Send this article to a friend:


We Stand at the Threshold of Two Futures
Tyler Durden

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Date 2020.  Government and central bank excesses are destroying society, people's jobs, the financial markets and human freedom. This is ONLY possible because you still believe in the money they print.

We stand at the threshold of two futures.  The one that becomes reality depends largely on the money you use.  Government money or money owned by people without any central control.  

It is that simple.  It’s your choice.  Decide now.

US flag, colour and monotone

In one world people respect each other and their differences.  Wives and husbands disagree but still create homes and families.  Neighbours don’t see eye to eye but respect each other’s property.

In the other world government decides what people do.  They can enter homes without warrant, force medical examinations and remove family members without reason.

In one world financial markets are free.  People invest in companies and buy their bonds based on the fundamentals of risk and reward.

In the other world markets are controlled by central banks.  With their ability to print infinite amounts of their fiat money they enter markets buying what they choose.  Free markets are dead.

In one world people are free to travel.

In the other world people are confined to their homes “for their own safety”. 

In one world people choose what they wear.

In the other world people are compelled to wear masks.

In one world people are free to work.

In the other world people depend on government hand outs.

In one world people collaborate in building their community.

In the other world people are told what they can and cannot do.

In one world there is free speech.

In the other world mainstream media has only one message “listen to the experts.”

In one world people use stable money that buys the same goods year after year.

In the other world the financial system is on life support sustained only be ever increasing injections of fiat money.

In one world people make mistakes, learn, create and prosper.

In the other world people are controlled by fear.


Who controls the money controls the country.  Your choice.


our mission:

to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public.
to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become.
to liberate oppressed knowledge.
to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint.
to facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
our method: pseudonymous speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. it thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-- and their ideas from suppression-- at the hand of an intolerant society.

...responsibly used.

The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. but political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the united states. used by the likes of mark twain (aka samuel langhorne clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay (aka publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the united states, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. like the economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker- as it should be. we believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.

Send this article to a friend: