Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The FED is a serious scam. When is something going to be done about it?

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 03:23 AM
link   
well, i hate to push the same links again as I did in page one, but how about a non nutball site (or at the very least nutballs with certified diplomas and credentials)that asserts that the fed caused the depression

The Theory of Credit and Money, Ludwig Von Mises

America's Great Depression, Murray Rothbard

What made the Great Depression worse, Mises Site



Dae

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
I'm busy now, won't be able to give this debate the attention it deserves until Tuesday or Wednesday next week. I hope it will continue until then.


Thats a shame but a good thing too as Im going to need time. My intuition tells me this whole system is rotten to the core but Im glad this opportunity has come about here so I can try and 'intellectualise' this the best I can.


It is wage rises that are the primary cause of inflation.


Our survey says... uh uhhhh!

Ive had a search and found this page which informs us,


From this page we can see that even Dictionaries don't agree on the definition of inflation and economists continue to argue over its primary cause. Although it is generally agreed that economic inflation may be caused by either an increase in the money supply or a decrease in the quantity of goods.


Apparently the cause of inflation is commonly mistaken for the effects, so your theory that wage rises are the primary cause is quite incorrect, wage rises is an effect of inflation just like price increases are an effect... not cuase.

According to Mises (Human Action, p. 432), "What many people today call inflation or deflation is no longer the great increase or decline in the supply of money, but its inexorable consequences, the general tendency toward a rise or fall in commodity prices and wage rates."

So what is the cause? Heres a theory:


Monetary inflation is actually a tax by which government - by expanding the money supply - transfers wealth from its people to itself. Indeed, inflation is perhaps the most destructive tax that can be imposed - but unfortunately it is the easiest one for a government to impose on its people. It also results in the transfer of enormous amounts of wealth from the hands of ordinary people to the hands of those speculators shrewd enough to take advantage of the price volatility inflation causes in the markets.


Ooo so the cause may be a deliberate attempt at sucking the wealth into to coffers! That bit in bold may help to clarify the other theory on Trade Cycles and Inequalities.

But perhaps Ive jumped the gun a bit, Ill back track as this is real important. The confusion arises from pointing at the effects of inflation instead of the causes.

For instance, a couple of effects would be wage increase and price increase which are known as inflationary. Therefore anything which is inflationary must be guarded against. This is where our heros, the Inflation Fighters (central banks) step in! Unemployment or a rise in economic activity, commodity prices and workers wages are all seen as potential threats and therefore under the watchful eye of our heros, The Central Bankers.

OK, so what are the causes then for goodness sake! Perhaps its as simple as an increase in money stock.

Source - PDF


Today, our money is fiat (essentially costless for the government to produce) and not limited by our stock of gold. So how does the issuer of money, the central bank, know when it has produced too much money? The answer to this question is relatively straightforward: If the central bank oversupplies money, the purchasing power of money falls, or in other words, the money price of things rises. That is, inflated money will reveal itself when the prices of things in terms of money rise. So the central bank must monitor the behavior of prices as a way of detecting inflation. But over time, people have blurred the distinction between how inflation is measured with what inflation is. Indeed, today one often hears the word “inflation” used when what is meant is simply “price increase.”


OK, Im going to summerise and leave it at that as my brain is actually hurting!

Inflation is caused by the act of Central Banks issuing too much money in the form of Credit, prices 'go up' not because of anything real in the economic sense but soley because of the increase of money supply.

IF our monies were based on gold and a large gold supply was discovered - THAT cuases inflation, a nice classic example of the metaphor, Inflation.

*Dae signs off with her brain in a bowl*


Dae

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuTroll
well, i hate to push the same links again as I did in page one, but how about a non nutball site (or at the very least nutballs with certified diplomas and credentials)that asserts that the fed caused the depression


Hey NuTroll, it would be most excellent if you could perhaps summarise or expound upon the issues brought up in those links. I feel that most people will be confused at the amount of (dis)information about and any rewording we can do will be helpful to those who cant/wont decipher it themselves. I know it is hard but its a mission of great and grave importance. We must convice the believers of the Banking Practices that its all insane and most rotten, so we can move on to better and sounder practices.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
That was a fast comeback, Dae. I'll give you the bit about the causes of inflation; as I said, I'm no economist. However, it doesn't mean the rest of your argument automatically follows. Wages are still a factor in inflation. And like all prices (wages are the price of labour), they are dependent in the first instance on supply and demand.

The idea that inflation is a form of taxation is new to me. Could you explain how that works? I just can't figure it out. And while you're at it, could you confirm that you still think it's bankers (and not governments) that are causing all this naughty inflation? Because if inflation is taxation, it's governments that benefit, not bankers. Inflation is bad for banks in that it reduces the value of repaid loans.

The bolded part of your quote may suggest that rapacious fat cats can benefit from economic cycles, but does nothing to support the argument that inequality creates economic cycles. I'll just have to take that one, Scottish-style, as 'not proved'.

Looking forward to hearing from you -- and this time, it really will be on Wednesday!

***

NuTroll, I didn't respond to your earlier post because it wasn't pertinent to the case being made by our friends Excitable_Boy and Dae, both of who seem to be arguing that central bankers (or maybe just bankers) manipulate the business cycle with malice aforethought.

Von Mises is no nutball. A respectable economist whose political views are close to my own, he did not accuse central bankers of bad faith, merely of incompetence. He did not argue that the Fed deliberately caused the Depression, but that it promoted it accidentally through incompent monetary meddling. As you will see from my previous posts, I am more than willing to accept that.

