The "Federal Reserve" - a PRIVATE corporation !!!

[RiverFlows]

Recently watched some interesting movies on Google video.

Short synopsis:

• The "Federal Reserve" is a PRIVATE corporation. It is no more "federal" than Federal Express.
  
• The "Fed" can create money "out of thin air". The government has to borrow this money from the "Fed" and pay interest to these private bankers. That's the main reason the income tax was introduced in 1913 (the same year that the "Fed" was established). That is despite the fact that Congress has the authority to create money itself, INTERESTFREE !!
  
• There is NO law that would require the average American worker to pay an income tax. So, many actions of the "IRS" are simply ILLEGAL and against the constitution.
  
• These private bankers of the "Fed" have been very successful over the last decades convincing us that the receipt (the printed piece of paper called "dollar") is the actual money. This simply is slight of hand. It's a magician's trick! It's the essence of their power and our powerlessness.
  
• They are printing those pieces of paper like crazy. That's why a house that cost $27,000 back in the 50s now costs half a million.

For anyone interested in watching, here are the links:

Extended Preview for AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM (15 Minutes) - Google Video

AMERICA: Freedom To Fascism. Aaron Russo Interview. - Google Video

America Freedom to Fascism Authorized version - Google Video

Let's try and stop this outrage! Let's get rid of the "federal reserve" system !!!

[John Wesley]

I heard this stuff about the Federal Reserves a few months ago and since then I've read books and watched numerous videos on it. Its really amazing, if in fact it is all true. I am inclined to believe much of it is.

I think the most remarkable part is that when I tell other people they never believe me. They just aren't willing to believe that the all mighty FED and Alan Greenspan could be working against the American people instead of for them. I think the reason people don't believe is that we're taught all our lives that the government and FED are completely benevolent entities. Total propaganda.

The good thing though, is that these ideas seems to be spreading. But what can anyone do about it?

If you're interested in learning more I recommend this book: Secrets of the Federal Reserve. It was researched at the Library of Congress.

The problem with all this is that there is no way to know what is really true and what isn't. The idea is so radical and goes against everything we've ever been told. I'm afraid that the truth is buried too deeply to be recovered.

[TheColonel]

This isn't really news. And Greenspan is no longer the chair, it's his protege' Bernanke.

While certain aspects of that video should concern everyone, keep in mind that it is in the Fed's - and the US Government's best interest - to keep the economy stable. They gain nothing by abusing their authority.

And I don't agree that they're working against the US people. Perhaps their interests are self-motivated, but it's a big stretch to say they're working against us.

[John Wesley]

That's all in how you define "working against". Of course they don't want civilization to collapse, but I would argue they do their best to keep the average citizen in the dark about who really controls the government and economy.

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

The "Federal Reserve" is a PRIVATE corporation. It is no more "federal" than Federal Express.

Not quite true. The Fed is a "quasi-governmental banking system", overseen by a board of governors which are appointed by the president. The president can also remove them from their position. The Federal Reserve Banks and all member banks are in fact privately owned, however:

"Each privately owned Federal Reserve Bank and each member bank of the Federal Reserve System is subject to oversight by [the] Board of Governors. The seven members of the board are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Members are selected to terms of 14 years (unless removed by the President), with the ability to serve for no more than one term."

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

There is NO law that would require the average American worker to pay an income tax. So, many actions of the "IRS" are simply ILLEGAL and against the constitution.

The 16th amendment of the US Constitution clearly says:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

How much more lawful does it need to get than that?

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

They are printing those pieces of paper like crazy. That's why a house that cost $27,000 back in the 50s now costs half a million.

Wow, they're blaming inflation on too much money being printed? Inflation is a complex issue and narrowing it down to "they print too much money!" is just silly. Especially now that we're in the electronic age and the fact that as much as two-thirds of US currency is outside of the country.

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

Let's try and stop this outrage! Let's get rid of the "federal reserve" system !!!

Read the Federal Reserve article in Wikipedia. It's very detailed and has a section about criticisms of the Fed. I'm not saying that The Fed is good the way it is right now, but I do have to read a lot more about it before forming an opinion.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

Let's try and stop this outrage! Let's get rid of the "federal reserve" system !!!

What's the alternative?!?!11111

[flabastida]

A 100% gold-backed currency is the most viable alternative.

[RiverFlows]

Originally Posted by Baltar

The 16th amendment of the US Constitution clearly says:
[...]
How much more lawful does it need to get than that?

