The New Era of McCarthyism: How Supporting Gold and Silver Backed Currency is “Domestic Terrorism”
Stop the presses! Raise the threat meter to max! Domestic terrorists are here and they want to destroy your country! They could be your next-door neighbors, your PTA leaders, your religious leaders, or *gasp* your children’s schoolteachers!
McCarthyism, as defined by Wikipedia, is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence. About a week ago, Bernard von NotHaus, the founder and designer of the Liberty Dollar, was convicted of a handful of some quite serious crimes. The charges he was found guilty of include the following:
[Mr. von NotHaus] was found guilty of making coins resembling and similar to United States coins; of issuing, passing, selling and possessing Liberty Dollar coins; of issuing and passing Liberty Dollar coins intended for use as current money; and of conspiracy against the United States.
As reported by CourierPress.com,
The 2007 raid was a development in a dispute between von NotHaus and the U.S. government. In a federal suit filed in March 2007 in U.S. District Court in Evansville, von NotHaus sought a permanent injunction against the federal government to force it to stop referring to the Liberty Dollar as an illegal currency and to require the removal of a warning from the U.S. Mint’s website stating that use of the Liberty Dollar violates federal law.
The suit was triggered by a public warning issued by the U.S. Mint in September 2006. The warning informed Liberty Dollar users that federal prosecutors had determined circulation of the medallions is a federal crime.
According to federal prosecutors, Liberty coins were marked with the dollar sign; the words “dollar,” “USA,” “Liberty,” “Trust in God” (instead of “In God We Trust”); and other features associated with legitimate U.S. coins.
Prosecutors claimed von Not-Haus and Liberty Services had since 1998 been issuing, disseminating and placing into circulation the Liberty Dollar in all its forms throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. The goal was to compete with United States currency.
Today, Tyler at ZeroHedge posted an op-ed written by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com.
Here’s a few noteworthy excerpts:
To be clear, NotHaus made some serious mistakes, including pressing his coins to look semi-similar to standard federal currency, and also using language which could be interpreted to insinuate that his currency was “legal tender”. There are many barter networks in the U.S. that use gold and silver that do not have these kinds of problems with the government simply because they are careful not to make the same blunders.
However, it wasn’t the conviction itself that struck me, so much as the language of the prosecutor, U.S. Attorney Anne Tompkins, in her post trial statement. Let me reprint my favorite parts for you here:
“Attempts to undermine the legitimate currency of this country are simply a unique form of domestic terrorism,”
“While these forms of anti-government activities do not involve violence, they are every bit as insidious and represent a clear and present danger to the economic stability of this country,”
“We are determined to meet these threats through infiltration, disruption and dismantling of organizations which seek to challenge the legitimacy of our democratic form of government.”
My feeling (and this is only an intuitive notion) is that Tompkins had little to do with the writing of those statements, or had much “coaching” from the Department of Homeland Security, which has been expanding its absurd definition of terrorism to include almost anyone who does not agree with the philosophies of establishment elites and corporate global banks. Even returning military veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have been listed as possible domestic terrorist threats. Why not proponents of gold and silver?
What we see here is the not so subtle conditioning of average Americans towards categorizing certain innocuous behaviors as being related to possible criminal or terrorist motives. Owning guns is anti-social, and you are a naughty bad person for liking big boom boom stick. What’s that? A pocket Constitution!? Didn’t McVeigh or one of the 9/11 hijackers carry around something like that? You have a survival garden? Hmm, that sounds fishy. I better call the FDA and make sure everything you’re doing is on the up and up. You want to trade gold and silver? Privately?! That’s obviously “black market” barter, and you are the reason the economy is so unpleasant. I don’t get as many food stamps and free big brother goodies as I used to, and I blame you and your dastardly sense of self sufficiency! The IRS should have your head! And so it goes…
Today, we stand at a bottleneck in the flow of history; a nexus of events which challenge our values, our resolve, and our better natures. Our deepest social and political beliefs will be called into question, our sacred principles of individuality and freedom will face an onslaught of malicious legislation and misguided cultural doubt. These principles always do in the face of global crisis.
To waver is not an option. To retreat is unimaginable. To compromise our core, in this kind of conflict, is to welcome defeat. At bottom, we live in an age of wills that only the strongest of hearts can endure.
As overwhelming as these kinds of struggle can be, as frightening as this kind of responsibility sounds, these are also days of truth and providence. Opportunities to right so many past wrongs in the single breath of an era are rare and precious. Men dream of living in the midst of such moments.
As a people, Americans have been challenged. The test is not only one of might, but one of honor and benevolence. How far are we willing to go to not only save ourselves, but to save each other? What are we really fighting for? Personal survival? The temporary stability and solace of the present? Or something more?
Do we intend to hide away, to merely eek out an existence at the dawn of economic and political catastrophe, or to stand steel faced and immovable in the very wake of the storm? To return to our foundations and hold fast. To not only subsist, but to prosper. To leave for the future something truly better than what we now have.
The most powerful position of defiance we can commit to as a movement is to teach average Americans to stand on their own. To become the purveyors of their own destinies. For me, what we call the Liberty Movement is not only a political entity but a vital philosophy driven by decentralized action and intensified by the growing uniqueness of its participants. It is the anti-thesis of globalization, which aspires only to diminish and dominate the individual, and replace sovereign thought with weak minds and absolute tyranny.
Ultimately, the greatest leaders do not actually seek to lead, but to teach. They do not seek power for themselves; they seek to empower the common man. This is an act of real survival, for a country of steadfast individuals is unconquerable. It is a place without fear.”
Tagged in: global markets, precious metals, regulation, silver market