Mind you, Mises held that all central bank intervention causes damage; he regarded it as the primary cause of boom-bust cycles. That's a controversial position in economics; plenty of (equally respectable) economists disagree with Mises.

Look: this is from one of the links you posted...



The "boom-bust" cycle is generated by monetary intervention in the market, specifically bank credit expansion to business.



...and if you look at the rest of the page it is quite clear that Mises and Rothbard regarded the interventions referred to as misguided, not malicious. They accepted that the economists of the Fed were acting in good faith.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Sorry, forgot to address this:


Originally posted by Dae
OK, so what are the causes [of inflation] then for goodness sake! Perhaps its as simple as an increase in money stock...

No-one is disputing this. If you print more money than the condition of the economy justifies, you drive down the value of the currency, causing inflation. It's happening in Zimbabwe on a hysterical scale right now. You remember I mentioned this as being one of the reasons why governments shouldn't control central banks. Nice to see you're starting to agree with me, as when you say...


Inflation is caused by the act of Central Banks issuing too much money...


By the way, there are still a lot more questions in my earlier posts waiting for your answers.



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I think u nailed it in the last post. so ill just post a few links to other books that might explain the conspiratoral side of things

Acceptances or Bankers Loans were described in Rothbards "America's Great Depression" as being on of the key inflationary forces in the late 20s. This easy credit money was appproved by Benjamin Strong (who only took the job at Morgan's prodding) and given to

Paul Warburg , who used the money to finance hitlers rise to power.

from Wall Street and FDR, anthony C sutton. Can read it here


But it was through a virtual monopoly of U.S. acceptance banking, achieved by the International Acceptance Bank Inc. and its affiliated units, that Warburg was able to get society to go to work for the Warburgs and their banking friends. Revisionist historian Murray Rothbard has examined the origins of the 1920s inflation that led to the collapse of 1929 and makes this pertinent observation:



While purchase of U.S. securities has received more publicity, bills bought were at least as important and indeed more important than discounts. Bills bought led the inflationary parade of Reserve credit in 1921 and 1922, were considerably more important than securities in the 1924 inflationary spurt, and equally important in the 1927 spurt. Furthermore, bills bought alone continued the inflationary stimulus in the fatal last half of 1928.13

What were these "bills bought" pinpointed by Rothbard as the key culprit of the 1929 depression? Bills bought were acceptances, and almost all were bankers acceptances.

Who created the acceptance market in the United States, largely unknown before 1920? Paul Warburg.
Who gained the lions' share of this acceptance business at artificially low subsidized rates? The International Acceptance Bank, Inc.

Who was the International Acceptance Bank, Inc? Its chairman was Paul Warburg, with Felix Warburg and James Paul Warburg as co-directors. However, a closer look at the make-up of the banks (see below page 95) suggests that it was a vehicle representing the financial élite of Wall Street.

Did the Warburgs and their Wall Street friends know where their financial policy would lead? In other words, did their financial policies of the 1920s have elements of deliberation? There exists a memorandum by Paul Warburg that clearly notes that banks had the capability to prevent inflation:

If the Government and the banks of the United States were helpless automatons, inflation, no doubt, would have to ensue. But it is insulting our banks to have the impression go out that they should not be capable of cooperating in some common plan of protection such, for instance, as keeping all cash reserves higher than required by the law, if indeed such a step should become advisable for the greater safety of the country.14

Consequently, Rothbard quite rightly concludes:

Surely, Warburg's leading role in the Federal Reserve System was not unconnected with his reaping the lion's share of benefits from its acceptance policy.15



the book



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuTroll
from Wall Street and FDR, anthony C sutton. Can read it here


But it was through a virtual monopoly of U.S. acceptance banking...

...Warburg's leading role in the Federal Reserve System was not unconnected with his reaping the lion's share of benefits from its acceptance policy.15

I'm sorry, but I searched the entire book, including the appendixes and even the bibliography, but could not find the quote you posted. Could you please link to the specific page or something?

[edit on 20-7-2006 by Astyanax]



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   
H iguys, great thread going on here. I always believed that there's one private bank that's controlliong the world, but the info on this thread totally convinced me that I was right!!

I think you should investigate this:

Do you know South Africa had the most gold in the WORLD before 1994?? Our currency was stronger than Brittain's in 1989. But the day after the ANC (black ruling party) won the election in 1994 ALL of our gold disappeared. There are many books about this subject out there, and they all tell the same story. USA helped the ANC to get to power, massive political pressure was put on South Africa's goverment by countries like USA. I think they helped the ANC, but in return they wanted all of our gold. For what is the big question??


By the way, go to
this link now!! South Africa had a prophet a long time ago, who prophecied all of this stuff. I think this information will answer EVERYONES questions!



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
[edit on 20-7-2006 by Astyanax]


no its my bad, i linked to Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler Instead of Wall Street and FDR. Here is the correct book, and its in Chapter 6, subheading PAUL WARBURG AND CREATION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Wall Street and FDR

Chapter 6


Dae

posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
That was a fast comeback, Dae. I'll give you the bit about the causes of inflation; as I said, I'm no economist. However, it doesn't mean the rest of your argument automatically follows.


Yeah, I saw your post early this morning and had to reply. Im no economist either! I understand that I may be correct on a point but Ill have to argue my case further.


