The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
THE KING’S BENCH
published by: paul.sholtz @ gmail.com
It’s been a busy and eventful month. Headlining some of the
more dramatic, recent news, more school shootings (now at
the University level)1 have occurred in the U.S. just in time for
Congressional gun control debates and the April 20th2
anniversary of Columbine  Princeton professor Walter F.
Murphy put on no-fly list for speaking out against Bush 
Russian president Putin decrees the establishment of a new
media regulatory agency to control all news outlets, including
the Internet (IHT 3/15/07, 3/23/07) (Bush and Blair are
reportedly jealous )  U.S. judge says Americans require a
criminal background check before chatting w/ foreigners on the
Internet (PRWeb 4/2/07)  Total gun bans have been
proposed for the city of Los Angeles (Reuters, 4/9/07)3 
Uruguay seeks the extradition of Henry Kissinger4 for war
crimes (Rawstory, 3/26/07)  Iranian tensions rise and fall on
the capture + subsequent release of British sailors. Oil prices
react accordingly. Amazingly, one of the female British sailors,
Seaman Specialist Faye Turney, was interviewed by two British
news outlets (BBC and the Independent) just hours before she
was captured! How convenient! At least this time the BBC did
us the courtesy of not broadcasting her capture before it
actually happened (see “Tales from 1984”, KB001)  Since
1999, Washington DC traffic cameras have issued 2,858,276
tickets worth $217 million (as of 1/31/07). Studies show the
cameras have failed to reduce accident rates. One important
takeaway: if you think it’s your income taxes that are financing
government, you just aren’t paying any attention. 
“In the absence of the gold standard,
there is no way to protect savings
from confiscation through inflation.”
-- Alan Greenspan, 1966
1 http://goldsilver.com/the_dow_is_crashing.php
Virginia Tech shootings, April 16, 2007.
2
A date rife w/ occult significance: Hitler’s birthday, Hitler’s massacre
of the Warsaw Ghetto, Waco (50 years to the day after Warsaw), OKC
bombing, and Columbine all occurred on or around this date.
3
This before the shootings at VT.
4 7
This is the same criminal, remember, that Bush initially wanted to
head up the 9/11 Commission.
Page 1
The Crash of the Dow
Mike Maloney, over at GoldSilver.com,5 has put together
something I’ve been looking for and/or meaning to do myself
for quite some time now, and that is to create a measure of
stock prices in relation to hard commodity prices, rather than
simply in terms of (hyper-)inflated U.S. dollars. I’m including
some of the charts he’s produced, which are well worth the
proverbial thousand words:
The U.S. media incessantly blathers on and on about the
“brand new, all time, record highs” of the Dow.6 But is what the
media telling us here really an accurate measure of value?
Since 2002, the U.S. dollar has lost 32% in relation to other
currencies (as measured by the US Dollar Index, USDX).
Anytime it looks like everything around you is going up and up
and up in price/value: i.e., stocks, bonds, real estate,
commodities, groceries, gas, medicine, gold, silver, Wall Street
bonuses, etc, are all rising, it pays to stop and simply ask:
“Why?” As the next chart below (the U.S. Dollar Index)
indicates, the primary cause can be traced squarely back to
the plummeting value of the U.S. Dollar.7 With the DJIA up a
paltry 6.9% over 7-years, and the value of the dollar down by
~30%, it doesn’t take rocket science to see that most people w/
$$ invested in the stock market are not even keeping pace w/
inflation, and so are actually losing ground.
5
You can read the article here:
6
Much like Hollywood each summer pushes its top line blockbuster as
“the biggest, highest-grossing move of all time!” Hollywood gets to say
this for the same reason the DJIA gets to make new historic “highs”
every other month: it’s not that the value of the movies (or stocks)
that’s rising; it’s that the value of the $$ is consistently falling.
In other words, the dollar has been inflating; more especially since
Bush took office in 2001.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2 Page 2

So as to normalize the Dow against something slightly more

tangible than the dollar, let’s first take a look at what the falling
value of the dollar has meant for gold prices:

Up (very) handsomely over the same time span; and this in

spite of central bank efforts to keep the price of gold artificially
depressed.

In his article, Maloney plots the Dow index against a range of

alternate yardsticks, including Euros, food, CPI, Treasury bills,
All three charts exhibit the same bearish trend.
industrial metals and a range of foreign currencies (and more).
But for our purposes here I’ll keep attention focused on what I
Measured in gold, the Dow has crashed 58%.
regard as the world’s three most pivotal commodities: gold,
Measured in silver, the Dow has crashed 65%.
silver and oil:8

Although I’m not posting it here, the graph of the DJIA

8
The U.S. spent most of the 1970s going off the gold standard (in the measured in terms of Dow Jones Industrial Metals Spot
form of the international Bretton Woods agreement; the private gold Price Index shows a similar bearish downtrend w/ an even
standard was dissolved on April 19, 1933 and has never returned to
American shores) and trying to put itself on a petrodollar standard, greater plunge: 73%. Since many goods and services in the
where – in international terms – it remains today.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
economy are produced using these industrial metals, this gives
a big clue brick as to why the general economy has been
floundering even as Wall Street bonuses have been soaring.
Consider, for example, the auto industry: Ford (F) and General
Motors (GM) need steel, zinc, copper and lead to produce their
cars. Operating costs for these companies have risen
dramatically in the past 7 years, and so their profits have all but
disappeared. The Dow has also plunged a whopping 76.5%
against copper, which is used by many analysts as a leading
9
indicator of the overall health of the global economy.
What do these charts prove? Among other things, they prove
that inflation is probably the single most dangerous macro-
economic factor affecting long-term investments in countries
10
(like the U.S.) that use fiat currencies. They also prove what
many insiders on Wall Street are already very well aware of: a
recent survey of 168 CEOs found that for every 1 share of
stock they are buying, they are selling 68 shares(!).
So inflation can make for treacherous investing, but just how
bad is inflation right now, really? According to the Minneapolis
Federal Reserve Bank, total inflation from 2000 to 2007 –
measured using the CPI 11– was about 20%. That’s bad
enough: using this yardstick, the Dow would have to be at
14,100 just to break even. But CPI is an extremely deceptive
yardstick: to arrive at CPI, the Bureau of Labor & Statistics
(BLS) takes a basket of goods and services and tracks their
prices. This might work if the BLS actually tracked the actual
price of the same items year after year. But they don’t. Instead,
when the price of any one commodity in the basket starts to
rise too sharply, the BLS either (a) removes it from the basket;
(b) swaps it w/ another commodity; or (c) makes up their own
brand-new imaginary price for it(!). To quote Clyde Harrison,
CEO of the Brookshire Raw Material Group, Inc: “Last year, if
9
When the economy is growing, you have greater demand for copper
in the form of plumbing, wiring, circuit boards, etc.
10
In the strictest of terms, the USD is not actually a “purely” fiat
currency: it is actually backed by the manufacture / creation of debt in
the commercial banks and at the Federal Reserve. So the number of
dollars in circulation is loosely governed by: (a) the ability of Americans
to take on new debt (and hence create new notes); and (b) the ability
of the IRS to “recycle” these notes back to the Fed. These limits on
dollar inflation, together w/ expansionist U.S. foreign policy, help keep
the dollar from hyper-inflating into total and complete worthlessness
(but only for a time!)
11
Consumer Price Index; the government’s “official” inflation gauge.
Page 3
you did not eat, drive to work, heat your home, visit a
doctor, buy a house, buy insurance of any kind, have a
child in college, or pay any state or property taxes, then
your cost of living agree s w/ the government’s Cost of
Living Index.” Such is what constitutes the very real and
extremely pernicious “inflation tax.”12
The true way to measure inflation is not by rising prices –
which are only a symptom of inflation – but rather by the rate at
which the currency / money supply is expanding (or shrinking,
in the case of a monetary deflation, i.e., depression).13 So it
might not come as a surprise to learn that back in March 06,
the Fed decided to stop publishing its M314 statistics, which are
the broadest and one of the best yardsticks out there to
measure where the currency supply is trending. Their excuse
for not publishing M3 is because they claim it would cost them
too much money. In truth, it may have more to do w/ hiding the
true rate of inflation from foreign central banks (FCBs) like
those in China and Japan that are heavily invested in (and
continue to invest heavily in) U.S. Treasuries. No doubt, they
also desire to hide these statistics from the American people at
large: the inflation rate from Jan 2000 to Feb of 2006,15 when
measured in M3, shows a whopping inflation rate of 56% -
almost 3x what the Minneapolis Fed Bank is trying to sell you
on(!) Extrapolating this to today, and plotting it against the Dow,
we see the Dow would actually have to be at (roughly) 17,000
just to break even with where it was in 2000!
Gremlin monetary science has been working invisible evils
against the American people and their economy since 1913;
12
“It will be asked how will the two masses of Continental and of State
money have cost the people of the United States seventy-two millions
of dollars, when they are to be redeemed now with about six million? I
answer that the difference, being sixty-six millions, has been lost on
the bills separately by the successive holders of them. Every one,
through whose hands a bill passed, lost on that bill what it lost in value
during the time it was in his hands. This was a real tax on him; and in
this way the people of the United States actually contributed those
sixty-six millions of dollars during the war, and by a mode of taxation
the most oppressive of all.”
-- Thomas Jefferson explaining the “inflation tax.”
13
A view generally attributed to the Austrian school of economics.
14
Money supply is generally measured according to one of three
metrics: M1, M2 or M3 (so ranked b/c of their increasing relative size).
M3 is generally regarding as the broadest, and hence best indicator of
where the true amount of money / currency circulating in the economy
is trending.
15
Feb 06 is the last period for which we have “published” M3.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2 Page 4

but now the chickens are slowing beginning to flock home to For Life is a just employer,
roost in a big way. The U.S. dollar is already undergoing a He gives you what you ask.
(deep) currency devaluation; a relatively slow (for now) But once you have set the wages,
devaluation, but a certain one nevertheless. All those hyper-
Why, you must bear the task.
inflated dollars, most of which are still held offshore, are slowly
beginning to come back onshore,16 and if they begin to do so in
I worked for a menial’s hire,
any appreciable volume at all, hyperinflation is going to pose a
Only to learn, dismayed,
real risk for what’s left of the American economy. When
hyperinflation does hit, it can do so w/ terrifying speed and That any wage I had asked for Life,
force: compliments of current Fed/IMF17 policy, one day soon Life would have willingly paid.
you may wake up to find the price of gas (which let’s say, for
the sake of argument, is $4/gallon) has doubled overnight to -- Jessie B. Rittenhouse
(American poet and author, 1869-1948)
$8/gallon. By noon that day it will cost $16/gallon. By evening,
it will be selling for $32/gallon. The next morning, the price of
gas will have risen to $64/gallon, by noon it will be selling for Found this while skimming through Napoleon Hill’s classic
$128/gallon, by evening for $256/gallon, and so on and on and “Think and Grow Rich” the other day. The words are poignant,
on and on until the price distortions and dislocations that have and thought I’d include them here for inspiration. They are a
been set in motion by Fed/IMF policy are finally able to work reminder that no more effort is required to aim high in life, and
themselves out through the broader economy. As these charts to demand prosperity, than is required to sit back and simply
indicate, precious metals – like gold and silver – will in all accept misery and poverty:
likelihood prove a wise hedge against this kind of hyper-
inflation (or any kind of inflation, for that matter).18 It’s a topic • Desire is the starting point for all achievement;
we’ll explore in more depth in future letters.
• Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe,
it can achieve;