Well, some people uphold that the 16th amendment was never properly ratified ...

More than 60 million (truely patriotic) Americans do not file a 1040. Why would they get away with it if this was "illegal"?

How did the US survive without a federal income tax prior to 1913 Why was it introduced the very same year that the "FED"up was foisted upon an unwary public in a very clandestine fashion?

"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws."
Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790

You're not on his payroll, are you ?

Originally Posted by Baltar

Wow, they're blaming inflation on too much money being printed? Inflation is a complex issue and narrowing it down to "they print too much money!" is just silly.

Of course, the neatly printed shreds of paper which Bernanke wants to throw from his fleet of helicopters are REEEEEEEEAL money

And they've got NOOOOOOOTHING to do with inflation

Originally Posted by Baltar

Especially now that we're in the electronic age and the fact that as much as two-thirds of US currency is outside of the country.

Yeah, confetti raining down on the whole world, 'cause they print(ed) so much.

Should more and more oil producing countries "dare" to sell their oil only in exchange for real values (as opposed to worthless confetti), then this fake will become even more obvious.

BTW, Iraq had started to sell its oil for Euros prior to the invasion.

Luckily, our troops found sooooooooooo many weapons of mass destruction!

And now Iraq is selling for dollars again.

Let's do the maths ...

[Colin]

There was a similar discussion about the Fed a while back in this thread.

I find it a fascinating subject, but try not to get too hot and bothered about the Fed and 16th amendment issues since I'm not even America (although I do live in the US). Once you do know about these issues it's easy to see why politicians have no problems spending money today that has no chance of being paid off until decades into the future.

The Fed was just created to capitalize on the money to be made via a fractional-reserve banking system (even more so when the US dollar became a pure fiat currency). Since these base criteria apply to many currencies worldwide (including the euro, Japanese Yuan, Chinese remnibi, etc.) it really is a global issue.

Since all fractional-reserve currencies blow up eventually (even the gold backed ones such as during the Roman Empire), your best bet is to diversify your assets and holdings. And buy some gold. If you don't want a gold ingot under your bed just buy some gold via the e-currencies such as e-gold, e-bullion or pecunix.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by flabastida

A 100% gold-backed currency is the most viable alternative.

No, it's the worst alternative. There's a reason it's not in use.

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

Well, some people uphold that the 16th amendment was never properly ratified ...

They can certainly try to "uphold" that but it's not going to do them much good. Relevant excerpt from Wikipedia:

Arguments made by tax protesters generally fall into several categories: that the Sixteenth Amendment was never properly ratified; that the Sixteenth Amendment does not permit the taxation of individual income, or particular forms of individual income; that other provisions of the Constitution such as the First, Fifth, or the "Missing Thirteenth Amendment" eliminate an obligation to file a return; that citizens of the states are not also citizens of the United States; that the statutes enacted by Congress pursuant to their constitutional taxing power are defective or invalid; and that the government and the courts engage in various conspiracies to conceal the above deficiencies.

These arguments generally contain logical fallacies, selective interpretation of perceived syntactic ambiguity in statutes and cases, and convey a general misconception about the structure of the legal system and the operations of the government.

In another Seventh Circuit case, the Court observed:

Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest. 'Tax protesters' have convinced themselves that wages are not income, that only gold is money, that the Sixteenth Amendment is unconstitutional, and so on. These beliefs all lead — so tax protesters think — to the elimination of their obligation to pay taxes."

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

More than 60 million (truely patriotic) Americans do not file a 1040. Why would they get away with it if this was "illegal"?

Are we talking about people who are legally required to file a tax return or just people in general? Not everyone has to do it. If your income is below a certain threshold, you're not required to file a return.

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

How did the US survive without a federal income tax prior to 1913 Why was it introduced the very same year that the "FED"up was foisted upon an unwary public in a very clandestine fashion?

I have no idea why income tax and the Fed happen to have begun in the same year. However, according to the US Treasury's historical account of taxation, the government had no alternative to instating an income tax. People didn't want other taxes to be raised and the federal government was short on money. One interesting thing to note though is that back then, less than 1% of the population was paying income tax. I don't know what the number is now but it's obviously much, much higher.

Under the Constitution, Congress could impose direct taxes only if they were levied in proportion to each State's population. Thus, when a flat rate Federal income tax was enacted in 1894, it was quickly challenged and in 1895 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional because it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state.