The idea that inflation is a form of taxation is new to me. Could you explain how that works?


OK, here goes. Inflation is caused by increased money supply which is then countered with deflationary fiscal policies which can include: Increasing the level of income tax, reducing government expenditure or increasing VAT and other indirect taxation. Source



And while you're at it, could you confirm that you still think it's bankers (and not governments) that are causing all this naughty inflation? Because if inflation is taxation, it's governments that benefit, not bankers. Inflation is bad for banks in that it reduces the value of repaid loans.


Naughty inflation? ^^
I can confirm to you that our banking system is based on fraud of which the only beneficiaries are the bankers. Yes I say that inflation is a mean form of taxation, a taxation that is part of the process of securing loans the governments take from the banks. Inflation is not bad for banks because it is all part of the banking system and the banking system benefits the banks!


but does nothing to support the argument that inequality creates economic cycles. I'll just have to take that one, Scottish-style, as 'not proved'.


Fair enough, hopefully we shall thrash that one out too.


By the way, there are still a lot more questions in my earlier posts waiting for your answers.


Well I did think I had until Wednesday to slice the rest of your post apart
and I look forward to your replies also!


I do want to comment on one point you made to Nu Troll


Von Mises is no nutball. A respectable economist whose political views are close to my own, he did not accuse central bankers of bad faith, merely of incompetence. He did not argue that the Fed deliberately caused the Depression, but that it promoted it accidentally through incompent monetary meddling. As you will see from my previous posts, I am more than willing to accept that.


Perhaps Mises didnt want to be considered a conspiracy nut and wanted to keep his good reputation, alot of what I have read in the past two days are from Mises writings. Why do you find it hard to believe that the banks are malicious instead of just incompetent?


Mind you, Mises held that all central bank intervention causes damage; he regarded it as the primary cause of boom-bust cycles. That's a controversial position in economics; plenty of (equally respectable) economists disagree with Mises.


Im sure in his private musing, perhaps after a few beers, he would tell us what he REALLY thinks



posted on Jul, 20 2006 @ 03:56 PM
link   


Paul Warburg , who used the money to finance hitlers rise to power.



Good to see Warburg's name come up here. The Warburgs were the next family I was planning on researching...thanks for the start! Another fine family those Warburgs! I am familiar with 2 banks of theirs: The Warburg Bank of Hamburg and The Warburg Bank of Amsterdam....

It's amazing that a Jew would finance Hitler's rise to power...but if there was money in it...that's all these scum bags really care about!

Here is a good bio on the wonderful Warburg clan: www.ihr.org...

Some topical info:



In November 1910, [Senator] Aldrich [of Rhode Island], Paul [Warburg], and four other experts sneaked off to discuss bank reform at a secret hideaway on Jekyll Island off the Georgia coast. With Democrats now in control of Congress and Progressives railing against Wall Street, the bankers had to travel incognito, lest they be accused of hatching a cabal.

As part of the elaborate charade, the conference participants pretended to be sportsmen, outfitting themselves as duck hunters.

What Chernow does not adequately explain is why such secrecy was necessary if a central bank was really such a great idea. We are told, in effect, that Warburg and others hatched a cabal to avoid being accused of hatching a cabal.

Because it was the product of a furtive conclave, and secrecy still surrounds many central bank decision-making activities, it is hardly surprising that there are so many dark suspicions and "banking conspiracy" theories involving the Federal Reserve Bank.

According to Chernow, Paul Warburg was the only person in America who understood how a central bank works. In 1912 and 1913, he drew up the basic plan for the Federal Reserve banking system, and he drafted the Federal Reserve Act. In December 1913 President Wilson signed the Act establishing the new central bank. If anyone can be called the father of the Federal Reserve Bank, the New York Times has rightly noted, it is Paul Warburg.

The new central bank's board of governors -- which for several years included Paul Warburg -- became top-heavy with political appointees whose policy of loose credit set the stage for the Great Depression. America's economic collapse of the 1930s can be traced to the Federal Reserve's operation by incompetents and self-serving hacks.



If this FED was on the up and up, why the need for secrecy? Why the need to sneak off the Jekyll Island and pretend they were there to hunt ducks? And this: "Because it was the product of a furtive conclave, and secrecy still surrounds many central bank decision-making activities, it is hardly surprising that there are so many dark suspicions and 'banking conspiracy' theories involving the Federal Reserve Bank."

No kidding....

Paul Warburg actually wrote up the plan for the FED and drafted the Federal Reserve Act which, sadly, was signed by Woodrow Wilson (which he later realized ruined the United States).

Paul Warburg is known as the Father of the FED. And didn't he do such a fine job! "America's economic collapse of the 1930s can be traced to the Federal Reserve's operation by incompetents and self-serving hacks."

Incompetents and self serving hacks!! This of course is talking about the: Rothschilds, Warburgs, Lehman Brothers, Lazard Brothers, Kuhn, Loeb, Israel Moses Seif, Goldman, Sachs and the Chase Manhattan Bank!!

Self-serving scum bags...the lot of them!

How about a little info on the Warburg banks?? www.mmwarburg.net...

There it is..the website of the awesome WARBURGS!!



Company philosophy

Our Bank is characterized by independence from institutional influences



It sure is independent of institutional influences. These scum bags do whatever they want and laugh all the way to the bank. Wait....they are a bank. Okay they just laugh all around the bank!