I bargained with Life for a penny, • There are no limitations for the mind, except the ones
And Life would pay no more. that we acknowledge;
However I begged at evening,
When I counted my scanty store. Such are the wisdoms – only a handful out of many – to be
gleaned from reading Hill’s works. I recommend them highly.
Charles F. Haanel wrote w/ even more penetrating clarity,
16
Need proof? Look to all the foreign companies buying up U.S. insight and depth on similar topics. Ben Franklin,19 James
assets + property. The Chinese have already purchased the U.S. Allen20 and UCLA Coach John Wooden are good reads too.
Panama Canal Zone, the Port of Long Beach and are looking to buy up
rights to the St. Lawrence Seaway. Dubai is looking to buy up those
ports which haven’t already been sold to the Chinese, and a Saudi oil
consortium is looking to buy out Dow Chemical for $50 billion in cash.
All these players – China, Dubai, Saudia Arabia – are holders of large
(enormous) USD reserves, and they’re looking for “buy” something –
anything – w/ those dollars while those dollars still have some value.
17
The two institutions which, according to Clinton Treasury Secretary
Robert Rubin, are the real “masters” of the world: the Fed controlling Follow-Up on the Trans-Afghan Pipeline
U.S. domestic policy and the IMF running U.S. foreign policy.
18
Commodities in general may be a good hedge against this type of
financial disaster: i.e., having on hand a stock pile of food, gas, survival
gear, etc, even (esp) guns. That, or else keep enough cash on hand to 19
make your way out-of-country and into a more stable part of the world, Yes, the famous Ben Franklin; see his autobiography.
20
should disaster strike!  “As a Man Thinketh…”
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
Following up on the brief mention made in the previous letter
concerning the Trans-Afghan Pipeline (TAP) project, the map
below gives a slightly better idea of the proposed pipeline route
from the Dauletabad gas field (until 1991 known as the
Sovietbad gas field) and its estimated 1.4 trillion cubic meters
of gas to its (proposed) terminal in Karachi, Pakistan:
Countries impacted by the Trans-Afghan Pipeline
The pipeline on the “upper” side of the map; the one that starts
at the Caspian Sea, works its way east through Turkmenistan,
up through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan and finally into Russia,
is the Central Asia-Centre (CAC) Gas Pipeline, owned and run
by Russia’s Gazprom. Perhaps the best way to visualize the
geopolitics at stake here is to think of the northern route – the
currently active CAC pipeline – as the “Ruble Line”, while the
proposed southern route, w/ its terminal in Karachi Pakistan,
as the “Dollar Line.”
Page 5
Follow up on Central Intelligence
Following up briefly on the last letter’s article concerning CIA
influence over the U.S. media viz the (appropriately-named)
Operation Mockingbird, consider the following quotes:
“It would be unwise to expect trustworthy information
from Washington” 21
-- Max Frankel, former NY Times executive editor
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete
when everything the American people believe is false.”
-- William Casey, CIA Director (from 1st staff meeting, 1981)
The second quote – the one from Bill Casey – is perhaps more
revealing (and more disturbing). Nevertheless, don’t forget that
21
There is a much more powerful variation on this quote, also from a
prominent NY journalist, although I hesitate to quote it here to due its
somewhat dubious origins. It is frequently cited as being a comment
that was made by a Mr. John Swinton, allegedly the editor-in-chief of
the New York Times, during a banquet held in 1953, where he openly
mocked the so-called “free press” of America and alleged that
journalists are paid to do little more than fawn at the feet of “mammon.”
In fact, yes it seems that there really was a NY journalist by the name
of “John Swinton”, and yes he really did have caustic things to say
about the ruling Establishment of his day, but no – his comments could
not have been made in 1953 owing to the fact that he passed away in
1901(!). What emerges, upon closer investigation of the Swinton
story/urban legend, is that yes he was a crusading journalist for the
cause of social and labor reform, and yes he was hired on a regular
basis as the head of the New York Times editorial staff in 1860.
Holding the position throughout the Civil War, he left the paper in 1870
and became active in the labor struggles of his day. So, as best as we
can surmise, and by adding our own dash of imaginative
embellishment, what probably happened is that one night, probably
around 1880, John Swinton, then the preeminent New York journalist
of his day, was the guest of honor at a banquet given to him by the
leaders of his craft. Someone who knew neither Swinton nor the press
offered a toast to the independent press. Swinton allegedly is said to
have outraged his colleagues by replying w/ his now (in)famous tirade,
which is quoted here in full:
“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America,
as an independent press. You know it and I know it.
“There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and
if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I
am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am
connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar
things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest
opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I
allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before
24 hours my occupation would be gone.
“The business of the journalist is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to
pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country
and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what
folly is this toasting of an independent press?
“We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are
the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our
possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are
intellectual prostitutes.”
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2 Page 6

it takes two to spread disinformation(!): the government can • The defense contractor who directly employs Cho’s
spin it all day long, but you’re the one who has to believe it (or
sister is McNeil Technologies, a provider of various
else it won’t work!) Reminds me of a Shakespeare quote,22 one
and sundry black-op intelligence services for the DoD,
that I know I’m butchering, but it goes something to the effect
including Language Services, Information
of: Lies! Invented by knaves and believed by fools!
Management Services, Security Services and
Intelligence Services. In 2004, McNeil was acquired
Also concerning the CIA – and its possibly (probable?)
by Veritas Capital; Robert B. McKeon, founder and
connections to last week’s shootings on the campus of VT –
president of Veritas, sits on the board of McNeil;
this is still a developing story and we don’t have all the details,
Veritas also owns a stake in DynCorp, a defense
but the picture that’s emerging is one of an absolutely classic
contractor implicated in all manner of shady corporate
example of an Operation Monarch / World Vision23 – style
crime over in Iraq;
programmed “robotic” shooter. Perhaps the most telling
smoking gun we have so far – although I confess it’s entirely
• Cho’s family is wealthy and well connected; his sister

circumstantial – is that both Cathy O’Brien and Fritz graduated from Princeton and his father made a

Springmeier24 went on public record years ago, stating that fortune in Saudi Arabia; Precisely how his father

Blacksburg, Virginia – the quiet hamlet home to VT – is located made this fortune in Saudi Arabia is less clear;

