Pat Dollard

[...] Kaiser of Jamestown, Rhode Island but it is not. Instead, it was posted in a comment section of Pat Dollard’s blog The War Starts Here by someone identifying themselves as TPS. I am including it here for you to read as it is really [...]

I just happend on your site through snopes.com trying to learn more about an author who penned a misattributted email, supposedly monikered ‘TPS’.

Any way, Mr. Dollard, I have some information that I would like to share, it touches many areas and subjects….for example:

Article 1, Section 8 Clause 5 of the US constitution states, that among the enumerated responsibilities of Congress, it lists that congress SHALL: coin the nation’s money, and regulate the value, thereof.

What are we doing, allowing, for the last Ninety-six years, a corporate entity OTHER THAN Congress, to, cheif among its other duties including regulation of the economy, to allow distribution of FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES as “the paper form” of the currency, when Congress can create the paper form of the currency without immense cost to itself, or the citizens?

What are we also doing, allowing a Taxation structure that does not adhere to the appropriation of population? Is this as a “remedy” to the apparent “first” violation?

Two wrongs do not make a right.

What would happen if on Monday morning, President Obama, declared in Proclimation, that all US MINTED coins(preferrably the lowly penny, just to put a thumb in someone’s eye), that happened to be minted on a certain year between 19XX-19XX, at a certain mint on that year, could be handed over to a certain government agency setup quickly, equiped with a certain tool, process that coin in a certain way, handing it back to said presenter, and leaving that said facility, now presenter has a coin that is worth 10,000 times its face value, by the power vested in the LAW.

Most assuredly the Federal Reserve guys will definitely scream “INFLATION”. and use the talk radio people to decry it as “FOUL” and “Upsetting the economy!”

And of course, since we think Obama is a Bank-backed Globalist, the idea of doing this kind of measure would NEVER be entertained, for if it were, his cabinet would be really quick to shoot it down as a “bad idea”, before it took root in his head, searching for ideas to pay down the debt…

for we believe he and his cabinet, as well as most of congress, regardless of the “D” or R” moniker, to be “globalists” as well, all wanting a “one-world” global socialist government, with corporate feudalism as the economy of choice, and they along with their elite freinds as rulers over the earth.

So obama, seeing the corner he paints himself in, albeit with his fellow bank-backed buddies’ eager help. Has a choice….does he “go along to get along” and allow his cabinent to run things the way the bank wants…all the while saying “he’s in charge here” so as not to cause trouble?

Or does he buck the bank, which is, probably, the only way to pay down and pay off the debt, and STILL have that bank operating as ususal….?

Well if he chooses the former….he’s “safe” but the country will be “destroyed” by its crushing economic millstone and its taxation regimen (Perception being the 900-pound gorilla in the room)

And if he chooses the latter…to buck the bank…he’s in trouble…

There also lies a paralell with Iran, and A-jad…

Now here in the states…We are fed the news that Ahmadinejad wants to build the bomb to blow Isreal off the map…and we see him and North Korea, and are dutifully scared of the enemy…wanting Uncle Sam to “save us from the evil monster”

But if A-jad did it…wouldn’t all that fallout be blown by the wind right back at him? I think he knows that, too. But the “hype” has to be maintained neverthless….because here’s what I think A-jad wants to do…

He knows that oil, as a commodity, is a value controlled by someone other than him. Naturally, Iran is now importing oil at a huge cost to itself, causing misery at the pump. But…Iraninan LAW he can control, albeit with guidance from the Clerics that REALLY rule the country…

Now…what would happen if, forced to back the money on something OTHER than the sheer force of the GOVERNMENT on its people, or the OIL value, decided, that Weapons-Grade Plutonium, of which a certain kind made in his labs, and positioned on those missles, and pointed at israel, and all CONFIRMED as such,…..could be used as a backing of a currency that he could distribute inside his country, without cost of interest to any bank, thereby lowering any potential HUGE TAX INCREASES or Debt assumptions, that he must foist on his people, on top of the necessary Sharia law, that his people foist on themselves, with his and his cleric master’s blessing….?

And all Israel has to do is act scared, like its doing now…?

Of course, what mires this idea into impossibility is Ajad’s true hatred of israel…and iran’s use of proxy soldiers to attempt to destroy the Jewish nation. Bad, chronic scotomas on all sides prevent a sideways Lincoln-monetary miracle to take root in the Middle East…Plus added to the fact that the “free” world… is basically the “debt-controlled” world…

More brain-droppings to follow if allowed, later.

