s so-called VIPER teams, which are deployed with increasing frequency everywhere Americans seek to exercise our innate freedom of travel.

VIPER stands for Visible Intermodal Protection and Response – granted, it’s a sloppy fit, but it makes a snappy logo – and the term refers to multi-agency gangs of armed pests under the supervision of the TSA. The VIPER teams initially focused their unwanted and counterproductive attention on Amtrak and Metro stations. More recently, however, the VIPER teams have given themselves the assignment of pestering their betters at practically every significant mode of commerce and travel. They have even started to conduct warrantless searches of private automobiles.

The program’s original purpose, explained the Washington Post, was to “provide a beefed-up law enforcement presence at … public transit stations over the busy holiday period. “ Now it is simply another way the Regime can harass people in search of prosecutable activity – or for property that can be confiscated in the name of asset forfeiture. (6)

At every opportunity, those presuming to rule us invoke what Noah Webster called “the old, stale plea of necessity” to justify the seizure of powers not delegated to them by the Constitution. As Webster’s phrase suggests, there is nothing new here; rulers throughout recorded history have done likewise. One reason the Founding Fathers created a written Constitution was to prevent such “emergency” usurpations of power, which almost always become permanently entrenched once the crisis has passed.

If government can simply conjure new powers and justify them in the name of “necessity,” then its powers are limited only by the depraved imagination of those seeking to rule. The Founders were certainly aware of this process, because they had seen how the British Crown had engendered and cultivated “crisis” to justify its continued rule in North America.

After the end of the French and Indian War – that is, the North American theater of a larger geopolitical conflict called the Seven Years’ War – Britain was firmly in control of North America, and it intended to consolidate its power.

With France removed as a contending power in North America, the late Murray Rothbard observed, “The British were now free to bring the fractious American colonists to heel, to impose a comprehensive system of British political and mercantilist control over the colonies.” To that end, the British actually provoked trouble on the frontier with various Indian tribes, thereby producing a “crisis” that would require the continued extraction of taxes from the Americans, and the expansion of military operations throughout the colonies in the name of “security.” (7) This campaign actually involved the pioneering use of bacteriological warfare – in the form of smallpox-infused blankets distributed in the region now known as Michigan. (8)

“The imperial Grand Design, hatched during the French and Indian War and put into effect as soon as it ended, was a comprehensive many-sided move to subject America to the British power,” Rothbard continued. “The vast new domains captured from France and Spain were to be occupied and administered as befitted a mighty imperial power. The laxity of salutary neglect was to be no more; all the mercantilist laws were to be strengthened and, above all, vigorously enforced; the British army was to overawe the unruly colonials by being stationed in America in force. The British army was to keep the French suppressed, rule the newly won western lands, and help a network of royal bureaucrats enforce mercantilist restrictions.”

“To pay for all this the British rulers hit upon a cunning expedient: the Americans themselves were to be taxed for that purpose,” elaborated Rothbard. “Thus the fractious Americans were to be forced to pay for their own suffering; to supply the funds to finance soldiers and customs agents who would enforce restrictions and taxes upon them. And a vast increase in the royal bureaucracy would thus be established without imposing new levies on the already war-burdened English taxpayer. The Americans would thus be caught in a vicious circle of tyranny: the British army was to be stationed in America, largely to enforce unwelcome regulations and taxes upon them, while the major excuse for the unpopular taxes was to pay for the selfsame army.”(9)

This public pretext for imposing this scheme, once again, was the supposed necessity of garrisoning British troops in the New World to “protect” the colonists from the depredations of Indians – who, again, were being riled up by the same scheming British. Once in place, the troops, customs agents, and tax collectors were sent forth, as Jefferson later wrote, as an all-devouring plague to devour everything of “substance” and reduce the Americans to peonage.

The American colonists rebelled, and a republic was created – and, alas, immediately subverted by a faction – led by Alexander Hamilton -- that sought to adapt and impose a very similar mercantilist/corporatist system in the independent United States.

Hamilton, as is widely known, favored a highly centralized government, a near-dictatorial executive, and a mercantilist/corporatist economic system. Nearly all of the salient traits of the modern Leviathan State headquartered in Washington — the imperial presidency, judicial activism, the Federal Reserve System's institutionalized counterfeiting and fraud, the ever-metastasizing government debt, the ever-expanding ranks of tax-subsidized corporate welfare parasites, the reduction of the states to docile administrative units of a unitary regime — were inspired by, and are the fulfillment of, Hamilton's designs.

Hamilton once complained of "an excessive concern for liberty in public men," a swipe at Jefferson and other freedom zealots who placed individual rights and dignity above considerations of "national greatness." Hamilton's designs were unabashedly imperial. They required that the central government absorb the powers of all other political and social entities, and that the president enjoy unqualified discretion in using those powers to build and perpetuate a strong and expanding state.

The system devised by Hamilton wedded the central government in an unholy union with the super-wealthy, creating a permanent creditor class – a constituency with an insatiable appetite for debt-derived revenue. That caste exists in perfect symbiosis with the ever-expanding central government, which is sustained by debt.

As Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo points out in his indispensable book Hamilton’s Curse, the mercantilist framework devised by Hamilton would "tie the wealthy of the country (who would be primary purchasers of government bonds) to the government, thereby creating a formidable political pressure group in favor of bigger government and higher taxation." This meant that “a tax burden was being placed on poor farmers in order to assure interest payments to the wealthy” – with the result that America was afflicted with “a new army of tax-collecting bureaucrats, just like the ones with whom King George III had plagued America before the Revolution.” (10)

After his death in 1804, Hamilton's disciples would succeed — briefly — in creating a central Bank of the United States. A generation later, an otherwise undistinguished Illinois lawyer who made himself wealthy in the service of the Hamiltonian railroad combine would wage a war of consolidation against the South in order to preserve the tax revenues that were indispensable to the corporatist system. Although the Regime demands that we perceive the War Between the States to be a sacred crusade to liberate enslaved black people, it was actually a conflict intended to make tax slaves out of everybody.