just minutes away from the large, under-mountain DUMB 25 26

27
home to Operation Monarch.
There is additional evidence to suggest that the incident at VT
was more than the work of just some “lone nut”; the following
information has not been independently corroborated, but it
comes from an amalgam of reasonably reliable sources:
• Cho’s sister works as a contractor for the State
Department at the Iraq Reconstruction Management
Office, the office that oversees billions of $$ in U.S.
aid to Iraq;
22
I can’t recall from which play, but it might be Twelfth Night?
23
World Vision was/is an international evangelical “front” run by the
CIA and believed to have trained Jim Jones as well as the assassins
responsible for shooting John Lennon and Ronald Reagan.
24
Cathy O’Brien and Fritz Springmeier are arguably the world’s two
leading authorities on CIA mind control. Springmeier is currently being
held as a political prisoner in the federal pen on fake, trumped-up
charges for speaking too freely of what he knew.
25
Deep Underground Military Base.
26
Don’t believe that DUMBs exist? Just google Howard Hughes and
look up what him + his buddy David Rockefeller were up to, back when
they were in their prime . Besides, that part of Virginia is home to all
manner of “continuity of government” programs, installations, etc..
27
Monarch was/is a secret government program to use various
psychological drugs, techniques and other mind control mechanisms to
create the perfect “soldier” or “killer” .. the perfect “Manchurian
Candidate”, so to speak. Much of the drug abuse that Vietnam
veterans were exposed to during that war was actually an outgrowth of
this program and others like it (i.e., MK-Ultra).
• Cho attended high school at Westfield High School in
Chantilly, Virginia; this high school has entered into a
“business partnership” with – of all people – the DoD
contractor Northrup Grumman(!) The partnership
specifically involves Northrup Grumman’s “IT Group”
and it has been rumored that Cho may have
participated in various “after school activities” hosted
by the defense contractor.
• Amazingly, one of Cho’s classmates from this
very same high school, Michael Kennedy, went on
a similar shooting rampage last May at a police
station, killing two officers before fatally shooting
himself; Remember now: this is a high school that
has known business ties to the DoD contractor
Northrup Grumman(!)28
• Cho was in the Marine ROTC; the military routinely
uses “grunts” as “guinea pigs” for all manner of
biological, psychological and chemical
experimentation; it’s claimed also that Cho’s killing
spree began just outside the Marine ROTC office in
28
The term “business” here is not of my own invention: I’m getting it
from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westfield_High_School_(Fairfax_County,_V
irginia) . Indeed, truth can sometimes often stranger than fiction.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
Blacksburg; Cho’s military background also explains –
at least in part – his shooting precision;
• Cho was addicted to various Prozac-class serotonin
reuptake inhibitors, drugs that induce are capable of
inducing psychosis and which are commonly seen in
victims of mind control;
As I said before, all this information is tentative, highly
speculative and much of it has not been independently verified
yet. We should have more information by the time the next
letter is published, and will pass it along if it’s worth reporting.
Nevertheless, the pattern that emerges is one of close ties and
involvement w/ the U.S. Defense Department and its affiliated
subcontractors and intelligence agencies.
As per VT + gun rights, know too that a very similar incident to
last week’s VT shootings also unfolded at the Appalachian
School of Law in nearby Grundy, Virginia on Jan 16, 2002,
where a shooter went on campus, and shot and killed three
people (including a dean and a professor) before he himself
was shot and gunned down by armed students(!) The right to
bear arms can save lives! Know further that as per the
29
Supreme Court Case of Castlerock v. Gonzales, the police
are under no obligation whatsoever to protect you, and if they
choose not to protect you while a crime is being committed
against your person, you do not have the right to sue them.
It pays to know your rights, and exercise them fully30.. 
Breaking News
29
Castlerock v. Gonzales, 545 US 748 (2005)
30
And 2nd amendment gun rights are one of the most important that
Americans have. They’re ranked #2 for a reason!
Page 7
It was (alarmingly) reported earlier this month that Princeton
law professor Walter F. Murphy – a former U.S. Marine and
perhaps the nation’s top Constitutional law expert – was put on
the No-Fly List simply for speaking out against some of Bush’s
policies. As we go to press (4/23/07), what is perhaps an even
more alarming story is just now hitting the news: 9/11 hero
William Rodriguez – a former janitor in the North Tower who
rescued at least 10 people on 9/11 and who was the last man
to make it out alive from the North Tower – has been detained
at a U.S. airport and his passport has been confiscated by
Homeland Security. Rodriguez is a frequent critic of Bush’s
policies and he travels regularly – both domestically and
abroad – speaking to audiences and questioning the
government’s official account of 9/11: for instance, Rodriguez is
on record as stating that large bombs detonated in the
basement of the North Tower before the first plane hit;
something Washington refuses to acknowledge or provide an
explanation for.
Dr. Strangelove Rides Again
Tensions concerning a possible U.S. strike on Iran have waxed
and waned over the past month,31 yet there is one (extremely)
important factor at play here that most people are still unaware
of. Of all the issues we’re covering in this issue, this one – to
me – is perhaps the most serious of them all: it is Washington’s
openly stated presumption that it may – if it desires – use
nuclear weapons in the event of an attack on Iran.32
First, some quick facts concerning Iran, its oil fields and its
nuclear program: Iran is the second largest OPEC producer of
oil, after Saudi Arabia; and fourth largest oil producer in the
world. The top four, and their respective daily oil production (in
barrels per day, bpd), are as follows:
• Russia: 9.5 million bpd
• Saudi Arabia: 9.1 million bpd
31
A U.S. attack on Iran could easily double oil prices.
32
I was first alerted to this dangerous change in policy by the article
written by Lieber & Press in the CFR mouthpiece, Foreign Affairs: “The
Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy” (March/April 2006). I’ll cite additional
references as we progress.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
• U.S.A.: 4.9 million bpd
• Iran: 4.1 million bpd
Note that Iraq, w/ its potential production capacity of 6 million
bpd and a country believed to be holding the world’s second
largest oil reserves, is not on the list owing to U.S. bumbling
(strategic denial?) of its oil production. Iraq is currently
producing about 2 million bpd. Note also that the U.S. ranks
(very) high on the list: number 3, once all is said and done. In
fact, the U.S. produces far more oil than the U.S. media
generally leads the population to believe; that, and the U.S.
generally holds back on its energy production so as to
artificially induce scarcity and hence generate higher oil prices
for the Rockefellers.33 North America is actually an extremely
34
mineral rich continent, and were the U.S. to exploit even a
fraction of its oil production (and refining) capacity more35
aggressively, the U.S. could in all likelihood even become the
world’s leading exporter of petroleum (again). Of course, a
sovereign and independent United States, one w/ its own
independent energy policy, an independent banking and
financial policy, an independent law-making body, etc; such an
America does not fit in very “strategically” w/ Zbigniew
Brzezinski’s “Grand Chessboard” view of the world; hence the
general state of economic / financial / energy interdependence
that you see; both amongst the States of the Union, and
amongst the various countries of the world.36
33
In fact, U.S. oil interests in the Middle East have less to do w/ energy
(we import very little oil from the region); and have more to do w/ (a)
strategic denial and/or control of oil (esp to Europe and super esp to
Japan); and (b) the export of U.S. dollars to the region, as part of
“recycling” agreements whereby Saudi oil profits are laundered back
into the United States to help underwrite the enormous U.S. debt.
34
It is true, nevertheless, that U.S. oil generally tends to be deeper in
the earth (i.e., harder to get), and held under less pressure (i.e., again
harder to get), than oil found the Middle East.
35
i.e., the enormous Gull Island field on Alaska’s North Slope; read the
“Energy Non-Crisis” by Lindsey Williams, a man who was there and
who worked on the Alaska Pipeline.
36
The gremlins have been busy formalizing “inter-dependence” pacts
and treaties since they officially took over control of the U.S. and its
economy in the early 1930s. On Jan 22, 1937 – during the Great
Depression – representatives from the several States signed a joint
agreement to work together for greater “inter-dependence” amongst
the various States of the Union, using language vaguely similar, in a
“mocking” sort of way, to the U.S. Declaration of Independence of
1776. On Jan 30, 1976, a group of Congressmen, sponsored by the
United Nations, voted upon and approved a similar charter (was this
even in their power to do?) – this time on a global scale – again, using
language that was similar in style, yet mocking in tone, to the U.S.
Page 8
Know also that Iranian pursuit of a nuclear energy program is
nothing new; Iran has been flirting w/ nuclear ambitions since
the Shah was in power. In fact, Iranian nuclear ambitions go all
the way back to 1957 when the Shah signed the civilian Atoms
for Peace agreement w/ President Eisenhower; Iran went on to
receive its first U.S. research reactor in 1967. However, the
Shah didn’t pursue the program aggressively until after the first
oil shocks in 1974. It’s at that point that the Shah’s fortunes w/
Washington began to darken. The Shah himself actually
believed that he was ousted from power by Kissinger & Co.
precisely b/c he began to pursue a (serious) nuclear energy
program.37 One of the first things Khomeini did upon seizing
power in Iran (in 1979) was to shut down the Shah’s nuclear
program.38 Gradually, Iran’s nuclear energy program was
quietly restarted as the fundamentalists lost some of their
power + influence: in 1995, Russia signed a contract w/ the
Iranian government to complete construction at the stalled
Bushehr plant,39 and supply it w/ Russian fuel.40 That the
Russians would insist on supplying Iran w/ their own nuclear
fuel is an interesting little caveat: one reason that Iranian
nuclear programs have historically attracted so much attention
from the West might have to do w/ the fact that Iran is one of
the few nations in the world w/ the capability of producing its
own uranium fuel.41 There is enough fuel in the uranium mines
of its Yazd Province for Iran’s nuclear energy program to be
entirely self-sufficient so far as fuel production is concerned.
Declaration of Independence of 1776. Neither did the irony of having
signed their pact on the bicentennial pass by them unnoticed.
37
Hostage to Khomeini, Robert Dreyfuss.
38
His reason? Apparently, according to the Ayatollah, WMDs are
immoral and hence against Islamic law (even though the Shah’s
nuclear program was – allegedly –a peaceful energy program, not a
weapons program). Of course, it’s not unreasonable to speculate that
politics had a lot to do w/ Khomeini’s decision: posturing and
grandstanding against the evil “Satan USA” aside, this was the era that
saw the blossoming of U.S-Iranian arms deals under the cover of what
came to be known as “Iran-Contra”; that Khomeini had his backers +
supporters in both Washington and London is not entirely unknown;
again, see ibid.
39
Begun under the Shah in 1975.
40
The Russians have been busy selling their nuclear fuel on the
international markets to – amongst others – the Americans! Amazingly,
over half of the uranium used for electricity generation in U.S. nuclear
plants today comes from old Russian military stockpiles. Nuclear
energy supplies about 20% of America’s electrical needs, meaning that
about 10% of all U.S. electricity is running on old Russian military fuel!
41
Or perhaps, Iran is one of the few nations in the world interested in
pursuing a nuclear energy program and w/ the capability of producing
its own nuclear fuel.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2 Page 9

Iran also has a nuclear facility at Arak which produces heavy

water, which can be used to moderate a research reactor
whose construction began in 2004. That reactor will use
uranium dioxide and could enable Iran to produce weapons
grade plutonium in sufficient quantities to build one to two
nuclear devices per year. Iran officially claims that this plant will
be used for peaceful “medical” purposes; but in all fairness, as
much as I am inclined to view most / almost all of what comes
out of Washington as totally disingenuous propaganda, the fact
is that Iran’s claims of “peaceful” intentions begin to look
slightly weaker and thinner here.42

So let’s take a brief look at what Washington stands to gain by

attacking Iran; then we’ll look at what the associated costs
might be; finally we’ll look at some of the ways Washington
Note that most oil fields are in
feels it might be able to avoid or sidestep costs. the southwestern part of Iran

