The Federal Reserve, not a Government agency??

[TheFreeAmerican]

Are you aware that the Federal Reserve is not a government agency but a small group of privately owned banks? Worst yet, Congress gave these privately owned banks the power to create money, virtually out of thin air, by signing into law the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve then charges interest on the money that they loan to the government.

A brief History For 80 years prior to 1913, America did not have a national banking system. There were two previous National Banks that existed since the birth of America, but each lost it's charter because our leaders always knew the inherent dangers that existed when the power to create money is handed over to bankers. Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying,”Banking establishments are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” It was in 1836 that President Jackson, who also knew the dangers posed by these bankers, denounced the 2nd bank of the United States calling it “unconstitutional”, and without hesitation refused to reinstate it's charter. He then helped to create laws that kept the bankers out until 1913. Jackson was the only president to ever pay off the National debt.
In 1911, Republican Senator Nelson W. Aldrich of Rhode Island, who was a very powerful political figure at the time, met with 15 businessmen and bankers in Washington and introduced his plan to centralize Americas banking system. It was later referred to as “The Aldrich bill” and was opposed by the public and the politicians alike because in part, it gave privately owned banks the authority to print money and control the interest rates of the money they loan.
In 1912, Woodrow Wilson is Elected President in part because he opposed central banks. Unfortunately his limited knowledge of the banking system caused him to rely on advisers, which ultimately led to the construction of the Federal Reserve act. Still, congress and the people strongly opposed any legislation to centralize the banking system, and continued to reject the attempts made until that fateful day in Dec. 1913.

December 23rd, 1913, A day that should live in infamy. It was the day the Federal Reserve act was signed into law by President Wilson. Unfortunately most congressmen were home spending the holidays with their families when the vote took place. 43 yay 25 nay and 27 did not vote. Which translates to 28.4 % of America was not represented that day. With one signature by one man, America was sold into monetary slavery. Shortly after the bill was signed President Wilson wrote:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world - no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."Woodrow Wilson's The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People.
The United States Constitution, section 8-powers of Congress, expressly gives Congress the authority to coin money. Historically when this is allowed to happen, the United States has flourished. After all, Congress is not going to charge interest on loans it makes to itself. The Federal Reserve does. Why? Because it is a business, and like all businesses they are profit driven. The Federal Reserve have shareholders and a responsibility to those shareholders to be profitable. How do they make a profit? They charge interest on the loans they make to the American people. Car loans, house loans, credit cards, any type of loan that carries with it an interest charge. They also charge interest on loans made to the Government. Many believe, including myself, that the income tax we have to pay goes directly to pay off the interest for the loans made to the Government. This interest translates to profits for the shareholders. Think about this, who controls the interest rates? If you answered "The Federal Reserve" you would be correct.
We the people have been fooled into thinking that this privately owned corporation has our best interest in mind when clearly they don't, they can't. It wouldn't be profitable and the goal of any business is to make a profit. In my humble opinion, this is a conflict of interest
Reply With Quote

 

[editec]

Yes, we're aware of that.

Now what?

 

[Skull Pilot]

The central bank although comprised of private entities is still a tool of the government.

 

[editec]

The central bank although comprised of private entities is still a tool of the government.

More like government is a tool of the private banks which own the FED, methinks.

Or were you sleeping for the last month or so?

 

[sparky]

well we're leaving out the jekyl island crew who promoted centralized banking here, as well as the Bretton woods crew who elevated it via the IMF to global consequenses Mr.FreeAmerican

but allow me to interject a much broader concept here , for the sake of possible debate....Usury given has a dubious history, it has in present times been a $$$ for any conflict, good OR bad

the $$$ men that finance wars also finance the rebulding of nations, and the nations who need a handout for infastructure all come under the heading of % made....

who are these sorts main sqeeze? the people who make foriegn policy , like the UN


Usury (in the original sense of any interest) was at times denounced by a number of religious leaders and philosophers in the ancient world, including Plato, Aristotle, Cato, Cicero, Seneca[9], Plutarch,[citation needed] Aquinas[10], Muhammad[11], Moses,[citation needed] Philo[citation needed] and Gautama Buddha.[citation needed]

For example, Cato in his De Re Rustica said:

"And what do you think of usury?" - "What do you think of murder?"

relevant in times where wall street farts and the world shrivels up, where the national debt clock has blown another digit, and every American is literally in debt up to his/her eyeballs before s/he is even born eh....?

 

[editec]

Usary can become the terrible tyrant of any society, that's for damned sure.

I am convinced that this society will never be truly just until every citizen of this nation can borrow money at the exact same interest directly from the treasury.

The basical inherent injustice of this form of capitalism we currently have is based on the sweetheart deal that the FED granted to the banking class.

Banks were borrowing money from the FED at 1 or 2% and lending it to consumers at 15-18-25%.

And we wonder why Americans went broke?

There's got to be a better way to model a supply side consumer driven economy than what we've current got.

 

[foggedinn]

,”Banking establishments are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.”

If Jefferson really did say this, I wonder what he would feel are the chances of maintaining our liberties with both a banking establishment and a standing army.

 

[sparky]

Usary can become the terrible tyrant of any society, that's for damned sure.

and we do have a history.....some fat for the fire then......of note is that this has long been an issue of control....which, of late, has shown us what lack of control gains us.....


Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws"
Bauer Rothschild
I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you've probably misunderstood what I've said.
Alan Greenspan
In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.
Alan Greenspan
I do not think it is an exaggeration to say history is largely a history of inflation, usually inflations engineered by governments for the gain of governments.
Friedrich August von Hayek
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.
Thomas Jefferson
More banking quotes;
http://www.freedomdomain.com/bankquot.html






Although something we take for granted now, the concept of Usury , was in the past, a moral issue;
The historical rendition of usury as a vile enterprise stems not only from a spiritual view that charging exorbitant interest is a flagrant manifestation of unchecked greed, but carries with it social connotations of perceived "unjust" or "discriminatory" moneylending practices.
Usury - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More on the cultural Hx of Usury here;
History of Usury Prohibition


Some Hx on the Bank of England here;
The Bank of England's strategy was to completely control the British Government. Then they could apply pressure on the colonies and force them to rebel. Lastly, they would impose a Bank of England type bank on the Colonies. This they did in the year 1791. It was called the Bank of the "U.S." General Jackson refused to renew the bank charter and it died an unnatural death in1836. The corrupt bank was re-chartered in 1913 under the name "Federal" Reserve Bank of the "U.S."
Secrets of the Bank of England Revealed at Last!!


The Sherman Act authorized the federal government to institute proceedings against trusts in order to dissolve them, but Supreme Court rulings prevented federal authorities from using the act for some years. As a result of President Theodore Roosevelt's “trust-busting” campaigns, the Sherman Act began to be invoked with some success, and in 1904 the Supreme Court upheld the government in its suit for dissolution of the Northern Securities Company. The act was further employed by President Taft in 1911 against the Standard Oil trust and the American Tobacco Company.
Sherman Antitrust Act — Infoplease.com
More on the Sherman Anti-trust act here, the gist being our governance wary of economic consolodation;
The Sherman Act

Josiah Stamp;
Josiah Stamp, 1st Baron Stamp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money ."

banking centralization was a goal attained via atrifical scares created towards gaining public interest in bank centralization, the institution holding the reins to booms or busts as more than bit players. The many prior 'runs on banks' prompted JP Morgans Panic of 1907. The goal was, just as the wot is today, coercing the masses into centralization. Woodrow Wilson, the prime Dem candidate of the era, at first advocated, but later lamented the concept. The specture of such power being manipulated by a mere handful of individuals having it's relevant pitfalls
JP MOrgans 'Panic of 1907'
Panic of 1907
the creation of the Federal Reseve, fueled via the panic, was planned at the Jekyll Island Club Hotel, where the actual name was coined to gain the public trust
The Jekyll Island Club Hotel
Jekyll Island Club Hotel – Weddings; Vacations; Getaways and Honeymoons in Romantic Coastal Georgia
More on the Jekyll Island story
Federal Reserve Fraud - You Need to Learn About the Federal Reserve Fraud Now!

It is absurd to
say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the
usurer and the other helps the People. If the currency issued by the People were no good, then the bonds
would be no good, either. It is a terrible situation when the Government, to insure the National Wealth,
must go in debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands of men who control the fictitious value
of gold. Interest is the invention of Satan". - THOMAS A. EDISON

Understanding why these people are benoaning the system is somewhat problematic. Picking apart Tom Edison's lamentation here we have a bond created by the FOMC>>>purchased by the FED & paid for with (now) electronic verification>>>>these new funds are now a lendable entity over 90% (because only 10% reserve is required) of their original 'bond' worth. Hence a million in bonds= 10 million lent out w/% accumulating....


The Independent Treasury Act of 1920 suspended the de jure (meaning "by right of legal establishment") Treasury Department of the United States government. Our Congress turned the treasury department over to a private corporation, which when seen in its true light, is a fascist monopolistic cartel, the Federal Reserve and their agents. The bulk of the ownership of the Federal Reserve System, a very well kept secret from the American Citizen, is held by these banking interests, and NONE is held by the United States Treasury:
Rothschild Bank of London
Rothschild Bank of Berlin
Warburg Bank of Hamburg
Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
Lazard Brothers of Paris
Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy
Chase Manhattan Bank of New York
Goldman, Sachs of New York
Lehman Brothers of New York
Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York

The Federal Reserve is at the root of most of our present statutory regulations, "laws", in the control and regulation of virtually all aspects of human activity in the United States, through successively socialistic constructions laid upon the Commerce clause of the Constitution. Basically, the Federal Reserve is the "STATE" of the United States.
Who Is Running America?