Thank you for your time reading this, and I hope that I did not strain your eyeballs too much…

[...] incorrectly attributed to David Kaiser, having appeared initially as a post by “TPS” at Pat Dollard’s [...]

COMMENT FAIL!

@Kapt. Blasto, That was brilliant.

@TPS (if you are indeed THE TPS): You have made a mockery of those that actually STUDY and TEACH history for a living. You’re just another lemming whose jumped on the right-wing bandwagon of comparing Hitler and Obama. If you actually KNEW your German history, you would understand why this comparison is SO absurd. Take this paragraph from your poorly written rant:

“Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.”

What is your credible source that proclaims Germany to be the most education & cultured country in Europe? During the time Hitler was coming into power, Germany was in RUINS, mostly because of the WEST and the reparations that they put on Germany during the Treaty of Versailles. I’m assuming that as “a student of history” that you do know about the Treaty of Versailles, don’t you? You know then that Germany was not present at negotiations, was forced to sign the treaty which, through a series of “punishments” from the major WESTERN countries, caused significant psychological, social and political, and financial damage to Germany such that it had no chance to recover from war. THAT is how a man such as Hitler was able to come to power in Germany.

I say to you, TPS, “student of history” — read your history books a little more carefully you write ill-thought diatribes that make their way across the internet because it’s been (purposely???) misattributed.

The email I received was attributed to David Kaiser, Historian. I agree with much of what was said, but the references to Germany’s leadership in arts, culture, etc. rang false. Then the ref to Hitler’s “election” firmed up my suspicions, as Herr H was never elected. No historian would make that error. Snopes confirmed my suspicions.

@TPS: Was this comment, aimed at me, perhaps?

Well, let me stare back at you similarly.

because my avatar has told me it spotted you right through the text…and it said that it magically spotted you not wearing your underwear correctly, as normal humans would…

But, as this avatar indicates to me…it might be because it was easier access for your hand to reach your bottom, to scratch out that last dingleberry, that was giving you quite a bit of trouble, as you sat and wrote that profound missive.

And I am so glad you were able to give yourself comfort. Most of us, however, use toilet paper to rid ourselves of that nastiness, before we leave the restroom.

But…my avatar indicates to me, that you might have made a mistake in scooping out that last dingleberry from yourself….

You may have just removed whatever passed for your brain.

Oh look! there’s three more avatars backing up the first avatar’s suspicions…

Boy are you dumb!

This is the email I received. I added comments to it for my friend who forwarded it to me. These comments are not easily distinguishable from the original essay as the paste ended up entirely as one font color.
=====================================================

Of course I have since found out that Dr. Steiner did not write this essay, and that it was promulgated with his name by someone with suspect ethics.

Here are Dr. Steiner’s comments from his http://www.historyunfolding.blogspot.com site:
A historian’s comments on current events, foreign and domestic.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Echoes of Vietnam
[People are still arriving here because they have received an email on the current state of America. If you are curious about my own views of the origins and consequences of the current crisis in American life, I recommend this link. However, the email attributed to myself comparing President Obama to Adolf Hitler, is a forgery which I did not write. All visitors may also be interested to read the following post. Meanwhile, here is the best explanation I've found of why that email is so incredibly popular.] [One must go to this site to open the very interesting link to this "best explanation."]
================================================

I hope you find the time to read this with an open mind. It’s interesting. Please read it with the open mind rather than immediately breaking it down into left or right, but rather look at it from the neutral viewpoint of right or wrong. It’s like the line below says, “what if he is right?”

Take the three minutes to read this.
Maybe he is wrong.
What if he is right?
Very few persons, even when they discuss something simple, are either entirely wrong or entirely right. It is always useful to carefully consider views that do not coincide with one’s own. This is an excellent way to expand one’s horizons and check for flaws and biases in one’s own thinking. However, what Dr. Kaiser discusses is not simple. Therefore it is nearly impossible to categorize what he says as “right” or “wrong.” What is easier to do is to evaluate the quality of his presentation.

David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College . He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser’s latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.

