dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

>>2937504

The founders were very specific on this point, they clearly understood that “money” had to be based on something of intrinsic value to avoid fraud in the monetary system.

They selected gold and silver coin and named it as such in our Constitution:

“No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;“

We are currently living beyond our means as a society.

We are allowing desperate, destitute people to flood into our country.

We are exporting our jobs and manufacturing base to nations historically hostile to us and we have debased our currency and allowed criminal fraud to run rampant in our banking and financial systems.

At some point a certain inevitably will present itself clearly.

How long until this harbinger arrives and who will suffer the consequences?

#GreatAwakening is not an action…

It is a reaction… and now it has begun.

"The Senator could scarcely believe his ears. 'Now my next question is, is it your intention that the report of this hearing should be that Greenspan recommends a return to the gold standard? Greenspan responded, 'I've been recommending that for years, there's nothing new about that. It would probably mean there is only one vote in the Federal Open Market Committee for that, but it is mine.'"

http://www.usagold.com/publications/greenspan.pdf

An inquiry into the evils of a fluctuating medium of exchange…

A Caveat Against Injustice

http://www.rogershermansociety.org/caveat.htm

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators

bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land.

The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute,

to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law which

violates the Constitution to be valid. This is succinctly stated as

follows:

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and

void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

"When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there

can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."

Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it

imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it

is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never

been passed." Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though

having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is

wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since

unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not

merely from the date of the decision so branding it.

"No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts

are bound to enforce it." 16 Am Jur 2nd, Sec 177 la