Lacking the revenue from an income tax and with all other forms of internal taxes facing stiff resistance, from 1896 until 1910 the Federal government relied heavily on high tariffs for its revenues. The War Revenue Act of 1899 sought to raise funds for the Spanish-American War through the sale of bonds, taxes on recreational facilities used by workers, and doubled taxes on beer and tobacco. A tax was even imposed on chewing gum. The Act expired in 1902, so that Federal receipts fell from 1.7 percent of Gross Domestic Product to 1.3 percent.

Eventually, the income tax debate pitted southern and western Members of Congress representing more agricultural and rural areas against the industrial northeast. The debate resulted in an agreement calling for a tax, called an excise tax, to be imposed on business income, and a Constitutional amendment to allow the Federal government to impose tax on individuals' lawful incomes without regard to the population of each State.

By 1913, 36 States had ratified the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. In October, Congress passed a new income tax law with rates beginning at 1 percent and rising to 7 percent for taxpayers with income in excess of $500,000. Less than 1 percent of the population paid income tax at the time. Form 1040 was introduced as the standard tax reporting form and, though changed in many ways over the years, remains in use today.

[Adam]

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about the Federal Reserve being privatized. It is a heavily regulated body, and does not have power without the consent of elected officials. Guess who elected those officials. While those officials are ultimately responsible for what happens in the Fed, we, as citizens of the United States, are the ones responsible for giving them the power that they have.

All government power comes from consent from the people, whether those people are fairly represented or not. If you consent to be oppressed, then you give those who govern you the power to oppress you.

Does the Fed control the economy? Absolutely not. In fact, they have very little direct control over the economy. The economy is based around the barter of goods and services. Money is a physical abstraction of those goods and services... In other words, the more money you have, the more favors other people owe you. Money can be *anything.* Money does not have to be soy ink on cotton with a holographic word and micro-printing on it... It can be two dozen pigs exchanged for a wife, or a large rock chiseled into a disk. In fact, gold is no more "money" than the slips of paper that ship with the game Monopoly.

The only thing that turns these physical abstractions of favors into money is the value that individuals hold for it, and that is most definitely a subjective value. Treating money as an object is foolish, because currency's value changes with the mood of the people making the exchange.

Who creates inflation? Well, since money is an abstract concept, there is no such thing as inflation... only the devaluation of the physical representation of money. What this does is punish those who are not working within the economy (hoarding their wealth) while rewarding those who are active in the economy (investing). The devaluation of currency is not bad, it is just severely misunderstood, so those who misunderstand it are punished for looking at money objectively, rather than subjectively.

Here's a quick example for those who have not studied economics in depth. Admittedly, this is an example of a micro-economy, but events that happen on a micro scale also affect events on a macro scale.

Let's say that a business owner sees a headline on a newspaper that says that lean times are coming. He had been planing to remodel a room in his house, but because of this prediction, he decides to save his money instead to make it through those lean times. Because he did not remodel his room, the designer loses a customer, and has to cut back on his budget, which means that he can not buy the art that he wanted for his own house. The artist now has a surplus of paintings that he can not sell, so he can not buy any more supplies... and his supplier happens to be the business owner who read the prediction in the newspaper, which means that the entire economic chain closes down because one person lost confidence in the economy.

The result of pulling your money out of the economy is that the economy slows down, leaving people with fewer ways to earn a living. From the viewpoint of the evolution of an economy, inflation is a very healthy aspect, since it keeps people actively involved, continuing to strengthen the economy. Without inflation, we would have stagnation, resulting in the same economic conditions that the US, and much of the world, faced in the 1930's, where people could not gather enough money, in whatever physical form, to feed themselves.

I'll admit that a world wide economy is more complex than that, but the foundations of the economy remains the same: Money, as an abstract, subjective concept, must change hands. Inflation is a tool that uses the physical currency to keep the value of money high, so that it is not hoarded by a few individuals, or even many individuals, so that the economy keeps on moving in a healthy manner. You must trade your currency for real, abstract money in order for the concept of money to have any value at all, and that is what inflation guarantees.

[Roadbiker]

Originally Posted by RiverFlows

• They are printing those pieces of paper like crazy. That's why a house that cost $27,000 back in the 50s now costs half a million.

One of the other fun bits about inflation is it's effect on loan payments. The hypothetical house mentioned by the OP would have had a mortgage of perhaps $22k -$25k. Assuming a fixed interest rate, the payments would have been determined at the inception of the loan and then wouldn't change. The purchaser's salary, however, would have increased as inflation caused prices to rise. With each passing year, the homeowner would spend a smaller and smaller percentage of his salary on his mortgage. That's why homeowners who have been in the same house for decades have $100 mortgage payments.