In terms of what Washington would get from attacking Iran:
• More strategic control over (very) strategic oil
reserves.43
• Control over the strategic Straits of Hormuz (choke
point for oil heading to Japan); strategically, Iran also
borders the oil-rich Caspian Sea, as well as NATO
member Turkey.
• Maintenance of U.S. petrodollar hegemony. 44
• Doubling of oil prices (i.e., profits)
• Snubbing of an independent nuclear research
program.45
42
Of course, that’s still an entirely different question than asking
whether an Iranian nuclear program in any way threatens me (or any
other person, for that matter). As far as I can tell, it plainly does not.
Russia still has 30 hydrogen-bomb ICBMs pointed directly at
Manhattan on hair-trigger alert, and the U.S. is still (by far) in command
of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, + the U.S. is openly using “dirty
nukes” in the form of DU in Iraq. I can think of many and sundry other
“nuclear” threats that are more real and pertinent to me than those
posed by Iran.
43
Refer to table above listing the world’s largest oil producers.
44
Iran has been threatening to open a Euro-based oil burse.
45
Is nuclear non-proliferation really something Washington is
concerned w/? Esp given Washington’s colossal nuclear arsenal?
Perhaps. I look to Cuba as an interesting case study. To my mind, it’s
obvious that there’s something in Cuba of which Washington is deathly
afraid. The proof? The fact that Cuba still (independently) exists! Cuba
is the sole – and this must be stressed – the sole, only, one-of-a-kind
Such are, briefly, some of the immediate American interests in
the region. There are also financial concerns to consider; refer
back for a moment to the table above listing the world’s largest
oil producers: what do these production numbers mean for the
world financial markets in the event of a possible war? For one,
Iran has been able to accumulate a strong cash position
from the recent high oil prices, earning some $45 billion in oil
revenues in 2005 (double its average for 2001-2003). This
gives Iran a war chest to use for protection against possible
sanctions, and extends to Iran the possibility of living for
months even w/ all its oil exports entirely cut off. In today’s
tight46 market for oil supply, even w/ OPEC producing at full
exception to U.S. foreign policy throughout the entire Western
hemisphere. The U.S. has marauded and plundered its way w/
impunity through every nation in Latin American (and, in some ways,
Canada too) w/ impunity. The U.S. even plundered and marauded its
way around Cuba before Castro came to power. But today – saber-
rattling and grandstanding / posturing aside – Washington has not so
much as even touched Cuba. When Cuba tells Washington to jump
and return Elion Gonzales, Washington asks how high? and promptly
obliges. Cuba-Washington relations in many ways resemble the
strange, proverbial tail-wagging-the-dog type situations.
So what could there possibly be in Cuba that has the potency to terrify
even Washington? My guess is nukes. Nukes (perhaps “accidently”)
left over from the Cuban missile crisis and nukes which just “happen”
to be (very) conveniently pointed squarely at NYC + DC. The idea is
perhaps somewhat far-fetched, I confess, and there may other
explanations for Cuba’s otherwise inexplicable immunity to U.S.
domination for the past 40 years. But if the theory proves true, it would
certainly make a convincing case for the power of nukes to act as tools
of deterrence.
46
No doubt, artificially tight.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
capacity, it would be difficult – if not impossible – to make up
for 4 million Iranian barrels a day for any substantial length of
time. An oil price-shock in the range $130-$150 / barrel would
not be unexpected.
There are also geopolitical concerns, in the sense that a fight
between Iran and the U.S. would have a (very) direct impact on
several other major countries as well, including Russia and
China. Russia’s interest in the region is partly driven by its
military interests: a brief look at a world map will reveal the
slow-but-steadily-increasing “encirclement” that US + NATO
forces + interests have been tightening around Russia ever
47
since the Clinton administration. With bases + a very strong
military presence in Afghanistan, Iraq and now potentially Iran,
the U.S. is encroaching itself uncomfortably close against
Russia’s southern flank.
Russia also has strong economic ties w/ Iran that will be
directly threatened by a U.S. war in the region:
• Russian nuclear technology is being sold to Iran; as
mentioned above, Russia is involved in re-starting
construction on the abandoned Bushehr plant;
• Iran has also been (and continues to be) a major
purchaser of Russian military hardware since the
collapse of the Soviet Union; In March 2005 Moscow
agreed to sell Iran a “defensive” missile system worth
roughly $7 billion.48
• Moscow is currently in talks to build five to seven
additional nuclear power reactors on the Bushehr site
after completion of the present reactor. Russia
expects to get up to $10 billion from this deal, as well
as additional arms sales to Iran.
• Armenia has agreed to sell 45% control of its Iran-
Armenian gas pipeline to Russia’s Gazprom. If Russia
takes full control over this gas pipeline, it will be able
47
Near-direct U.S. influence in the region now extends as far as the
Ukraine.
48
In 2000, Putin announced that Russia would no longer continue to
abide by a secret US-Russian agreement to ban Russian weapons
sales to Iran that had been concluded by the government of Boris
Yeltsin.
Page 10
to control the transit of Iranian gas to Georgia,
Ukraine and Europe.49
The relations between Russia and Iran are perhaps best
summed up by the recent statement by Russian Defense
Minister Sergei Ivanov in the Jan 18 issue of the daily
Nezavisimaya gazeta:
“It is not profitable for Russia to impose sanctions on Iran,
since we just recently signed an agreement to sell them
nearly $1 billion worth of medium-range anti-aircraft
weapons. These modern weapons are capable of hitting
targets up to 25 km away and will probably be used to
defend various testing sites in Iran. Therefore, if some
attempt is made to strike at the country and the deliveries
from Russia are made quickly enough, we can expect a
strong response. In other words, Iran will be able to
defend itself.”
Then there is China to content with. In 2000, Beijing invited
Iranian President Khatami for a literal red carpet reception to
discuss ways China + Iran could cooperate in terms of their
respective energy and economic policies. Then in Nov 2004 –
at the precise moment of the U.S. presidential elections –
China signed a huge oil and gas deal w/ Iran, worth anywhere
from $70 to $100 billion. Under the terms of the deal, China will
purchase Iranian oil + gas and help to develop Iran’s
Yadavaran oil field, near the Iraqi border. That same year
(2004) China also agreed to purchase $20 billion in liquefied
natural gas from Iran over the next quarter-century. Iran’s oil
minister stated at the time: “Japan is our number one energy
importer for historical reasons … but we would like to give
preference to exports to China.” China, in return, has become
a major exporter of manufactured goods to Iran; manufactured
goods that also include strategic military hardware and
technology.50 These weapons sales include thousands of
49
Something that Russia may have an interest in doing, owing to the
fact that the U.S. has been working hard to install US-friendly, pro-
NATO governments in Georgia as well as Ukraine.
50
Both the Clinton and GW administrations have been plagued by
scandals known loosely as “China-gate”, in which Chinese arms
dealers come to Washington and buy up U.S. military hardware for
pennies on the dollar. It would be interesting to trace how much of the
Chinese military hardware ending up in Iran actually originated in the
U.S.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
tanks, armored personnel vehicles, artillery pieces, missile
systems, more than a hundred fighter aircraft and dozens of
small warships.
40% of the world’s oil flows through the narrow
Straits of Hormuz. The strait has two 1 mile wide
channels for marine traffic, separated by a 2 mile
wide buffer zone. It is the only sea passage to the
open ocean for much of OPEC’s oil. It is also Saudi
Arabia’s main export route.
In addition, we must not forget that the U.S. is not especially
fond of attacking other countries (at least, not since Vietnam)
unless it’s able to stack the odds for victory more or less totally
in its own favor. Conquering and defeating such large and
intimidating foes as for instance Grenada, Panama or Haiti is
one thing. 51 Conquering and defeating a country like Iraq –
th
which in 1991 had the world’s 4 largest military, a highly
educated population and Western-style medical clinics – is
something altogether different. To have directly attacked Iraq in
1991 would have been folly for the U.S.; remember that in
1991, the U.S. did not conquer Iraq: it merely defended a piece
of real estate the size of Kuwait. 52 What followed in the
aftermath of the First Gulf War then was U.S. foreign policy
intended to strategically weaken and disable Iraq to the point
51
And w/ good reason: Reagan apparently bit off a bit more than he
could chew when he stirred up his Contra War down in El Salvador and
Nicaragua; one is therefore forced to conclude that U.S. military
prowess has the potency to conquer and defeat nations as large or
larger than Grenada, but not quite so large as for instance El Salvador.
52
Is Kuwait larger than Grenada, but smaller than El Salvador?
Page 11
where it could be “safely” attacked at some later point in time
(2003, as history would have it).53 12 years of economic
sanctions that starved and killed at least 2-3 million Iraqis,
probably more; the near complete disarmament of Iraq under
UN weapons sanctions + no fly zones, etc. Only after 12 years
of this kind of “silent”, indirect warfare did the U.S. feel
confident enough to go ahead and directly attack a weakened
and almost completely defenseless Iraq; and even in spite of
all these measures, the Iraqi invasion has not exactly gone
according to U.S. plan.
Iran, of course, is no Iraq. For starters, it’s much larger (area-
wise), which means more troops + logistics would be needed
to secure the territory. Nor has Iran spent the past 12 years
being starved + disarmed; if anything, quite the opposite: the
Russians + Chinese have been building up the Iranian armed
forces, and as noted earlier, Iran has sufficient cash reserves
to operate long enough to (probably) weather any sanctions
Washington may wish to impose. Iran’s people are also more
unified (ethnically) than those of Iraq, sharing a common (and
very ancient) Persian ancestry + culture; Iran is not the random
hodgepodge of conflicting, bickering races + ethnicities drawn
together by random British lines in the sand that Iraq was. Iran,
in other words, would put up a real (and protracted) fight.
And a real and protracted fight w/ a relatively large and
powerful nation is not something that holds much sex appeal
for the U.S.; especially not now considering how overextended
the U.S. is w/ troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and the 120+ some-
odd other countries in the world where the U.S. maintains a
military presence; w/ many of its troops in the Iraq/Afghanistan
theaters now being “re-upped” for their third or fourth
consecutive tours(!)54
So the question naturally arises: U.S. intends to attack Iran
with … what … exactly?55
53
U.S. troops casualties in the current Iraq war are – relatively
speaking – probably the lowest of any war the U.S. has ever fought;
this is not coincidental and it’s not an artifact of any kind of U.S. military
“might”: it’s the outcome of 12 years of deliberate U.S. policy intended
to starve and disarm Iraq – weakening the prey, so to speak – before
launching formal military attacks against the country.
54
In WWII or Vietnam, you only had to serve 1 tour.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
Enter CONPLAN 8022.56
CONPLAN 8022 is the new “war plan” drawn up by Omaha-
based STRATCOM57 to deal w/ theaters like Iran and North
Korea. It was signed by Bush as a classified Presidential
Directive in Jan 2003. Whereas a normal war plan would
encompass an amalgam of forces – air, ground, sea – and take
into account logistics, politics, etc, it would also require
significant lead time to be effective. CONPLAN 8022 differs
from such conventional war plans in that it presupposes no
“ground troops.” Instead, it calls for a highly concentrated
strike that combines aerial bombing w/ electronic warfare and
cyberattacks to cripple the opponent’s response (i.e., cutting
electricity, jamming communications, hacking computer
networks). It specifically leaves open the option of using
nuclear weapons and - as mentioned above - it is being
administered directly by STRATCOM, an agency which was
previously responsible solely for overseeing nuclear forces.
Consider further what the high priests from the Pratt House58
have to say on the matter:
“Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United
States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It
will probably soon be possible for the United States to
destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or
China with a first strike.”
55
In the closing days of WWII, Hitler allegedly began to direct
imaginary armies to go off and fight in imaginary battles even as his
(real) enemies were closing in on him, mile by mile. The reason was
that his generals were simply too terrified to inform him that they were
actually losing the war, and that they did not have sufficient troops,
materials, armies, etc, to continue the effort. These armies that Hitler
was ordering around simply did not exist anymore: they had all been
killed, destroyed, captured, etc. But rather than give in to reality, Hitler
instead began to recede into an increasingly imaginary, make-believe
world where he was still in “control”; anyone who threatened the (false)
peace and stability of this inner world was dealt w/ harshly. The end as
predictable as it was inevitable.
Watching the Bush administration fumble around in Iraq (and
Afghanistan, and at home), one has to wonder whether or not a similar
dementia has not set into the mind of the sitting president.
56
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2005/05/14/AR2005051400071.html
57
STRATCOM once only oversaw the nation’s nuclear forces; now it
has responsibility for overseeing a global strike plan w/ both
conventional + nuclear options.
58
i.e., the Council on Foreign Relations on 68th and Park; I believe this
would be the same “Pratt” from whence Reagan’s Secretary of State,
George P. Schultz, gets his middle initial “P.”
Page 12
“If Washington continues to believe such [global,
economic] preeminence is necessary for its security, then
the benefits of nuclear primacy might exceed the risks.”
The CFR notes that the U.S. has some distinct advantage over
other nuclear powers – esp e.g., China – in the sense that the
U.S. nuclear arsenal is highly distributed, being maintained
separately amongst: (a) strategic Air Force bombers; (b) ICBM
missile silos;59 and (c) nuclear armed submarines. The only
country w/ the breadth of force to match this is Russia, and
much of that country’s nuclear infrastructure is in shambles
and/or in a state of decay. China does not even have long-
range bombers of submarines that are realistically capable of
delivering a nuclear payload. The CFR authors conclude by
admonishing us to “Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.”
Those who know and understand the level of influence the
CFR is able to wield over the U.S. State Department should
find such language ominous and alarming. Reading between
the lines of such rhetoric, one is left w/ the uneasy feeling that
59
You give enough madmen unlimited $$ for long enough, and God
only knows how they’ll manage to absolutely and completely screw
things up. Every few years since 1977, strange stories have appeared
in the press about large whales beaching themselves on the Eastern
seaboard of the United States. On Feb 6, 1977, a large number of
whales began beaching themselves at Jacksonville, FL for no apparent
reason. Biologists quickly conjectured that they must have lost their
“sense of direction.” The whales were dragged back out to sea but they
promptly returned, preferring to die on dry land (the whales being
mammals like you and me, and apparently preferring to pass away in
the open air rather than in their underwater agony). Soon afterwards,
another 120 whales had again beached themselves, again in
Jacksonville. Now the biologists were really stumped. That the whales
kept re-beaching themselves, even after being dragged back out to
sea, indicated that this wasn’t just a “navigation” program. Upon
autopsy, it was discovered that the whales had empty stomachs
(meaning they were sick and had not eaten for a while) and that they
were suffering from extreme plutonium poisoning in their lungs.
Amongst other things, this poisoning had caused a fungus-like growth
to cover the whale’s lungs, resulting in a slow, suffocating death. The
cause of this plutonium poisoning is almost too incredible to believe.
In the late 1960s, Howard Hughes, David Rockefeller and the CIA all
got together and decided it would be “really cool” if they planted
dozens of nuclear ICBM missile silos in the ocean floor all the way up
and down the Eastern U.S. seaboard(!) Hughes’ drillship, the Glomar
Explorer, was built specifically w/ this purpose in mind (although a
slightly different cover was disclosed to the public). Predictably
enough, soon one of the missile silos – specifically, the one located on
the seabed 290 miles ESE of Jacksonville at 30 9.9’ N and 77 8.44’ W
– began leaking plutonium. Whales today, highly intelligent creatures
that they are, possessing highly sophisticated language structures,
probably “know” enough to avoid the area now. But still, you and I are
going to have a LOT of cleaning up to do in this world once the
gremlins have been ousted from power in Washington. An account of
this insane odyssey can be found in Chap 6 (“Admiralty”) of George
Mercier’s excellent book, “Invisible Contracts.”
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
(a) Washington believes it may be able to get away w/ nuking
Iran if it desires to – a position it could very realistically be
forced into if it chooses to attack Iran, owing to how thinly
spread out its existing forces already are; and (b) should
Russia or China – both of which have (at this point) an
enormous financial / economic stake in Iran – in any way
object to such (insane) plans, then they too could be dealt w/ in
just the same way (which is to say, by nuking them too).
22 kT atomic bomb explodes over Nagasaki, Japan
Devil Inside
Some interesting news has broken on the 9/11 front in the past
month. In fact, as we’re going to press (4/23/07), Senator John
Page 13
Kerry60 has just given a press conference in Austin where he
was essentially cornered61 and forced to admit – in the
contorted, evasive language typical of politicians – that WTC7
may have been brought down by explosives in a controlled
demolition. Equally amazing, Kerry claims that this is the “first
time” he’s ever heard about the idea that WTC7 may have
been brought down by explosives or in a controlled
demolition(!)62 It will be interesting to continue watching Kerry