They have locations here: Hamburg, Berlin, Bremen, Braunschweig, Frankfurt, Hannover, Cologne, Luxembourg, Switzerland

I'm amazed that there are no locations in the US....but we know they do plenty of business with the US!!...they have plenty of stock in the FED!! (privately held stock because the FED isn't publicly traded). I came across info on exactly how much stock each of these scumbag families have in the FED.....I will have to find that and add it here...

There is an annual report available on the site I posted, but what does that really show? It just shows what they want to show. The FED is where they make their real money and there certainly isn't any info on that annual report about that!!

Info on who has how much stock in the FED:



Originally,
there were reportedly 203,053 shares of privately owned Federal Reserve
stock, of which approximately 65% were owned by foreigners and approximately
35%(72,000 shares) were:
1. Rockefellers' National City Bank = 30,000 shares
2. Chase National = 6,000 shares (currently Chase Manhattan and owned by
David Rockefeller)
3. The National Bank of Commerce = 21,000 shares (now known as Morgan
Guaranty Trust)
4. Morgans' First national Bank = 15,000 shares
Interestingly, the total shares owned by Rockefellers interests equal
36,000 shares and the total of Morgans' equals 36,000 shares.
Although the privately owned Federal Reserve Act of 1913 provided the names
of the owner banks be kept a secret, R.E. McMaster, publisher of the
newsletter" The Reaper" discovered, through confidential Swiss banking
connections, that the following banks have controlling interest in the
privately owned Federal Reserve
1. Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
2. Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
3. Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
5. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
6. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
7. Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
8. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By Rockefellers)

source: www.apfn.net...


Part of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 stipulated the names of the owners must be kept secret? Why is that?? Well...it was written by Paul Warburg...so I'm sure he was no dummy...he wanted to make sure he and his cronies could keep their dirty little secret quiet about how much money they were robbing the American people of! He and his scum bag friends wanted the people to believe it was a government agency. It wouldn't fair too well if everyone knew that a small handful of greedy money-mongers were squeezing every dime they could out of every American. Remember: Today, that figure is $1 trillion per year. That's what they make every year and it's tax free and in 93 years the FED has never been audited. Why is that? WHY? Because they own everybody.

[edit on 20-7-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Wasn't able to find out much about the Lehman Brothers. It appears they are a very small fish in this drama. Currently, Richard S. Fuld, Jr. is on the Board of Directors for the FED in New York. He is also, coincidentally, Chairman of the Lehman Brother's Executive Committee.

Wasn't able to find any additional information linking them to the FED other than the fact that they have their boy, Mr. Fuld, on the board.

Here's their website: www.lehman.com...

That's where you can find out what they WANT you to know. Such as:



The history of Lehman Brothers parallels the growth of the United States and its energetic drive toward prosperity and international prominence. What would evolve into a global financial entity began as a general store in the American South. Henry Lehman, an immigrant from Germany, opened his small shop in the city of Montgomery, Alabama in 1844. Six years later, he was joined by brothers Emanuel and Mayer, and they named the business Lehman Brothers.

1880-1889
During the vigorous economic expansion of the second half of the 19th century, Lehman Brothers broadened its expertise beyond commodities brokerage to merchant banking. Building a securities trading business, they became members of the New York Stock Exchange in 1887.

Setting the stage for future global growth, Jacob Schiff, a Kuhn, Loeb partner, led the Firm to establish investment-banking relationships in Europe and Japan.

(NOTE: A RELATIONSHIP BEGINS WITH KUHN, LOEB - another group that also owns interest in the FED)

1900-1909
At the turn of the century, Lehman Brothers was a founding financier of emerging retailers, including Sears, Roebuck & Company, F.W. Woolworth Company, May Department Stores Company, Gimbel Brothers, Inc. and R.H. Macy & Company.



Etc....etc.....Obviously, no dirt to be found on their own site.

A little dirt here: www.usatoday.com...



Lehman Bros.' founder Henry Lehman started as an itinerant peddler in Alabama in 1844. Shortly after he arrived in the USA from Germany, he was joined by his younger brothers, Mayer and Emanuel.

The Lehmans grew wealthy as middlemen in the cotton trade. They stored Alabama cotton, often paying planters for it in hard currency and bartered goods, then sold the bales to other brokers or banks in New York and Liverpool, England.

The U.S. Census of 1860 lists Mayer Lehman as the owner of seven slaves — three males and four females — ranging in age from 5 to 50. "Some of these were household slaves. Others may have been used in the firm," notes a family history, The Lehmans: From Rimpar to the New World.

In the collection of Lehman family and business memorabilia at Columbia University is a photograph of a receipt for the purchase in 1854 of a 14-year-old slave girl named Martha. The buyer is listed as H. Lehman & Brother, the name of the firm before Emanuel's arrival.

The Columbia collection also contains a private, unpublished history of the Lehman Bros. investment bank that details the brothers' purchase of a male slave for $900 and their ownership of other slaves as early as 1850.



So they started off in the cotton business and....owned slaves. A lot of rich people in the south owned slaves back then and were in the cotton business. I'm sure they probably owned more than 7 as this story tells and I'm sure more than one brother owned slaves...whatever.

As I said earlier...the Lehamn Brothers appear to be a small fish in the big FED pond. But they are and have been involved with Kuhn Loeb and they do have a member on the board of the FED in New York right now (that is no coincidence).

Next.....I'll dig up what I can on the Lazard Brothers.....