Of note along the way here is Carroll Quigley (November 9, 1910 - January 3, 1977) was a noted historian, polymath, and theorist of the evolution of civilizations.
Quigley became well known among those who believe that there is an international conspiracy to bring about a one-world government. In his book Tragedy and Hope, he based his analysis on his research in the papers of an Anglo-American elite organization that, he held, secretly controlled the U.S. and UK governments through a series of Round Table Groups. The Round Table group in the US was the Council on Foreign Relations. He argued that both the Republican and Democratic parties were controlled by an "international Anglophile network" that shaped elections.
There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known. (p. 950}
The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. {p. 1247} - Both from Tragedy and Hope

Carroll Quigley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Round Table movement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Rhodes Milner round table group
Carroll Quigley: The Anglo-American Establishment[/ur]


[url=http://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm]The Creature from Jekyll Island, The Federal Reserve, talk by Edward Griffin
I came to the conclusion that the Federal Reserve needed to be abolished for seven reasons. I'd like to read them to you now just so that you get an idea of where I'm coming from, as they say. I put these into the most concise phrasing that I can to make them somewhat shocking and maybe you'll remember them:
The Federal Reserve is incapable of accomplishing its stated objectives.
It is a cartel operating against the public interest.
It's the supreme instrument of usury.
It generates our most unfair tax.
It encourages war.
It destabilizes the economy.



History of banking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nevertheless, in recent years, the dominance of U.S. financial markets has been disappearing and there has been an increasing interest in foreign stocks. The extraordinary growth of foreign financial markets results from both large increases in the pool of savings in foreign countries, such as Japan, and, especially, the deregulation of foreign financial markets, which has enabled them to expand their activities. Thus, American corporations and banks have started seeking investment opportunities abroad, prompting the development in the U.S. of mutual funds specializing in trading in foreign stock markets.
Such growing internationalization and opportunity in financial services has entirely changed the competitive landscape, as now many banks have demonstrated a preference for the “universal banking” model so prevalent in Europe. Universal banks are free to engage in all forms of financial services, make investments in client companies, and function as much as possible as a “one-stop” supplier of both retail and wholesale financial services.
Many such possible alignments could be accomplished only by large acquisitions, and there were many of them. By the end of 2000, a year in which a record level of financial services transactions with a market value of $10.5 trillion occurred, the top ten banks commanded a market share of more than 80% and the top five, 55%. Of the top ten banks ranked by market share, seven were large universal-type banks (three American and four European), and the remaining three were large U.S. investment banks who between them accounted for a 33% market share.
NAFTA & GATT serving as Globalizing attempts toward expanding the concept of central banking's fractional reserve system worldwide



When a country went to a fiat currency there was a period, as long or longer than 30 years, in which it thrived even more. However, during that period of prosperity on a fiat currency, excesses began to build. Once they have built up to extreme levels, it is a very dangerous time. When levels of debt become too excessive, an increasing amount of the rewards of production; profits, must go to servicing debt. When the servicing of debt consumes all of the profits of production, it finally consumes production itself. This is the real culprit for the loss of jobs domestically. As more of the economy shifts from real production of goods, to the pushing of various forms of paper, citizens lose jobs and live in more dangerous timesFiat Money Systems


146. What were the lessons of World War II about economic policy?
The main lesson was that our country need never again suffer from a prolonged depression like that of the 1930’s. During the war we had full employment and the economy produced gigantic quantities of goods. If we could maintain full employment in wartime why not in peacetime ! Only now our economy can produce goods to eliminate poverty, ignorance, and disease rather than goods or the destructive processes of war. The second lesson was that the Great Depression resulted from the failure of Government to recognize and assume its responsible role in the economy. This included the monetary aspect of Government policy.
MONEY FACTS - Chapter 9

The debt ammassed by WW2 alone was a windfall for bankers worldwide, due to the debt incurred by every nation involved. even the loosers debt was assumed by bankers, so conflict becomes a win/win deal for them. The arms race/cold war alone allowed finacial institutions worldwide to compound interest as fast as countries could be convinced to assume more debt. which to this day will make good....can you say petrodollar?

The fact that billions of dollars worth of oil is priced in dollars ensures the world domination of the dollar. It allows the U.S. to act as the world's central bank, printing currency acceptable everywhere. The dollar has become an oil-backed, not gold-backed, currency.The Invasion of Iraq: Dollar vs Euro Re-denominating Iraqi oil in U. S. dollars, instead of the euro

Pentagon wants about $100 billion more for wars;
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/20/war.funds.ap/index.html?referrer=BuckFush.com
One can do inflation math that occurs from the debt's accrued...
The Inflation Calculator

 

[editec]

Yeah...many of us understand where the BIG LIE starts NOW.