on this issue in the coming days and weeks, and see if he
continues to comment on WTC7, and if so the extent to which
he will try to cover up, deflect attention or “damage control” the
issues surrounding its collapse.63
WTC7 has always been the weakest link in the government’s
“official” story concerning 9/11. As we reported in our last letter
(“Tales from 1984”, KB001), the BBC announced the
demolition of WTC7 25 minutes before it actually happened(!)
WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein, who has profited by at least
$5 billion from the destruction of the WTC, admitted on Public
TV in 200264 that he and the NYFD “pulled” WTC7 on 9/11.65 In
Feb 2002, Silverstein Properties won $861 million from
Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC7. As the
estimated worth of the WTC7 property destroyed on 9/11 was
roughly $386 million, and the building’s collapse alone won
Silverstein a payout of nearly $500 million, the destruction of
just Building 7 alone has now netted for Silverstein a
handsome profit of $975 million (nearly $1 billion). Silverstein
was never questioned by the 9/11 Commission or anyone else,
60
As a trivia note, it was well publicized during the 2004 election that
both Kerry + Bush were members of the secret Yale club “Skull &
Bones”; what hasn’t been so well publicized is that Teresa Kerry’s
former husband – Henry John Heinz III – former U.S. Senator from
Pennsylvania, was also a Yale graduate and also a member of Skull &
Bones. At least, he was until he died in a mysterious plane crash in
1991 and Teresa and John Kerry promptly proceeded to begin courting
one another. Betrayal is the watchword of the Washington gremlins; it
is both their M.O. and their Achilles’ Heel.
61
“Cornered” in the verbal / debate sense of the word. The video can
be seen at:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/230407building7.htm
62
It’s always entertaining to watch gremlins when they’re caught off-
guard by unscripted questions 
63
At this point in his career, Kerry is a professional cover-up artist,
having been involving in covering up such things as U.S. crimes in
Vietnam, Iran-Contra, the BCCI banking scandal and now 9/11.
64
“Rebuilding America” broadcast on public TV in 2002.
65
“Pulled” being a term to describe a controlled demolition.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
and the collapse of WTC7 was never even mentioned in the
66
9/11 Commission Report.
On another note related to 9/11,
director of the specious Homeland
“Security” Department, Michael
67 68 69
Chertoff, has been called to
task to defend a surreptitious
surveillance program that’s been in
place at airports around the country
for quite some time now but which
has only recently been announced in the Federal Register.
Known as the Automated Targeting System (ATS), the system
alleged keeps track of who pays for international flights in and
out of the U.S., how they’re paid for and who is listed as a
70
contact on such flights. The system uses this information to
generate a computerized risk assessment of international
travelers. The DHS notice published in the Federal Register
points out that people do not have the right or ability to see
their own assessments or to directly challenge them.
Nevertheless, DHS plans on keeping ATS data around for 40
years (from time of collection) and on sharing it w/ state, local
and foreign governments. The data can also be shared w/
courts and private contractors.
66
NIST has come up w/ at least 5 different explanations for why
Building 7 fell, including debris from the larger towers falling on it, and
the idea of an exploding gas tank in the basement of the building. NIST
has currently re-opened its investigation into WTC7 to explore the
possibility that bombs may have brought the building down.
67
The name means “Satan” or “devil” in Russian.
68
This is the guy whose idea it is to deploy armed military drones –
probably in the form of CIA GlobalHawks circling at 65,000 feet – at
U.S. commercial/civilian airports as early as this summer. This as part
of a Pentagon plan code-named “Operation Chloe” name, incredibly
enough, after Chertoff’s favorite 24 character (USA Today, 3/22/07)
69
This is also the guy who helped author the Patriot Act of 2001. It
should be noted that the terrorist attacks happened on 9/11, and the
Patriot Act was passed only several weeks later. This is not nearly
enough time to draft a piece of legislation that lengthy, and gives us a
clear clue brick that some people in Washington (including Chertoff
himself) were patiently lying in wait for some fortuitous “opportunity”
they could use to foist already pre-drafted legislation onto an
vulnerable, wounded Congress. It’s also interesting to note that many
provisions of the Patriot Act are little more than re-enactments of key
provisions of Clinton’s 1996 Anti-Terror bill (enacted in response to the
OKC bombing) that were repeatedly ruled to be un-Constitutional by
the Supreme Court.
70
I say “allegedly” since for all we know, the system could be tracking
and tracing a great deal more.
Page 14
“This is ultimately about connecting the dots”, Chertoff said last
December in Atlanta when commenting on the program. He
added that this type of “fusion” has been a priority since the
attacks of 9/11.
Connecting the dots indeed. What do you say you and I go
ahead and “connect” a few dots of our own? Especially as
such dots may point and trace back to Mr. Chertoff himself and
various criminal cover-ups he may be involved w/ concerning
9/11. Headlining the list of “dots” we’ll want to take a look at is
the fact that Chertoff may have shielded from criminal
prosecution a former client suspected by law enforcement of
having funneled millions of dollars directly from Osama bin-
Laden (OBL) to various terrorist groups around the world while
he (Chertoff) was in charge of the USG’s 9/11 investigation.
Some interesting facts concerning the Egyptian-born Dr.
Magdy el-Amir, a prominent New Jersey neurologist, long-time
friend of Michael Chertoff and a man who is at the center of a
range of various terrorist intrigues emanating from Jersey City,
NJ:
• El-Amir gave money to Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman,
one of the conspirators in the 1993 WTC bombing;
• His brother Mohammed, while in Cairo, was caught
on tape attempting to buy weapons from an American
undercover agent for Islamic militant groups;
• Before being arrested in a terrorist deal involving oil
and heroin for guns and training,71 arms smuggler
Diaa Moshen was paid at least $5,000 by one of Dr.
el-Amir’s companies, as reported by NBC Dateline.
• According to a foreign intelligence report made
available to the Chairman of the House International
Committee, el-Amir’s HMO was suspected by law
enforcement of being used to funnel $$ provided by
71
The whole flow of funds between oil and heroin on the one hand,
and arms deals on the other – a flow of funds that can be traced at
least as far back as Iran-Contra in the 1980s – has been documented
nicely by Michael Ruppert in his video: Truth & Lies of 9/11. The video
is available over Google Video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145&q=tr
uth+and+lies
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
OBL to finance various “terrorist” activities around the
world;
• According to a lawsuit filed shortly before the State of
New Jersey took over his failing HMO, el-Amir
“caused more than $5.7 million to be paid by wire
transfers to unknown parties.”
How it is that el-Amir even came to be running this HMO is a
fascinating odyssey in and of itself. The Oct 25, 1999 issue of
the medical trade journal Medical Economics poses the
question: “Why was this doctor [Magdy] allowed to start a
health plan?”72 The Bergen Record goes on to ask “How could
this medical entrepreneur, who had no experience running a
manage-care or health insurance company, receive a license
for an HMO that now provides care to 44,000 of New Jersey’s
most vulnerable citizens?” It continues: “Moreover, how could
the state pay such a novice $6 million a month in taxpayer
money to take on such responsibility?” It is interesting to note
that el-Amir had only been granted a state license to operate
the HMO one month prior to finagling the above-mentioned
lucrative contract from the State of New Jersey in 1995. Such
questions were being raised because after having been in
business for little more than 3 years, el-Amir’s HMO had
managed to run up liabilities of more than $45 million and
essentially run itself out of business, to the chagrin of both
73
doctors and patients alike.
So how indeed was a foreign-born “novice” like el-Amir able to
procure such lavish government contracts? The answer lies in
part in the political influence he was able to purchase for
himself, for instance by making generous campaign
contributions to New Jersey’s ruling Republican Party, donating
nearly $18,000 to various GOP candidates in 1996. Nor do el-
Amir’s political connections don’t stop there, either. Once the
72
Article is available here:
http://www.memag.com/memag/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=124049
Interesting are the references (made in 1999) to attorney “Michael
Chertoff”, who had not yet risen to “stardom” following the events of
9/11.
73
Magdy had been using the same style of financial wizardry that
commercial banks like to use: recording loans as “assets” and using
this to bolster his financial statement. When the loans went bad, so did
the HMO. A warning, perhaps, of the greater (potential) impending
doom facing certain (all?) commercial banks that engage in the
practice.
Page 15
house of cards that was his HMO began to fall, el-Amir went
straight to the top lawyer in all of New Jersey: a criminal
defense attorney named Michael Chertoff. As the Bergen
Record reported on June 19, 2000:
“New Jersey is home to about 65,000 lawyers, some of
whom are quite good at what they do. But if the State had a
First Lawyer, or a Lawyer Laureate, it just might be Michael
Chertoff.” 74
“His counsel is sought by public corporations, politicians,
government agencies, and high-profile defendants.”
“Columbia/HCA, the health care consortium .. is the ninth-
largest employer in the United States .. As the lead attorney
for Columbia, Chertoff negotiated a partial settlement of the
case in May for about $745 million.”
El-Amir’s means– although comfortable – were in the grand
scheme of things, still rather modest. His entire net worth at the
time he contacted Chertoff was about $760k, not even putting
him into the Millionaires Club. So how is it that a relatively
obscure, failing doctor was able to retain the legal counsel of
New Jersey’s top criminal defender? However he managed to
do it, Chertoff was worth every red cent he was paid by el-
Amir: though doctors and hospitals calculated they were owed
more than $45 million, el-Amir faced no criminal charges.
The most interesting political connection, of course, is the one
that ties el-Amir back to OBL himself. According to a foreign
intelligence report obtained by NBC Dateline in the fall of 2004,
and which was given to a senior member of Congress – Ben
Gilman – back in 1998 when he was chairman of the House
International Relations Committee, Dr. el-Amir has had
financial ties w/ OBL going back for many, many years.75 The
report alleges that an HMO owned by Dr. el-Amir (the report
was written in 1998, remember) was “funded by bin Laden”
and that in turn el-Amir was skimming money from the HMO so
as to finance “terrorist activities.” According to sources close to
74
Michael Chertoff went to Harvard Law School w/ author Scott Turow,
and is featured as one of the intense, brilliant characters Turow writes
about in his book “One-L.”
75
As per what was brought up in the previous paragraph, does this
imply that Chertoff has had financial ties w/ OBL going back over the
years as well?
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
the investigation, $15 million remains unaccounted for in the
shambles of el-Amir’s HMO. Where did the money go?
Dateline found that at least some of it went into hard-to-trace
offshore bank accounts.
Although Chertoff allegedly has been put in his position so as
to make American “more safe”, one has to ask whether or not
his actions have actually (deliberately) made the nation a far
more dangerous place. Today, Dr. el-Amir remains a free man,
living and continuing to practice medicine in New Jersey. Nor
has his alleged involvement in foreign terrorist activities ever
been formally investigated. Chertoff too, remains a free man,
despite the lies, cover-ups and duplicity that we’ve seen from
him in this and numerous other cases. A more in-depth report
76
on this affair can be obtained from Mad Cow Productions.
There is a war on for your mind!
And no, there are no days off!
Ever wonder why it’s called a Social
Security “Trust” Fund? (Part II)
76
Link: http://www.madcowprod.com/01122004.html
Page 16
“Finding the Russian scientists may be a problem being that
Russia does not have a Social Security system, as here in
America, that allows us to monitor, track down and capture an
American citizen.”
- Colin Powell
In the last issue, we looked at how Social Security was set up
as a trust to give the government the ability to surreptitiously
usurp (legal) title to most (if not all) property throughout the
country.77 Trusts are by their very nature extremely secretive
and extremely silent legal structures, and for these reasons
they are the perfect vehicle for government to use if it desires
to usurp the rights, property and wealth of its own citizens. For
example, anyone – including government – can create a trust
without expressly using the words “trust”, “trustee”, “benefit”,
“beneficiary”, etc, or any other term that is normally used in
relation to trusts. If you borrow my pen, we have thereby
entered into a “trust” relationship whereby you, the beneficiary,
are enjoying “equitable” (and temporary) use of my pen, while
I, the trustee, retain “legal” title and control over (although not
possession of) the pen. Furthermore, I “trust” that you will
return my pen once you are doing using it, even though no
words have been exchanged between us. Because creating a
trust can literally be just that simple, it is easy for the
government to entangle people78 into trust relationships - and
thereby compromise whatever rights they might normally
expect to have - without having anyone understand what’s
really going on.
This program of silent usurpation of citizen rights vis-à-vis
trusts works so well, in fact, that government now uses “trusts”
of some form or another at very nearly every nexus point it has
w/ the People at large. For instance, another (very) common
77
In the last issue, I sarcastically noted that there might still be a
“common law” freeman running about on the loose, somewhere in
America (i.e., someone who was not subject to the Social Security
system). In fact, there are about 14 million adult Americans today who
do not participate in Social Security; of these it seems they can be
divided into roughly two groups: a) the first who object on religious
grounds, with the Amish and Mennonites falling into this category; and
b) the second being the aristocratic intelligentsia ruling the nation, in
the sense that I don’t think many of the Rockefellers or Morgans or
Harrimans really bother with social security numbers. Altogether about
5% of the American adult population does not participate in SS.
78
Especially if the people in question have been deliberated dumbed
down.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
way people get themselves ensnared into government trusts is
when they fill out any sort of “application.” Typically, such an
“application” is really an “application for benefits” and when you
are filling out an “application” for a driver’s license, a Social
Security card, or a bank account, you are probably applying for
some type of “benefit” to be provided by a governmental trust
of some sort. Obtaining a “benefit” from a government trust
puts you in the position of being a “beneficiary”, and hence
forfeits most – if not all – of your claims to any legal rights or
79
standard at law relative to trust property. If you should ever
lodge a complaint against the trust or the trustees, the courts
will silently presume that: 1) you recognized the trust
relationship when you “applied” to become a beneficiary; and
2) you knowingly and voluntarily surrendered your inalienable
(and legal) rights when you applied for beneficiary status.
Based on those silent presumptions, you will lose your case.
80
Insofar as the average person can’t even imagine that they
would be seduced into surrendering their inalienable rights just
by filling out an application, they will never raise an effective
defense in court against the imposition of duties (or loss of
rights) under an unseen governmental trust.
Even worse, unlike contractual relationships, there is no
requirement for “full disclosure” when you create a trust or
designate someone to be a beneficiary. Why? Because the
beneficiary is presumed to be incompetent and unable to
understand the trust or its operation. Just like a father can
create a trust for his five-year-old child, w/o informing the child
of the creation or existence of the trust, so too can government
create a trust and designate you as the beneficiary w/o
explicitly informing you on that fact. Your relationship to any
property held by that government trust will henceforth be that
of a beneficiary; your pleadings will be heard in a court of
equity (not a court of law) and you will have no legal rights or
resource upon which to stand.
Not an altogether satisfactory way of doing things, is it? But
surely there must be some tangible benefits to dealing w/
79
Most people seem to have been conditioned into think that when
they fill out an “application” of some kind, they are applying for “free”
benefits of some sort. Silly them.
80
Amazingly, this statement applies even to the average lawyer 
Page 17
Social Security, aren’t there? Well yes, there are. For one, it’s
extremely difficult (almost impossible) to get a job in the United
States w/o having a Social Security Number (SSN). Remember
that Social Security was enacted in a time of severe financial
distress81 – a veritable economic coup d’etat – under the color
of imparting to “beneficiaries” the guarantee of a retirement
pension. But, in time, as is customary with government
programs, a great many other additional “benefits” and
enticements (as well as fiduciary obligations) have grown up
around the vast socialist wealth redistribution scheme82 83
known as Social Security; especially as such matters concern
wages, labor and “employment.” The “Social Security-to-
employment” nexus is a crucial one to understand, as this is
the means by which most people today are compelled to apply
for and receive a Social Security Number (SSN). Today we’re
going to take a closer look at this SS / employment nexus, and
the sorts of trade-offs that are involved when you (voluntarily)
go to work for an employer who demands of you a SSN.
The first thing to get a proper handle on is the relationship
most working Americans have with the State itself: although
few people think of their jobs in such terms, the truth is that
anyone who works for a corporation – be this any corporation
(large, small, LLC, etc) – is in fact working for a creation of the
State, and hence is working (indirectly) for the State itself.84
81
Social Security was enacted in 1935, two years after FDR
confiscated all of America’s gold in 1933.
82