One thing I do know....some of our elected officials need to grow some balls and work diligently to GET RID OF THE FED!



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Hello everybody, i have been folowing this tread with great interest. Altough i live in the Netherlands, i think a scam like this can effect the whole world.
When i was looking for more information i came across this website.
Its by a dutch financial reporter.
This is where the scam gets even bigger.

The Federal Reserve can in theory set up their own hedge funds, which reside in the Cayman Islands or the Antilles, and the Federal Reserve can actually mandate that those hedge funds purchase American Treasury bonds…, as if they are foreign investors that are doing that. But in the meantime this is all about money that is printed in America and is used to purchase American Treasury bonds. In this way America is actually financing itself - they are pretending that foreigners are still actually doing the financing.



[edit on 22-7-2006 by Piet]



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Some new info....



At the close of research and investigation for this article, the writer must conclude that the influence of one-world foundations in the areas of social science, education and foreign policy has only accelerated; thereby accomplishing great strides due to minimal opposition from opposing foundations.

It must be remembered that it was the One-World cabal, (Rockefeller, Rothschild etc.), who pushed for the legalization of tax-exempt foundations, and were therefore the first to establish them. They were able to successfully get off to a head start. Even if a sizable foundation-sponsored opposition were to develop, it would be on a small scale and of rather insignificant result, compared to the massive efforts exerted by the One-World Cabal's mega-foundations.

The One World Cabal will always have more power in the world because of the devious strategies it is willing to employ in order to accumulate money and manipulate the rest of us with it. Clear cut, and decisive action is required immediately. Otherwise, it is this writer's opinion that we will very quickly lose the freedoms our Constitution guarantees for us. In short, our Constitution will be superceded by a One-World document, in fact it already has.

It is important for the reader to begin to think about what the world will be like if the One-Worlders succeed. Because this is a short article, all the possible ramifications and changes to your lifestyle cannot be covered. But one possible negative outcome could be a return to a feudal system with 98% of the people shackled to some major corporation in the same way that serfs lived by the whim of their overlord. This is just one of many possible scenarios, all equally black.

That being said, the ball is squarely in your court. You are part of a select few who have the education, intelligence and desire to even care about such things. In other words, it is up to you. You are part of the last classically educated free-thinking generation in this nation. If you wish to preserve your country for your grandchildren, then get busy. Write letters, form groups which will inform your family and friends. Buy shortwave radios, and create radio networks which will get together and decide how to create an informed voting block that will take back your country.

source: www.rumormillnews.com...


A great article by Gunther K. Russbacher regarding the "One World Monetary Cabal" as he calls it. Who is Gunther K. Russbacher?:



Editor's note: Navy Captain Gunther Russbacher is a 29 year veteran of the United States Intelligence Community, (Office of Naval Intelligence, attached to the Central Intelligence Agency). During all of that time he has operated as a deep black covert operative. In 1980 Captain Russbacher flew then vice-presidential candidate George Bush to a secret meeting near Paris in what has become known as "The October Surprise" scandal.

In 1989, Captain Russbacher violated direct orders and married, Rayelan Allan, an investigative researcher who was currently working to expose the October Surprise scandal. Captain Russbacher was arrested two days after their marriage and stayed incarcerated until December of 1993.

It is evident to all who are familiar with the Russbacher case that he was a political prisoner of the Bush administration. The following article was written, in spring of 1992, from his prison cell in the Jefferson City Correctional Center in Missouri.

Captain Russbacher has been called the "Company Banker". Because of this, he had to be knowledgeable about the banking system in the United States. Once he began studying the Federal Reserve, its origins and its global aspirations, he began to understand how three hundred families control the world. This article was written from memory, with a little help from friends at Langley Center.



A political prisoner of the Bush Administration (daddy not dubya)...

Some new and interesting insights on what is really going on in the world and within the FED. It also gets into some questionable "accidents" that killed off some critics of what has been going on in the world regarding us being led into a One World or New World Order.

The name Rockefeller is very prominent in this essay!!



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 02:18 PM
link   
How about those Lazard Brothers??



Some gullible individuals, including gullible members
of the U.S. Congress, still think that Felix
Rohatyn is just another nasty banker. What they
don’t understand, or choose not to understand, is that
Rohatyn is an extension of the 1930s and 1940s Nazi
operations inside France, operations associated with a
London/Paris-centered faction of international finance,
known then and now as the Synarchist International.

Felix Rohatyn today faithfully represents the same
policies and the same outlook as the wartime French
Nazi collaborationists, associated with his own Lazard
Frères bank and its closely allied spawn, Banque
Worms. Rohatyn’s now-exposed current role in the total
dismantling and overseas “outsourcing” of the U.S. automobile-
manufacturing sector, with its embedded
machine-tool capacity so vital to America’s economic
national security, is thoroughly consistent with this pedigree.

In this scandalous assault on America’s once-great
industrial base, Rohatyn is acting, not as an American,
but as an agent of the Paris-centered financier networks
that are today’s successor generation of European
Synarchist bankers. Particularly since his tenure as U.S.
Ambassador to France, Felix Rohatyn has revived the
now-70-year-old Synarchist collaboration between his
own Lazard banking group and the Synarchist Worms
Group, today represented by Gerard Worms. Both
Rohatyn and Gerard Worms, in recent years, have been
co-directors of three major European financial entities:
Suez Groupe, Rothschild et Cie Banque, and The
Publicis Groupe, the world’s fourth-largest communications
firm. In Publicis Groupe, Worms and Rohatyn sit
with Michel David-Weill, the longtime managing director
of Lazard.

source: www.larouchepac.com...