Dr. David Kaiser

History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. Note the time frame here. I would say some of what Dr. Kaiser mentions has been evolving for much longer. However, he does not mention specific historical markers for what he is feeling and smelling, so it is nearly impossible to figure out how he arrived at the stated time frame. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two. Actually, I think it had started as early as the Kennedy presidency, but accelerated under Reagan and Clinton. In my opinion it worsened precipitously under Bush, which led to the crisis that was in full force by last year, and which has allowed the government to justify almost unprecedented action (if one argues that we are cannot make wartime comparisons). But because Dr. Kaiser time frame and markers are nebulous or unstated, and the “something monumental is poorly defined, I am not even sure that I am talking about the same thing.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has “loaned” two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of “we the people,” who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not. The Fed is an unpleasant thing to consider, but since it exists it is good to know about it. G. Edward Griffin’s book The Creature from Jekyll Island is the best I’ve seen on the subject. For an easier overview I recommend his CD of the same name, available from http://www.realityzone.com. It provides some background for working through the “why” question below. Answers to the “why” and “who questions above are mostly available to an economic or historical researcher, and perhaps should have been referenced rather than presented as mysteries. We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why? (Dr. Kaiser presents “intentionally” as fact. To my knowledge most economists generally would support the contention that industrialization has declined – and supply nuances to provide a fuller picture – but would strongly disagree with the word “intentionally.” This word implies a conspiracy. And why use the word “we?” Why not “In the last two or more decades the industrial component of the US economy has declined in accordance with (some entity’s) plan?”)

We (we? – you, I and Dr. Kaiser, perhaps?) have intentionally (intentionally?) dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. It is by no means universally accepted that this has been done intentionally. This is a statement that requires documentation.) Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. (One mark of someone who is arguing to convince by emotion and not by reason is that they make sweeping statements. He of course means most parents, most teachers, etc…) Why? (It seems strange to me that Dr. Kaiser’s apparent answer, suggested in the latter part of this essay, is that it may be the work of one evil and ambitious man intent on seducing and then using America for his own purposes.)

We have now established the precedent of protesting every (again, a sweeping statement – in this case a misleading one, as there have been recent close elections that have not been much protested, certainly not legally) close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago? True point, but somewhat spurious here. Does help build emotional force for the message. We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. This is now turning more emotive than cognitive. Again, sweeping statements are made. Emotionally charged words (“corrupted,” “sacred,” “radically,” “Marxist,” “banana republic”) are employed. Rationality is fading a bit – let’s find a specific banana republic and compare, in theory and practice, our voting system to theirs – are they more or less identical? To what purpose? (Answered by Dr. Kaiser below?)

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. (Again, a bit too much emotion; too little analysis. It’s almost seems like Dr. Kaiser is assuming his audience is unwilling to think deeply. There are very specific reasons going back at least ten years for the collapse of the mortgage industry. This is directly related to the housing market, which is actually not in free fall but, having returned to the level it was at ten years ago when some of the disruptive mortgage factors were introduced, is actually recovering. Social Security has been a predictable problem since at least 1965 but the political and national will to address it has been and is almost nil. One would think Dr. Kaiser must be aware of some of this. But if he is, why does he put things in such emotive black and white terms? Our education system is worse than a joke (“Joke” strikes me as another term that could be construed as emotive – and really, what does “worse than a joke” really say? Couldn’t he instead make a precise point using available facts and statistics? (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) this implies that my kids, your kids and most of the college kids we know are incompetent…- the list (which list?) is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten (precision in analysis is a good sign, but again this seems emotive. Why not 1929 x 8, or maybe 42? – what is this statement doing here?…And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. (We do have a nebulous enemy, and political correctness has, in my opinion, gone a bit too far. And this enemy does include individuals who would love to see us and our children die. But there are also brave Iraqs and Afghans who have died and seen their children die in an effort to achieve freedom. Let’s remember that those who sincerely believe in the human right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness should not be callously grouped with others of the same genetic or national heritage, despite the difficulty of telling them apart. Yes, simplicy is appealing. But who, individually, is our enemy? Should we include, for example, the Afghan and Iraqi women who have risked death to go to school?

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska (actually much is known about our current president’s background, and only a nuanced interpretation supports Dr. Kaiser’s statement. Deconstruction of the statement leads me to suspect the intent is to be derisive and to suggest the majority of the US population voted incorrectly in the last election if the criteria was experience as a mayor, governor or CEO. Perhaps this could have been said more clearly. In any case, the discussion is a long one. This compelling but emotive statement is one that few historians would make without providing full context. .. All (“all” is simply and verifiably false. If making this argument one would want to define the emotive word “radicals” and substitute “many” for “all”) of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (This statement belongs in an essay from a respected historian?)(Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.) (And this one? This seems more to appeal to a group of persons who have identified media bias – and this point can be made reasonably – but what is it doing here almost as a gripe rather than a well-supported point? And again, here is the “never” word. Like the “always” word its use usually marks shallow thinking and an appeal to emotion.
Mr. Obama’s winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. (A guy on the street might say this. A well-educated historian should be able to analyze more deeply. When one deliberately
ignores complexity, the reason is usually to appeal to emotion or to avoid deep thinking.) Why? Setting up a straw scenario and then asking “why” can be persuasive, especially with a favorable audience, but is poor thinking. (Example: Wife to her mother: he never listens when I talk! Why?? The mother’s answer – because he’s no good; we both know that…)