I have in mind here not the touchy-feely, Leftist, utopic vision of a
world where everyone loves everyone else and we can all redistribute
wealth to those who are in most dire need of it (it’s a fact that many
monasteries operate along more or less such socialist / communist
lines and principles, and do so w/ relative success); rather I have in
mind here the mechanism by which all (political) Communism works
and for which schemes like Social Security were created: namely, the
(usually surreptitious) transfer of wealth from the poor to the wealthy,
affecting the destruction of the middle class in the process.
83
The Supreme Court has ruled that Social Security was intended, at
least in part, to be a system wealth redistribution: see Fleming v.
Nestor 363 US 603.
84
The situation in which most or all of the means of production are in
the hands of the State is, of course, Communism; America has
practiced full-blown Communism, which is to say, the Ten Planks of
Marx’s Communist Manifesto, since 1933 and FDR’s New Deal. The
level of centralized economic planning and control exerted by
Washington has only grown steadily since then, although the truth of
what is really happening is often cloaked behind slick, Orwellian
DoubleSpeak intended to distract and mislead. One of the key
differences between America and say, the former USSR, is that in the
US, there is one level of indirection (a “buffer” of sorts) between the
State and those who are employed by it. In America, we call this “level
of indirection”, this “buffer zone”, the corporation.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
Corporations are not common law “businesses” in the sense
85
that a sole proprietorship or a partnership, etc, might be;
rather, they are legal fictions created by the State for the
purpose of realizing a direct, tangible benefit towards the
general public welfare.86 The State, of course, much like any
other organization, can create and enforce the various rules
and regulations that its own employees are expected to abide
by. Likewise, the State may also exercise near total
discretionary power and authority over the rules and
regulations that its creations (i.e., the corporations) must
follow,87 as well as (by extension) over those persons who are
in any way contracted with these various State corporations (a
group which today includes very nearly every working man and
woman in the United States; in the sense that nearly everyone
88
is working for some kind of corporation). The State may
exercise such authority and control over its corporations and
those employed by them through a variety of means, including
89
regulation by statute and taxation.
85
Today the tax laws have been contorted to the point where even
these “common law” businesses operate under color of corporate
aegis, and so generally require SSNs of their employees.
86
There was a time and an era when to incorporate a business
required a charter that was voted upon and granted by the respective
State Legislature.
87
It is a well known and very ancient maxim of law that “the Creator
rules the created,” legal precedent for which can be found (somewhat
obviously, perhaps) as far back as the Bible, and right up through the
common law of the Middle Ages and up to modern times. For example,
we might expect and understand that parents should have the right to
exercise some degree of control and discipline over their own children.
(Of course in America today, most people – including both parents and
children – operate under the legal status of being official “wards” of the
State, and so it is that the State has ultimate say over who owns and
what happens to most children in America. Horror stories of what
happens in Child Protective Services abound, but is too far off-topic to
delve into further here).
88
And who created the State in the first place? We the People. Or
perhaps – in the case of the federal Union – We the States; in fact,
there were serious proposals in the Constitutional Convention of 1787
to have to preamble read “We the States” rather than “We the People”;
after all, it was the States who were coming together into a “more
perfect union”, not the people; i.e., it’s called the “United States of
America”, not the “United Peoples of America.”
That being said, one can argue whether the current regime operating
out of Washington is in fact a creation of of “We the People/States” or
whether it is a creation of the central bankers who seized control of the
land in 1913. Certainly, “We the People” seem to exercise less than
satisfactory control over Washington’s policymaking, and Clinton
Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin is on public record as stating that the
Federal Reserve controls U.S. domestic policy, while the IMF controls
U.S. foreign policy.
89
The Supreme Court has even ruled that the State has the right to
destroy one of its created corporations through taxation if it so desires:
Enochs v. Williams 370, US 1 (1962).
Page 18
This is key to understand. While it is true that there is no “law”
requiring an American to pay or file income taxes (an argument
favored by many in the tax protest community), there are
government trusts and there are government benefits.90
Private individuals have no common law “right” to work for a
corporation: working for a corporation (or for the State itself) is
a privilege granted by the State and if you are going to accept
that privilege – accept that “benefit” – you’re going to have to
play by the State’s rules. Corporations do not come from the
common law, and the common law does not recognize
corporations created under the jurisdiction of the civil law.
Corporations are juristic State-created persons, and hence
their creator - the State - can (and does) demand (under the
civil law) whatever performance it desires from its creations
(and from those persons who are in any way legally contracted
to its corporate creations). So for instance, the State91 may
require private and otherwise “free” individuals to obtain a
State-created franchise, something akin to a license92, in order
to work for the State or for any of its creations in the form of a
SSN. By then broadening the scope of corporate power and
control so that It drowns out all other private, “common law”
businesses,93 the gremlins in Washington have arrived at an
entirely new and creative way to ensnare and entrap you into
coming under the umbrella of Social Security: if they don’t get
you with the “carrot” of a “free” government pension plan, 94
90
Or at least, what the government alleges to be benefits. The genuine
extent to which such programs are “beneficial” and “desirable” is a very
open question indeed.
91
A state government, or the U.S. federal government, or any
organized body politic, for that matter.
92
A license is formally defined as permission from the State to commit
crime (ever wonder where the word “licentious” comes from?). 007’s
“License to Kill” hits closer to the truth than many movie-goers realize.
Think also of what this means in the context of a driving “license”; a
business “license”; a hunting “license”; even a marriage “license”; all
these are activities that have been formally criminalized in America by
the State, unless permission in written form (in the form of a “license”)
is first obtained from the State so as to commit such tort or trespass
without legal liability.
93
Most of which had already been “licensed” into coming under
government control anyway, starting more esp. in the 1930s. Ever
wonder why hair dressers or masseuses need a State license to
operate?
94
After they’ve triggered a global, decade-long economic Depression
to terrify you into “voluntarily” accepting that government handout. In
fact, only government can get away w/ running a racket like SS; if SS
were run out of the private sector, the government would have to shut it
down on the basis of fraud and racketeering: precise statistics escape
me, but the average retiree sees something like 1/20 of the $$ they
invested over the course of their career into SS; also, this statistic is
not adjusted for the corrosive effects of inflation.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
they’ll get you with the “stick” of forcing (essentially) all
employers in the nation to operate under the auspices of Social
Security and hence make of themselves corporate extensions
of State power; subjecting the day-to-day economic life of their
employees to whatever rules and regulations the State desires
to impose.
Now a SSN attaches to a great many other government
“benefits” than simply (a) the carrot of a government-pension;
or (b) the stick of needing one in order to sustain yourself and
put food on your table viz employment: for instance, you can’t
get unemployment insurance, or welfare, or food stamps, or
Aid to Dependent Families, or worker’s compensation
insurance, etc., without a SSN. You don’t qualify for minimum
wage unless you’re working for the State or for one of its
corporate creations and have a SSN. All in all, there are at
least 108 direct benefits that attach to “beneficiaries” of the
95
Social Security trust.
But where there are benefits or privileges, there are usually
(sometimes hidden) costs as well. In fact, in the eyes of the
State, any privilege granted by government is a proper subject
for taxation.96 Once the prospective (State or corporate)
employee has admitted to the desire for, applied for and
obtained a franchise from the State in the form of an SSN, he
now qualifies for a tax on his “income” – allegedly levied for the
purpose of financing these benefits, although in the case of the
federal income tax such reasoning is entirely spurious.97 Now,
because a stand-alone tax on your labor and income would be
a direct tax, and because direct taxation is forbidden by the
95
When I recently went to renew my driver’s license in New York
State, I was told I could not do so w/o my Social Security card. So I
suppose we can now add “driver’s licenses” to the list of “benefits” that
Social Security trust beneficiaries are able to receive, although New
York’s legal basis and justification for having such a requirement is
extremely dubious (imho). In fact, the whole racket of criminalizing the
use of roadways and forcing everyday “not-for-hire” (i.e., not cab
drivers, truck drivers, limo drivers, etc) drivers to be licensed, bonded
and insured in order to use the roadways is an extremely dubious
practice to my mind; one fostered and financed almost exclusively by
the insurance industry, an industry which has been more directly
responsible for the destruction of American principles and ideals than
any other, w/ the possible exception of banking.
96
I believe here was once a Supreme Court ruling to this effect, but the
precise citation escapes me.
97
The Grace Commission, set up by Ronald Reagan during his first
term in office, found that 100.0% of all dollars collected by the IRS go
to one of two places: (a) government waste; or (b) paying off the
national debt.
Page 19
Constitution unless it is apportioned amongst the States, the
gremlins in Washington have to be a little more crafty about
how they go about assessing and collecting this “income” tax –
even though they are still operating w/in the context of a trust.
To this end, what they actually do is levy an excise tax98 upon
the “privilege” you derive from working for the State or one of
its created corporations (what most Americans believe to be an
“income” tax is in truth an “excise” tax).99 100 And because a
17% (minimum) federal income tax alone is not going to be
enough to ends meet101 when government is extending all
these “benefits” (in truth, subsidies) like unemployment
insurance, workers compensation insurance, minimum wage,
etc., to all its Social Security beneficiaries, the government
goes right ahead and charges you another 16% tax on your
income in the form of a Social Security tax. Now already that’s
1/3 of everything you earn and produce going right out the door
to pay for government-granted “privilege” of putting food on
your own table; and don’t forget that these are just two of the
14 taxes that attach to the Social Security system. All told,
these 14 taxes will consume – depending on who you are and
what your status is – anywhere from 50% to 75% of your
income.102
98
In other words, a “privilege” tax.
99
This is an extremely important, b/c an excise tax is an indirect tax
and therefore need not be apportioned among the several States.
Were the tax laid directly on income, it would represent a direct tax,
and would therefore be subject to apportionment, as the Constitution
demands. The IRS does not apportion the taxes it assesses; that is,
the IRS is collecting an indirect tax (i.e., a tax that is avoidable by not
volunteering / participating in the system, in the same way the gas tax
is avoidable by not driving).
100
Can the IRS be sued on the basis of semantics? (i.e., calling it an
“income” tax when in truth it’s an “excise” tax?)  There is more here
than meets the eye: take a close look sometime at USC 31, Chapter 3,
Sub-Chapter 1, which lists all the agencies and bureaus operating out
of the U.S. Treasury. You’ll notice (perhaps conspicuously) that the IRS
is not listed as one of them (nor is the BATF, which also claims
Treasury authority). So ask yourself why the IRS goes ahead and
stamps “U.S. Department of Treasury” on all their mailings, when
they’re not listed as such in Title 31? Aaron Russo’s film, “America:
Freedom to Fascism” is a good primer on the subject.
101
In truth, as explained in the footnotes above (Grace Commission),
the income tax finances no direct benefit whatsoever; the income tax is
partly an inflation control measure and mostly a means of providing ex-
post-facto financing to support the spending of Congress by providing
the means to pay interest on the debt created by Congress, the
Federal Reserve and the commercial banks participating in the Federal
Reserve system.
102
This statistic includes only those taxes associated w/ Social
Security; it does not include, e.g., property taxes, State-mandated auto
insurance (which is a form of tax), inflation (which is the most insidious
and pernicious tax of all), etc.
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2
A heavy progressive income tax is the Second Plank of Marx’s
Communist Manifesto. Are you beginning to see why? What
better way to destroy the purchasing / economic power of your
business rivals / competition than by forcing them to participate
in the debtor’s prison known as Social Security?103
But opening yourself up to the (potential) liability of taxation is
just one of the “costs” that attach to being a beneficiary of the
Social Security trust. In addition, so as to better facilitate the
administration and financing of these benefits / subsidies, you
may – as an employee of the State or one of its created
corporations – be compelled to do some, any or all of the
following:
1. Obtain a SSN as a federal license to work for the
State or its created corporations;104
2. Accept Federal Reserve Notes in payment or just
consideration of the debt arising amongst the various
105
agencies, franchises and corporations of the State;
3. Pay any federal tax debt arising from your franchise in
Federal Reserve notes;
103
Actually, there is a better way: it’s called inflation. But that’s why KB
recommends emphatically that you acquire as much gold (and silver)
as you can get your mitts on 
104
US v. Flora, 362 US 145
105
In fact, this is the only purpose that Federal Reserve Notes have
ever served, and it is (still) the only purpose (real) purpose that they
continue to serve even today. Prior to 1933, FRNs were not circulated
amongst the general public: they were only circulated among the Fed
banks themselves, and several government agencies, as a means of
keeping track of what debt was owed to whom. And so even today,
FRNs are still not “technically” circulated amongst the “general” public;
rather, they are (still) only circulated amongst the Fed banks and
several government agencies as a means of keeping track of what
debt is owed to whom. The difference between now and 1933 is that in
1933, most (free) Americans were compelled to take upon themselves
the status of becoming an “agency” of the federal government by
taking on a SSN. In other words, FRNs are not “real” money; they are,
in fact, “notes” – which is to say, a form of debt. If all “business” activity
takes place under a single corporate umbrella (USG), wherefore the
need for “money”? There is no need for $$ in that case(!); rather, all
you need is simply a way of keeping track of the debits + credits that
arise amongst the various agencies/departments/etc of the One
Corporation – and this is precisely why FRNs exist; they are nothing
more than a debit/credit tracking mechanism being used facilitate the
Holy Grail of Communism: a society w/o money(!) This is what is
meant by jurists studying Social Security and the income tax who
allege that Social Security ( “security” in the penal sense of the word)
is little more than debtor’s prison: a prison w/o walls, perhaps, a
prison for the whole of “society” (hence “Social” Security), but a prison
nevertheless arising from the USG bankruptcy of 1933.
Page 20
4. Provide information, regardless of any so-called “Fifth
Amendment” “rights” against self-incrimination you
may or may not have;106
5. File a tax return
6. File an IRS W-4 Form upon employment, which is a
contract of franchise and expectation and promise of
payment of tax due at year’s end.
Such as some of the benefits – as well as some of the
associated costs – attaching to “beneficiaries” of the Social
Security trust. This is all in addition to the greatest cost (of all)
of the Social Security trust that we alluded to in the last letter:
namely, that legal title to (i.e., control of) all property to which
an SSN is attached passes on to the Federal Government.
Such property may include your homes, cars, bank accounts,
insurance policies, passports; perhaps even your own body.
So now perhaps have you have a slightly better appreciation
for why the gremlins in Washington seem to get away w/ such
brazenly un-Constitutional conduct. The truth is they have
cleverly sidestepped the Constitution by maneuvering the
public into contracts, into “trusts,” where the people have no
standing in law and where they have no legal rights107
whatsoever – Constitutional or otherwise. Perhaps now too you
may have slightly greater sympathy for that federal judge as he
sits in his Star Chamber108 handing down guilty verdict after
guilty verdict after guilty verdict on matters relating to
everything from taxes to eminent domain to free speech to
anything else you can think of. As one noted federal judge
recently said (quoting loosely): “All we’re doing is administering
equity.. Look, equity may be a [deleted explicative], but that’s
all we’re doing.”
106
Never forget: beneficiaries of a trust never have any rights w/in the
context of that trust(!)
107
i.e., rights at law.
108
The phrase “Star Chamber” is not used capriciously; it has a well-
defined legal meaning, specifically meant to describe legal or
administrative bodies with strict, arbitrary rulings and secretive
proceedings. It was a favorite means of administration for the Nazis (as
it is for fascists of any stripe). Historically, the term was often used to
describe the “Star Chamber” that met at the royal palace of
Westminster from 1487 until 1641. The term appears to have first been
used during the reign of King Edward II (reigned 1307 – 1327).
The King’s Bench – April 25, 2007 – Number 2 Page 21