Synarchist International? That's interesting...sort of a London/paris financial cabal.

Felix Rohatyn is in charge of the Lazard Brothers of Paris (Lazard
Frères bank). This horse's arse was once the U.S. Ambassador to France...wtf?? Rohatyn at one time was also co-director of Rothschild et Cie Banque....coincidence? Now I wonder how this scum bag got the job as Ambassador to France??



During the late 1920s, the Paris branch of the Lazard
banking interests helped establish the Banque Worms,
on behalf of the French Synarchist industrialist
Hippolyte Worms. French intelligence documents from
the 1930s identified Hippolyte Worms as one of the original
12 members of the secret Synarchist Movement of
Empire, a group at the heart of the Nazi collaboration.
The Banque Worms, otherwise referred to as “the
Worms Group,” came to dominate the pro-Hitler Vichy
government of post-1940 France, maintaining throughout
its close ties to the London-New York-Paris Lazard
group. It was during the pre-Vichy period that Lazard
bankers Frederic Bloch-Laine and Andre Meyer, later
the mentor of Felix Rohatyn, were dominant behind-thescenes
figures in the banking apparatus that later
steered the Nazi collaborationist regime of Pétain, Laval,
and Darlan, through Banque Worms.

The U.S. intelligence service and diplomatic corps of
the 1930s and 1940s were fully aware of the pro-Hitler
treachery of the Banque Worms Group.


So the Lazards, just like the rest of these scum bags that own and run the FED were all involved with and backed Hitler and Nazi Germany.



“This group should be regarded not
as Frenchmen, any more than their corresponding members
in Germany should be regarded as Germans, for the
interests of both groups are so intermingled as to be
indistinguishable; their whole interest is focussed upon
furtherance of their industrial and financial stakes.”

Drexel Biddle left no room for doubt that he was
equating the Banque Worms group with the worst of the
Nazi collaborationists. “On the one hand,” he explained,
“Pierre Pucheu (Interior), and Yves Bouthillier (National
Economy) were members of the Worms clique. Gerard
Bergeret (Secretary of State for Aviation) was included by
some among Pétain’s personal following, by others
among the Worms group. Excluding Bergeret, the
Secretaries of State were almost to a man associates of
the same clique.”

Scores of other reports, many of them obtained by
Executive Intelligence Review from the National Archives
of the United States, catalogued the in-depth collusion
between the Worms group and the Nazi regime in occupied
France. A series of three in-depth intelligence
dossiers traced the pedigree of the three main branches
of Lazard Brothers (New York, London, Paris), into
European wartime Synarchy.

Many will attempt to deny that Felix Rohatyn is of the
same Nazi pedigree as his Lazard and Banque Worms
predecessors of the 1930s and 1940s. But the evidence is
massive.


"A series of three in-depth intelligence
dossiers traced the pedigree of the three main branches
of Lazard Brothers (New York, London, Paris), into
European wartime Synarchy."

Wonderful people those Lazard Brothers...aka Nazis. Sounds like Felix Rohatyn, the one time U.S. Amabassador to France, was a traitor. Amazing what this group that controls and owns the FED is capable of!! DISGUSTING!!

Here is the website of the Hitler-loving Lazard Brothers: www.lazard.com...

There you can learn all they WANT you to know about them.



Through the early and mid-twentieth century, the three Lazard "Houses" in London, Paris and New York continued to grow their respective operations independently of each other, with the New York House coming under the leadership of André Meyer in 1944. Under Mr. Meyer and continuing with Felix Rohatyn, the New York House further developed its reputation as a preeminent mergers and acquisitions advisory firm. Michel David-Weill, a descendant of the founding families, joined Lazard Frères et Cie. in Paris in 1956, ascended to a leadership role within the French operations and later moved to the New York House, where he became senior partner in 1977.



Hmmmm...nothing there about being Nazi sympathizers.....

But..here is a good quote from thier website:



Integrity. We take great pride in the tradition of integrity that we have developed over more than 150 years.


Integrity?



[edit on 22-7-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 05:10 AM
link   
I just wanted to throw my two cents in here, perhaps more later.

I don't agree with the argument that inflation is caused through wage increases. Wage increases don't normally occur across all job sectors (please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no economist). So assuming that one particular industry, or let's say minimum wage is raised from (I'm not sure what it is today, this is just an example) $5.35 to $5.50, then all those employers/company's that have employees working for minimum wage either absorb that rise in cost for labor or pass that on to the consumer. In the event it is passed on to the consumer, that doesn't reflect a decrease in the buying power of the dollar but rather, an increase in the value of the service or the goods provided.

I also don't agree that an increase in gold, for example, in an ecomony, which in turn would create more money to represent that gold causes inflation. Let's say your base of gold is $100,000 and it's represented by paper money, equally distributed across the people. Suppose your country comes across another $100,000 in gold and that paper money is evenly distributed. That new gold does not decrease the buying power of your paper money, because something that was $1 before is now $2. The price of an item or service would remain in proportion to the amount of money in an economy, given that it based upon something of value.