Hamilton's system reached its full, malignant maturity in 1913 under the unspeakably vile Woodrow Wilson, the presidential sock-puppet of "Colonel" Edward Mandell House — who was himself the instrument of the same creditor class Hamilton had served so faithfully. What DiLorenzo calls the "Hamiltonian Revolution of 1913" brought about the 16th Amendment and a permanent income tax, the creation of the Federal Reserve System, and the effective abolition of the United States Senate (originally designed to protect the interests of the separate states) via the Seventeenth Amendment.

Since that time, Americans have lived under a unitary state fueled by taxation, debt, and inflation, in which the earnings of the middle class are plundered for the benefit of corporate welfare whores. Those living today enjoy the unique, albeit unsettling, blessing of watching the death throes of Hamilton's system, or at least the post-1971 version of the same. This also means seeing countless variations on the use of engineered “crises” to expand and entrench government power.

Consider the following parallel:

On February 10, 2003, George W. Bush demanded support for an illegal war of aggression against Iraq, insisting that "The risks of doing nothing far outweigh the risks of whatever it takes to disarm Saddam Hussein.” A little less than six years later – September 20, 2008 – as the global financial system created by the disciples and admirers of Hamilton, House, and the ilk went into meltdown – Bush asserted that "The risk of doing nothing far outweighs the risk of the [$700 billion-plus mortgage bail-out] package."

Amid threats of the literal imposition of martial law, Congress enacted a “bailout” measure that turned the office of Treasury Secretary into a de facto financial dictatorship openly wedded to the international banking combine. Every particle of wealth generated in the productive sector has either been leveraged or devoured outright by that monstrosity – and the plunder will continue until the parasite either destroys the host, or is destroyed by it.

We are witnessing the terminal crisis of the present system. It will not survive. In political terms, the only question remaining is this: After the system collapses, what will replace it? From the perspective of history, our prospects aren’t encouraging. Even those of us who believe that our lives and liberty are the gifts of a sovereign Creator will be called on to endure trials and hardships that will test our faith to the utmost – and we may come to understand that sometimes the most effective resistance we can offer is to refuse to surrender our faith, and our principles, in the face of acute adversity. Above all else, we must retain our ability to recognize reality, and the courage to defend the truth irrespective of the price to be paid.


[1] See
[2] The Unfinished Journey: America Since World War II (Oxford University Press, fifth ed, 2003), pg. 243.
[3] See Dr. Paul’s “American Traveler Dignity Act at dignity-act-of-2010/
[4] “Bomb Implants Emerge as Airline Terror Threat,” Wall Street Journal, July 7, 2011.
[5] “TSA warns of possible airline threat involving implanted bombs,” Los Angeles Times, July 6, 2011.
[6] “Marshals To Patrol Land, Sea Transport,” Washington Post, December 14, 2005.
[7] Murray N. Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty, Vol. III: Advance to Revolution (Auburn, Alabama: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1999), pg. 14
[8] Ibid. pp. 20-22.
[9] Ibid, pp. 27-28.
[10] Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution and What It Means for America Today (New York: Crown Forum, 2008), pg. 48.

Written by William Grigg.

* * * * *

The world is changing. The U.S. is moving into a period of austerity, and will never be the same again. How can you verify that is true? I suggest you read the article, “American Profligacy and American Power” in the November-December 2010 issue of Foreign Affairs magazine. Why is the article important? Richard Haass (the co-author) is President of the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the Trilateral Commission, and one of the key leaders of the occult cabal that rules the world today. Richard Haass (and Roger Altman) wrote:

“Despite the size of its economy and the reserve status of its currency, the United States… (is) not immune from global financial rejection….One way or the other, by action or reaction, there will be a profound shift in U.S. fiscal policy if the U.S. government continues to overspend. Deficits will be cut sharply through a combination of big spending cuts, tax increases, and, quite possibly, re-imposed budget rules. No category of spending or taxpayers will be spared….

It makes a big difference whether the new fiscal rectitude in the United States arises from domestic leaders making difficult decisions themselves or from international pressures imposing these decisions. The proactive approach would allow the United States to manage its transition into austerity, avoiding both severe disruption at home and a sudden reduction in its position abroad.…

Collapsing confidence in Washington’s ability to control its debt could trigger a dollar crisis among global financial markets, as there was in 1979, with the Federal Reserve compelled to raise interest rates way beyond what domestic needs alone would require.…

More than just financial resources will be affected. The United States’ global influence, in all of its facets, will suffer. Washington’s ability to lead on global economic matters, such as its recent urgings in the G-20 for more stimulus spending, will be compromised by the coming plunge into austerity.” (italics and underlining added-ed)

What is the Brotherhood of Darkness doing? They are increasing the monetary base, and destroying the value of our currency. Can we stop them? I don’t know, but we must continue our effort to educate the public because millions of Americans know there is a problem, and are looking for answers.

How should we proceed? When I was young, we sang militant Christian hymns, but they were banned because the BOD fears militant Christians.

I believe we can reclaim our Christian heritage by proclaiming:

“Onward, Christian soldiers! Marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus Going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, Leads against the foe;
Forward into battle, See His Banners go!
Onward, Christian soldiers, Marching as to war,
With the Cross of Jesus Going on before.”

Barbara and I appreciate your loyal support and your faithful prayers.

Yours in Christ,

Stanley Monteith

Return to Radio Liberty home page

Please help Radio Liberty to expand our ministry to other outlets with your gift.
Please note that donations to Radio Liberty are not tax deductible