It may also give you the perspective to appreciate the
humorous – no, in fact, the utterly ridiculous – situation most
Americans find themselves in, whereby they make the
(frivolous) claim that “Hey! We’re taxpayers! And so we
demand to know this and that and the other thing about our
government!” … Or “Hey! We have rights as taxpayers! We
have a right to see some accountability here! We demand it
since we’re good citizens and we pay our taxes!”
People of America!! It’s Time to Wake Up!!!
You wouldn’t be a taxpayer if you still had any rights
109
left!
Your status as a taxpayer is proof that you have no rights(!!)110
Your status as a taxpayer is proof that you are a beneficiary to
111
Social Security, and beneficiaries have no rights or standing
112
at law. You cannot acquire the legal status of “taxpayer” in
the United States unless you have already first applied for and
accepted the benefits of some kind of government trust,
usually the Social Security trust (although an American may be
“beneficiary” to numerous other government trusts at any
particular moment in time). Remember too what it means to be
the beneficiary of a trust: it means you have no standing at law;
it means you have no (legal) rights in the context of the trust; it
means that disputes will be heard not in a court of law, but
rather in a court of equity where the judge is not bound to heed
or obey any particular law at all, but rather is free to rule in
whatever manner his conscience desires. It is a perhaps ironic
truth that the only people left in America who have any
standing in land, who have any rights – legal, Constitutional, or
God-given – are precisely those individuals who do not pay
taxes.113 Such are the sentiments that motivated one noted
judge to point out that “who would believe the ironic truth that
the cooperative taxpayer fares much worse than the individual
who relies upon his Constitutional rights.”114
More next time on courts of equity (i.e., judicial Star Chambers)
and how they destroy the carefully constructed Rule of Law
that the Framers of the Constitution based the American
Republic upon.
To be continued…