To me, inflation is the rising cost of a product/service in relation to the devaluation of a currency through excessive amounts of said currency in the economy. Basing a currency on "market value" rather than a standard of something you can hold in your hand, such as how much gold you have, to me seems much more suseptible to inflation since your basing the amount of currency to print on something that is based on perception and is vulnerable to widespread thievery and over-evalulation of an economy. For example, many corporations and banks use drug money and money laundering operations to increase their net profits. These profits are not on the "books" but to people in the stock market, they see "net profits increase" and so they invest more. It also gives the perception that the economy is thriving more than it really is, when in fact a large number of these "profits" are coming from clandestine operations.
For an example of what I'm talking about see RJR vs. European Union

that's just ONE example of ONE corporation doing that. Trust me the banks are doing that as well.

Further, suggesting that it's best to put the job of printing money in the hands of a private entity is a good idea, because a gov't with that responsibility would cause hyperinflation, is silly. Let's face it, inflation IS rising and we have a private corporation running our money AND our federal government has indebted our grandchildern's childern. There is no fiscal responsibility. Citing an African nation (i forgot who you mentioned Astyanax) as an example is ludicrous, as most African nations are poor and have no history of good leadership or economics.

My two cents for now, I'll be following and adding in later

peace

[edit on 23-7-2006 by derdy]



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Apparently Leo Want has been trying to do something and almost got killed.

From Rense.com
Wanta Plan - Fed Blocks
$4.5 Trillion Due US Treasury
By Greg Szymanski
7-20-6

The corrupt Federal Reserve Board is now standing in the way of 1.575trillion in repatriated offshore funds earmarked for the U.S. Treasury in what is now being called in worldwide financial circles as the *Wanta Plan*.

An agreement was reached June 12 between U.S. authorities and Wanta, the legal trustor of more than 27.5 trillion in lost or stolen U.S. assets from the Cold War era, to return 4.5 trillion of the looted money by the Bush and Clinton crime families, less money for taxes and other related expenses.

However, the Arctic Beacon, one of the only news outlets in the country covering the hush-hush story, has learned the Federal Reserve Board has acknowledged the Wanta settlement and is now without sufficient public justification, blocking the return of the money which could turn the bewildered American economy around overnight.

Wanta made his first public statement on the massive settlement Wednesday on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal, at www.gcnlive.comarchives, as well as appearing with Greg on the Jeff Rense RadioProgram at www.rense.com the same evening.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Sorry double post....


[edit on 24-7-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Some interesting new info...this next paragraph about how many of these interests in the FED have merged or consolidated over the years...



These interests have merged and consolidated in recent years, so that the control is much more concentrated. National Bank of Commerce is now Morgan Guaranty Trust Company. Lehman Brothers has merged with Kuhn, Loeb Company, First National Bank has merged with the National City Bank, and in the other eleven Federal Reserve Districts, these same shareholders indirectly own or control shares in those banks, with the other shares owned by the leading families in those areas who own or control the principal industries in these regions. The "local" families set up regional councils, on orders from New York, of such groups as the Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and other instruments of control devised by their masters. They finance and control political developments in their area, name candidates, and are seldom successfully opposed in their plans. [...]

source: www.cassiopaea.org...


Two other organizations to look at in different threads would be the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. These are actually controlled by the owners of the FED. The owners of the FED finance and control political developments, name candidates and are seldom successfully opposed.

I guess Kennedy was the exception to that. Nixon was supposed to win that election. RFK was taken out so that he wasn't able to do what his brother was....beat Nixon!



These developments following the passing of the Federal Reserve Act proved every one of the allegations Thomas Jefferson had made against a central bank in 1791: that the subscribers to the Federal Reserve Bank stock had formed a corporation, whose stock could be and was held by aliens; that this stock would be transmitted to a certain line of successors; that it would be placed beyond forfeiture and escheat; that they would receive a monopoly of banking, which was against the laws of monopoly; and that they now had the power to make laws, paramount to the laws of the states. No state legislature can countermand any of the laws laid down by the Federal Reserve Board of Governors for the benefit of their private stockholders. This board issues laws as to what the interest rate shall be, what the quantity of money shall be and what the price of money shall be. All of these powers abrogate the powers of the state legislatures and their responsibility to the citizens of those states. [...]



Once again, Jefferson's reasons for opposition to a FED-like organization are brought to the surface...and a list of the reasons why the FED is essentially illegal.

"No state legislature can countermand any of the laws laid down by the Federal Reserve Board of Governors for the benefit of their private stockholders." ARE YOU KIDDING? The scums that own the FED can do whatever they want....that is pretty scary my friends!



The ten largest bank holding companies in the United States are firmly in the hands of certain banking houses, all of which have branches in London. They are J.P. Morgan Company, Brown Brothers Harriman, Warburg, Kuhn Loeb and J. Henry Schroder. All of them maintain close relationships with the House of Rothschild, principally through the Rothschild control of international money markets through its manipulation of the price of gold. Each day, the world price of gold is set in the London office of N.M. Rothschild and Company. (Secrets of the Federal Reserve, Griffin, 1952)



Rothschild...I hate that freaking name! The Rothschild's set the price of gold and they are part-owners of the FED. MORE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Kids watching the candy store!



J. Henry Schroder Banking Company played an important role behind the scenes of WW I. No historian has a reasonable explanation of how World War I started. Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated at Sarajevo by Gavril Princeps, Austria demanded an apology from Serbia, and Serbia sent the note of apology. Despite this, Austria declared war, and soon the other nations of Europe joined the fray. Once the war had gotten started, it was found that it wasn't easy to keep it going. The principal problem was that Germany was desperately short of food and coal, and without Germany, the war could not go on.