[Still Growing]

What if I told you that a group of foreign investors privately backed the US gov't and that we must pay them interest even if we print money?

What if you knew that only two US presidents ever issued money against the Fed and they were both killed (Lincoln & JFK).

What if you knew that Thomas Jefferson said he feared that "foreign banks have taken over America"

Woodrow Wilson stated ""I have unwittingly ruined my country" after he unwittingly created the act in 1913 with the Federal Reserve act.

What if you found out that 12 reserve banks owned the Federal Reserve and that these banks were mostly private and the members of these banks also owned most of the American media including the major networks? Would you assume that they were attempting to control the media?

Can you believe that these 12 meet once a year and that the entire world reports about their meetings as the "Bildaberg Group" and the average American has never once read about this meeting? There is a complete media lock down on this. If you don't believe me, email or ask a European friend if he's ever heard of this group.

Our government is going into debt at a rate of 1.2 billion per day and all of the interest is being paid to these 12. Even when we print money with our own presses they are in turn paid interest on it!!!! This is an outrage!

Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying that it was unfair that the American taxpayer has to pay 36% just to print its own money and so he issued 400 million in bonds. He was killed within 5 months.

JFK went against the 1913 Fed Reserve Act by issuing a bill to back money by silver which the Fed did not act on. He was killed within 2 months.

This isn't one person talking conspiracy, this is US Presidents quoting in writing and on tape speaking out against it.

Your average US consumer, or Sheople as we are jokingly called, is thousands in credit card debt has no idea about how the country operates. We are spoon fed the same BS that we are the greatest country on earth and that we have a free press.

There is no place I'd rather live and I love this country but I just don't think that our tax dollars should be fleeced by foreign banks.

Many countries subsidize farmers to ensure that during war we'll have some control over our some food. So it seems that if our entire currency is backed by foreign interests then this is unsafe.

Be sure to check out THE FEDERAL RESERVE FRAUD

[John Wesley]

We've established in this thread that something is unsavory about the FED, but the problem still remains: what can we do about it? Will it ever be possible to generate enough public opinion to switch back to the gold standard? I think this is unlikely, considering the current system has control of the media.

Is this problem going to cause the global economy to collapse somewhere down the line?

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

What if you knew that only two US presidents ever issued money against the Fed and they were both killed (Lincoln & JFK).

Umm.. Abraham Lincoln died in 1865, which is 48 years before the Fed was created. How could he be killed for going against something that didn't exist? The JFK assassination will unfortunately be forever shrouded in mystery so I can't say much about it.

Originally Posted by Still Growing

Abraham Lincoln was quoted as saying that it was unfair that the American taxpayer has to pay 36% just to print its own money and so he issued 400 million in bonds. He was killed within 5 months.

Did he say this about the Fed, which didn't exist yet? He must've been able to see the future.

Originally Posted by Still Growing

Our government is going into debt at a rate of 1.2 billion per day and all of the interest is being paid to these 12. Even when we print money with our own presses they are in turn paid interest on it!!!! This is an outrage!

Our government is in debt because our government is stupid. There's no need for a conspiracy; there's plenty of stupidity to go around. A huge amount of money is being (and has been over the years) pointlessly spent on the military and all kinds of pointless military engagements (Iraq being the latest). This is arguably the biggest reason for the enormous national debt. Check out costofwar.com for the current figures on how much the Iraq war has cost so far.

[Steve]

Has anyone noticed that the more exclamation marks used, the more loony the poster is?

[dorothy hanna]

Uh-Oh!!! I must be looney!!!

[Still Growing]

Originally Posted by Baltar

Umm.. Abraham Lincoln died in 1865, which is 48 years before the Fed was created. How could he be killed for going against something that didn't exist? The JFK assassination will unfortunately be forever shrouded in mystery so I can't say much about it.

Did he say this about the Fed, which didn't exist yet? He must've been able to see the future.

pointlessly spent on the military and all kinds of pointless military engagements (Iraq being the latest). This is arguably the biggest reason for the enormous national debt. Check out National Priorities Project - Cost of War for the current figures on how much the Iraq war has cost so far.

Baltar,
It was 1789 when Alexander Hamilton lobbied for the first privately owned Federal Bank. We had two Federal Reserve systems which lasted 20 years each and now we are almost 100 yrs into the third. So there was no need for Lincoln to see in the future...