109
One way I like to describe to “costs” of being a taxpayer, the “costs”
of living under Social Security, the income tax, the Federal Reserve,
etc, to those who are just waking up to the whole inflation / income tax
/ Federal Reserve ponzi scheme is as follows: The Federal Reserve
has devalued the purchasing power of your dollar to 4% (probably
more) of what it was when the Fed came into existence; so knowing
that, which would you rather have: (a) would rather have $100k in
income and pay 30% in income taxes on it?; or (b) would you rather
have $2.5 mil (i.e., $100k x 25 in purchasing power) in income and pay
ZERO income taxes on it? Kind of a no-brainer, isn’t it? 
The example is a bit contrived, I confess, but if the truth of where
purchasing power has fled lies somewhere between $100k and $2.5mil
in this example, my sense is that it probably lies closer to $2.5 mil than
most Washington bureau-rats would be comfortable admitting to.
110
Another way that I’ve heard the institution of the income tax + IRS
described is that it amounts to little more than a military tribute forced
upon the American people by the conquering central banks in 1913.
This is not an altogether inappropriate analogy. Free, sovereign people
do not pay a tax on their income: for reference, talk to Adam Smith
(Wealth of Nations) or Jesus Christ himself (Matt 17:24-26). The
framers of the Constitution knew + understood this, and so structured
taxation in the Constitution so that the bulk of it would accrue indirectly,
in the form of tariffs + excises charged on imported goods.
111
More accurately, status as a taxpayer is not altogether different from
the status of a slave (or at least, that of a serf).
112
At least, they have no rights in the context of the trust; but as we’ve
seen, the Social Security trust has grown to consume just about 113
“everything” in America at this point in history. There are precious few Such people making up, as cited above, about 5% of the adult
things you can do anymore w/o bumping up against Social Security American population: for the most part, by my reckoning, mainly the
(i.e., w/o, at some point along in the transaction, having invoked your Amish, the Mennonites and the Rockefellers.
114
SSN in some way). US v. Dickerson 413 F 2D 1111.