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. (He is verbalizing the emotion he feels. Given that he his previous statements and presentations have been largely emotional, I do believe him. But I wish he had stayed with facts and employed his own purportably excellent training.)

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment (in my experience emotion often interferes with objectivity, so I feel Dr. Kaiser’s assessment must be viewed with real caution. I do appreciate him identifying this view as his own assessment and not a fact. I wish he had done this with many of his previous statements.) Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. (Dr. Kaiser’s background provides us with very good reasons to think deeply about his assessment. Unfortunately, my opinion is that his exposition is quite poorly done, and weakens the force of these previous statements. He has repeatedly presented his opinions as facts, and ignored backing these opinions with supporting evidence, and attempted to compensate with emotional statements and words.)

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the “savior” was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative “losers” read it right now. (Two comparisons one often sees are “if we put a man on the moon, why can’t we…” and the Nazi comparison. To me these both almost always mean the presenter is no longer thinking precisely. It is sad to see this from a historian. I cringed when the Bush-haters used the Nazi comparison and I cringe when the Obama-haters use it. It is highly emotive, and anyone with an ability to think rationally should know that it should be avoided, but if used, only with extreme caution and careful disclaimers, and never as a simple comparison.)

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his “brown shirts” would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did – regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand – the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media – did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and …. .. .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It’s all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. (Certainly Dr. Kaiser’s training, objectivity and breadth of knowledge would not allow him to compare himself to Winston Churchill, although one might mistakenly think this is what he is doing.) He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . (A historian would hopefully not be ignorant of many other relevant things about the Germany of 80 years ago: the recent defeat in a World War, the crushing poverty, the almost toxic historical nationalistic and racial pride, the largely racially uniform population, the wish for simple solution and for someone, something or some group to blame things on… Besides these there are hundreds of other relevant items that one would only omit if, Hitler-like, one wished to appeal to emotion rather than reason.) It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions (although Dr. Kaiser claims not to be overly prone to emotional decisions, much of this piece is short on supporting evidence and long on emotional presentation), I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective (Dr. Kaiser has shared very little objective evidence with us, but lots of subjective observations) pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence.. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. (Really none of these. I’d say a person who can write this compelling a piece and use emotional presentation and innuendo so effectively is far from foolish. But objectively he has done a poor job of presenting evidence, and wandered from starting with “something evolving for ten or fifteen years” to an emotive rant about our president of one year – a rant that to me has many similarities to those that appeared from other quarters about the previous president.) To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections. (This is a surprisingly naïve statement from a student of history who purports to be analyzing a fifteen-year trend. It is the same sort of “only hope” that the Clinton-haters had, and that the Bush-haters had. Sadly, I do think think there is an unsettling trend toward individual greed and cognitive laziness in our population. But the situation and solution is quite a bit less simple than changing one politician. Many citizens need to be involved, and sources of inspiration would be helpful. Looking back at American history, a lassitude similar to what we now have was fairly effectively remedied by World War II, but maybe something else would be better this time. In my opinion many things, small things, are needed. Among other things, more citizens likely need to become informed and involved at the local level. An increased spirit of personal sacrifice for the good of all, and an increased patriotism that involves community and national service rather than words needs to be seen in more individuals. It is not part of our constitution, but many Americans nominally accept the guideline “love thy neighbor as thyself” – and if their actions matched the phrase, I believe their example would strengthen the nation. Having some citizens bold enough to effectively give up their lives and their family’s physical safety – like the Iranian protestors, the Cuban bloggers, the Iraqis who openly welcome other sects than their own, the Chinese rights workers, the Myanmarese opposition, the Mexican, Russian or Venezuelan journalists – to work patiently for what they see as the country’s good – well, this would be something worthwhile. To promulgate poorly thought-out words or to comment on them requires little of the courage, resolve and patience that is needed. Such words, unless they in some way enhances the common good and uplift individuals, are in my opinion more a sign of poorly disguised frustration and egoism than patriotism.

David Kaiser
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States