In 1836 for example, President Jackson fought with Congress over claiming that private parties were trying to run the US via the Reserve. Thomas Jefferson also said that the biggest threat to the US was a Private Reserve

If you do not believe that Lincoln, Jackson or Jefferson spoke out about a Privately held Federal Reserve then why don't you research it. Its public record. Why would I misquote a US President when its so easy to research. Obviously you didn't bother. I'll leave out the exclamations points here Steve.

It is also not conspiracy theory to know which companies own the current Federal Reserve and to also know that they own major shares in NBC, CBS and the Washington Post. I can't prove that they have any influence in what their companies report, its just is a HUGE conflict of interest. Again, this is public record.

So many US Presidents and Senators have spoken out about this and I am doing my best to give quotes of people with a lot more legitimacy and respect that I posess.

I'll leave you with a quote:
Henry Ford said "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".

Baltar, What do you think he meant by that statement?

[Brutha]

Can you believe that these 12 meet once a year and that the entire world reports about their meetings as the "Bildaberg Group" and the average American has never once read about this meeting? There is a complete media lock down on this. If you don't believe me, email or ask a European friend if he's ever heard of this group.

Being European myself, I wouldn't think that anyone I know who isn't very well educated in conspiracy theories has ever heard of the "Bildaberg Group".

If it would be reported in any media, those newspapers would have a few of their articles on the first google site. But their are only conspiracy sites, youtube vidoes and some myspace groups on the first google page.

I'll leave you with a quote:
Henry Ford said "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".

When you quote you should give your sources. Quotes without sources are worthless.

[chicagosuccess]

Like the one in your signature? Sorry - it's totally off topic but I couldn't resist.

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

If you do not believe that Lincoln, Jackson or Jefferson spoke out about a Privately held Federal Reserve then why don't you research it. Its public record. Why would I misquote a US President when its so easy to research. Obviously you didn't bother. I'll leave out the exclamations points here Steve.

As Brutha said, the burden of proof lies with you. If you want people to take you seriously then post your sources. Nobody's going to go out and corroborate your statements and quotes. You have to do it yourself.

[John Wesley]

I'll confirm that he is right about Lincoln, Jefferson, and Jackson. You can confirm it yourself with a bit Googling. I find it remarkable how people refuse to consider the idea that the Federal Reserve might be monopolizing the economy. I guess those media companies they own sure are getting the job done.

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by John Wesley

I find it remarkable how people refuse to consider the idea that the Federal Reserve might be monopolizing the economy. I guess those media companies they own sure are getting the job done.

I don't read newspapers, watch TV news networks, or read online news/media sites. However even before I unplugged myself from the Borg Collective I don't remember them making almost any mention of the Federal Reserve. I think most people are simply not aware of it at all, rather than conditioned to think it's ok. You're right though that most people wouldn't readily believe that the government is out to screw them over. I certainly find it hard to believe myself.

However I am aware of all the disturbing things that have been happening since 9/11. Just the fact that they created the "Department of Homeland Security" is disturbing in itself.

[John Wesley]

Ever heard the term "conspiracy of silence"? Haha, just kidding. I'm no conspiracy theorist. Those people take it over the edge. However, I do believe there is much more going on behind the scenes than what we're told on the 6:00 news. I guess insignificant sheep like me will never know the truth.

[jonw]

Im suprised nobody mentioned the Money Masters. Do a search for them. The whole video is also available on Google Video.

[Matthew Shea]

I'm suprised this thread is still active. Don't feed the trolls, people.

Besides, what does this have to do with PD anyway?

[John Wesley]

If people want to discuss a topic why shouldn't they? The number of responses is evidence people want to discuss this thread.

You just made the most trollish comment of the whole thread.

[Matthew Shea]

Trollish? Really?

Is this a banking forum?

Is this a government or political discussion forum?

Is this a business forum?

No, it's a personal development forum, yet the OP made absolutely no attempt to link this supposed conspiracy that the government is foisting on us to how we're supposed to become better as humans. It has nothing to do with the purpose of this forum and is trying (successfully) to elicit an emotional response. THAT is trolling. The number of responses is only indicative of the success of this trolling effort.

Of course I'm not saying it can't be discussed here. If I'm the only one who feels this way, so be it, but am I not allowed to express my opinion, too?

[John Wesley]

I think trying to understand the society you live in makes you a better person. Don't get all hot and bothered, there are many other threads that talk about PD.