It starts with the BIG LIE that we have anything even remotely like an HONEST market.

Now the real question is what do we do to wrest that power away from those who currently have it?

Neither candidate is going to take on those shadowy figures who really control the currency.

If they were that honest, they'd have NEVER reached the positions they currently hold.

If they suddenly decided to change that system?

They'd be assassinated.

 

[sparky]

exactly why many call it a one party system Editec, the $$$ party....

we've merely the illusion of choice here....

 

[editec]

exactly why many call it a one party system Editec, the $$$ party....

we've merely the illusion of choice here....

There are minor difference between the parties, Sprak, agreed?

Each party panders to one group of notwits or the other to maintain their great unwashed bases.

But in the fundamental issues that truly make a difference (those would ALL be things economic) they are basically both drawing support form the same class.

 

[TheFreeAmerican]

Yeah...many of us understand where the BIG LIE starts NOW.

It starts with the BIG LIE that we have anything even remotely like an HONEST market.

Now the real question is what do we do to wrest that power away from those who currently have it?

Neither candidate is going to take on those shadowy figures who really control the currency.

If they were that honest, they'd have NEVER reached the positions they currently hold.

If they suddenly decided to change that system?

They'd be assassinated.

you are absolutely correct editec, anyone standing against them would get taken out. However, I've always been the type that takes the rules made up by others and beat them at there own game with their own rules. So with that said, their rules are to take out anyone that threatens them right?
In my opinion they are threatening us and if we use their rules then the answer is simple. They fear our numbers, for their numbers are quite small. Their power is money, take away the money; take away the power.
Above all else though, we have to outlaw "fractional banking" this is tool used by these tyrants which is the one thing that has always kept them in business. This is a global problem, so the solution must then be a global one.

 

[dilloduck]

you are absolutely correct editec, anyone standing against them would get taken out. However, I've always been the type that takes the rules made up by others and beat them at there own game with their own rules. So with that said, their rules are to take out anyone that threatens them right?
In my opinion they are threatening us and if we use their rules then the answer is simple. They fear our numbers, for their numbers are quite small. Their power is money, take away the money; take away the power.
Above all else though, we have to outlaw "fractional banking" this is tool used by these tyrants which is the one thing that has always kept them in business. This is a global problem, so the solution must then be a global one.

They are the theives who pull the strings. They've been highly successful at hiding the strings they use to control world leaders and world events. I think they are now as exposed as they have ever been yet we balk at calling them on it. Guess who pushed the bailout plan? Have you ever seen both parties come to terms on anything so big in such little time. Are we so indebted to them that we would crumble without them ? I say we call their bluff.

 

[editec]

you are absolutely correct editec, anyone standing against them would get taken out. However, I've always been the type that takes the rules made up by others and beat them at there own game with their own rules. So with that said, their rules are to take out anyone that threatens them right?
In my opinion they are threatening us and if we use their rules then the answer is simple. They fear our numbers, for their numbers are quite small. Their power is money, take away the money; take away the power.
Above all else though, we have to outlaw "fractional banking" this is tool used by these tyrants which is the one thing that has always kept them in business. This is a global problem, so the solution must then be a global one.

we have to outlaw "fractional banking"

Yeah, right. How?

Congress sure as hell isn't going to do it.

The problem isn't that we don't know the solution, FA.

The problem is we don't know how to GET TO that solution.

Civil disobedience?

The only meaningful civil disobedience possible for the citizens is the REFUSE TO USE THE SPECIE or CREDIT.

Except for that vexing " this note is legal tender" clause which means that we must pay (at minimum) ftaxes and fines in that tender.

And since those of us with fuctional home economies have most of our liquid and near liquid assets in LEGAL TENDER, they've got us by the short hairs.

I have given this some thought over the last year or so.

I can understand how to BREAK the monetary monopoly if Congress wants to work with us, but if they do not, then I see no effective non-violent solution.


I think if we're going to get to a solution, it's a long term (probably decades) uphill political battle to take over Congress by a third party.

And since those cognizant enough to understand that solution, but come from different world views on most other issues, forging an alliance of left thinking and right thinking anti FED monetary monopoly types is mighty difficult.

I can't get behind Ron Paul, he's a social darwinist and and nutter from my perspective...even if he is right about the Fed.

But I think whether or not your basical political world view is right or left we can both agree that getting the PEOPLE in the front of the line for NEW SPECIE is the solution to shoot for.

The banks, ain't gonna like it.

And if the banks don't like it, the corporations won't like it either.

Same class, you know.