John Hamill in The Strange Career of Mr. Hoover explains how the problem was solved. He tells us that the initiative came from the German authorities in Belgium through their continuous relations with the American Relief Committee. Hamill points out "That is what the Belgian Relief Committee was organized for--to keep Germany in food." The Belgian Relief Commission was organized by Emile Francqui, director of a large Belgian bank, Societe Generale, and a London mining promoter, an American named Herbert Hoover, who had been associated with Francqui in a number of scandals which had become celebrated court cases, notably the Kaiping Coal Company scandal in China, said to have set off the Boxer Rebellion, which had as its goal the expulsion of all foreign businessmen from China. Hoover had also carried out a number of mining promotions in various parts of the world as a secret agent for the Rothschilds, and had been rewarded with a directorship in one of the principal Rothschild enterprises, the Rio Tinto Mines in Spain and Bolivia.

Hoover had been barred from dealing on the London Stock Exchange because of one judgement against him, and his associate, Stanley Rowe, had been sent to prison for ten years. With this background, Hoover was called an ideal choice for a career in humanitarian work. ( John Hamill, The Strange Career of Mr. Hoover, William Faro, New York, 1931 - Copies of Hamill's book were systematically located and destroyed by government agents, because it was published on the eve of President Hoover's re-election campaign).

Although his name is unknown in the United States, Emile Francqui was the guiding spirit behind Herbert Hoover's rise to fortune.


Herbert Hoover was not a nice guy. He was a scum bag. He was a Rothschild chrony....no wonder he was President.....This all just gets worse and worse.



Francqui was a director with Hoover, in the Chinese Engineering and Mining Company (the Kaiping mines), through which Hoover transported 200,000 Chinese slave workers to the Congo to work Francqui's copper mines."


Hoover transported Chinese slaves......lovely fellow. How many President's have the FED owned since it began in 1913? All but Kennedy? Am I close?......

Excuse me while I go throw up.....


[edit on 24-7-2006 by Excitable_Boy]


Dae

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Continuing critique of Astyanax's post (id:2352347)


Originally posted by Astyanax
Thus economic cycles are self-correcting. If left to its own devices, however, the market is cruel; the cycles can be rapid, short-lived and brutal.


OK, Economic Cycles, lets go there...

I Google this phrase and Im not surprised at what I find. Theories upon theories are raining down on me! This page has about 10 different theories to describe 'economic cycles', and within some of these theories they tell us that the economic cycle may not exsist...

Source

Business cycle theory matters simply because many people believe business cycles exist. This has not been a permanent belief. In the 19th century, business cycles were not thought of as cycles at all but rather as spells of "crises" interrupting the smooth development of the economy.


Here are five different cycles with their length in years.


Seasonal cycles - within a year
Kitchin cycles - 3 years
Juglar cycles - 9-10 years
Kuznets cycles - 15-20 years
Kondratiev cycles - 48-60 years


So with this in mind, Id like to go back to your comment, "Thus economic cycles are self-correcting.". It would seem economic cycles may not exist, and for you to talk about them with such certainty is alarming. You then go onto describe how if these economic cycles are left to their own devices it will be mayhem and disaster for all.


If left to its own devices, however, the market is cruel; the cycles can be rapid, short-lived and brutal.


My three tier response is based upon an old saying, "Pigs sweat, men perspire and women glow.".

The sweat
Where are your sources for making claims like these? Is it the magazine The Economist? I suggest you chuck them in the bin and have a good read online with some decent sources, oh and dont be frightened of reading the conspiracy sites either!

The perspire
Your theory seems to suggest that we can never be free of Banks making billions and billions of units of fiat currency (aka money
) from us each year just so we can trade and exist in society. You paint a picture of fear, a classic religious tactic employed as people control, without Central Banks as our Fiscal Saviour...

The glow
Oh my! Is this true what you say?
Could you kindly direct me to the source of your knowledge? I feel I must have confirmation about the horrors you proclaim will happen if we dont have the Central Banks saving us. *places down her glossy magazine and looks serious*

--------

Dae's Economic Cycle Theory

For many years now learned men have noticed patterns of peaks and troughs within our economy and business life. As is the tendency for some men, these patterns were analysed and the numbers were counted. Let's have a look at Irving Fisher (1907) as he scratches his head pondering the nature of economic cycles. As a young man he believed these cycles were due to man's headstrong belief in future profits resulting from technological improvements. However, this did not sit well with him and as a result he considered different ideas, completely dropping old theories in his wake.

One day Irving, not a young man anymore, proclaims that it is all an illusion, the illusion is but the "dance of the dollar". One can only imagine the frustration. Men like Irving Fisher have for many years tried to describe the obvious changes within our economy as a natural process, something akin to the seasons*. The Kondratiev theory, described in cycles of 50-60 years, is one such misleading idea that tries to compare these patterns to Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter.

Dae's theory proposes that these patterns, boom-recession-depression-recovery, is nothing but the ouput of a well oiled system of robbery and fraud. The data produced over the years have told us nothing of cycles, only the behaviour of the Central Banks. Men have noticed the pattern in the sand but not the snake that makes it.


*or other naturally occuring, regularly cyclic phenomena. Dae's Economic Theory v2.0 posits that the correct natural cycle is the menstrual cycle; that is, cramp, blotation, deflation, recovery.






top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join