It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dennis Kucinich States His Intention To Put The Federal Reserve Under Government Control

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   




Brought tears to my eyes. If he does introduce this our reps MUST hear from us. We cannot sit back and let this slide!!!!

"stop lending credit into circulation and instead of borrowing money from banks and creating debt, governement can spend the money into circulation."

Priceless. Our money would have intrinsic value at that point. Ill be watching this.


[edit on 27-1-2009 by tjeffersonsghost]




posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
The advice of someone from Britain, where we used to have a government-owned national bank - don't do it. It just makes the economic state of the country into a political weapon, far more so than even in your last election. When politicians can decide what money goes where, you have what you guys call 'pork-barrel spending' all over the place. Not a good look.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Methinks the good Mr. Kucinich should stay out of small planes and in crowded places from now on.

That sort of talk can have a negative effect on ones health.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   
What the hell? Who pissed in his coffee?

This is the first I've heard of recently about this...definitely going to be keeping a very close eye and see where this goes. Let's see if the MSM does any reporting; if anything Mr. Kucinich might be on Rachel Maddow at least it'll get him air time.

I would have thought Dr. Paul would have put this one into play first. Good move nonetheless.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   
There is one wrinkle in the plan.

Our Legislators have terminated our control of the Treasury. They passed legislation, along with the initial so-called "bail-out" (I prefer to think of it as extortion) they passed 'executive' powers to the Treasury Czar, whose actions and policies are beyond legal challenge, even by that of the traditionally separate power, the Judiciary.

As long as the Treasury is free from accountability for it's actions, as it is now - thanks to them - we really don't have control. Putting the Fed under the Treasury is akin to the Fox guarding the hen-house.

The Treasury Czar is a POLITICAL appointee, and an INTIMATE associate of the Central Banking Cartel of which the Fed is a small (although significant) component. Since the Treasurer either comes directly from the 'financial' industry itself, or is in fact beholden to their machinations and agenda, we can no longer 'win' the struggle against economic tyranny by placing it under the Department of the Treasury. We are paying "our" treasurer to work for them.

The International ministers of finance and the "international' cartel itself are the singular well-spring our ALL our financial maladies. How much more self-evident this can be is beyond me.

Mr. Kucinich intention's, whether righteous or not, are doomed to an ineffectual result. We need to realize that financial doctrine appears to be a religious expression, and as such, such be entirely separate from the state. Unfortunately oversight is pointless without an avenue for redress. Which is precisely what the legislature demolished with the bailout on the 3rd of October 2008..



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


The Treasury Czar is no longer. He was out the day Bush left and now we have Geithner in charge. Geithner has become a state's witness as well and will start testifying against the "Czar" adn the folks that abetted him.

As far as getting rid of the federal reserve, I believe that all the actions we have seen to date, lead to that conclusion. Before it is done all debt will be rolled into the Fed and then with one stroke of a pen and a few computer entries, we will be free of their financial tyranny for good.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I seem to remember, back in the dim and distant past, that taking away the power of the Federal Reserve was one of Kennedy's plans and in fact went so far as to have a bill number assigned. Of course unfortunate circumstances meant it never came into effect - go figure.

Man, that guy Kennedy sure made a lot of enemies.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
This thread should be renamed: "Dennis Kucenich States His Intention To End His Own Existence."



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity
reply to post by Maxmars
 


The Treasury Czar is no longer. He was out the day Bush left and now we have Geithner in charge. Geithner has become a state's witness as well and will start testifying against the "Czar" adn the folks that abetted him.



Are you certain? I can't recall seeing any legislatorial change in the scope and breadth of the position. Just because the faces change doesn't mean the position changed. Or might you have a link to share that I could research. The laws were formally changed in Oct. '08 by legislative action, I can;t believe I missed the change to the law, but if I did... boy that's good news.

Edit to add: Geithner? The former president (or was it CEO) of the New York branch of the Federal Reserve Bank? Uh. No disrespect intended, but I wouldn't put my eggs in that basket.

If he moves to create policy extinguishing his unchallengeable decision-making power, I might reconsider.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by Maxmars]



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
"


...stop lending credit into circulation and instead of borrowing money from banks and creating debt, governement can spend the money into circulation."





the reason the US currency is the world's reserve currency
is because the Federal Reserve exists,
and It's role as a 'watchdog & oversight'
against the federal government 'spending' money into existance.


In the last year however, the Fed. has assumed the roles of Legislature
and Executive branches of gov't... something they had not done
since it's creation on Jeckyll Island and its institution during the 1913
holiday recess in Congress.


No matter what 'K' gets passed, the Fed is due a payment for the $8.5 Trillion which was requested by the US government...
i beieve the Federal Reserve gets flat rate of the money created out-of-thin-air...@ between 2-4%... go figure -->> 2% of $8 Trillion is What?

probably enough to have the all the FederalReserve's 12 different regional Boards establsh perpetual Estates for All their Families & cousins & posterity for the next 20 generations...
exactly what the founding fathers did not want..
a class of perpetual aristocrats !



[edit on 27-1-2009 by St Udio]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Hi Max -

Can you link to the legislation you are referencing that was passed for the Treasury Czar? I know better than to doubt you, but I am having a hard time finding anything on it while I am in search of Geither's current status vis-a-vis that.

Thanks!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I would hope... that Kucinich follows through on this as far as he can. And when TPTB "JFK" him, the sheep will see the similarities and the number of American citizens that are aware of just what is happening to this country will skyrocket.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
\I seem to remember, back in the dim and distant past, that taking away the power of the Federal Reserve was one of Kennedy's plans and in fact went so far as to have a bill number assigned. Of course unfortunate circumstances meant it never came into effect - go figure.\

Thats correct.

but I fail to understand the reason of your smiles...

One can only aplaud this man and wish him to succed.
By the way, only this way, Obama will be able to act independently and not play another puppet president...



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWayISeeIt
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Hi Max -

Can you link to the legislation you are referencing that was passed for the Treasury Czar? I know better than to doubt you, but I am having a hard time finding anything on it while I am in search of Geither's current status vis-a-vis that.

Thanks!


Please - always doubt me - I prefer to be corrected than to have someone take my all-too-human memory's accuracy for granted!


It was entitled "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" and was put forth by Mr. Paulson of "Blueprint for a Modernized Financial Regulatory Reform" fame.

In section 8 of the proposed and subsequently passed legislation you will find: ""Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

Now I haven't reviewed the final version, but someone told me it had been removed. Knowing the nature and practices of our esteemed legislators, I'm certain the verbiage was probably couched differently to ensure the same redress-proofing. But I will be happy to be wrong. Essentially such authority was granted and set to expire on December 31st, 2009; but I am still reviewing the 451 page document (these things take time you know
)

Here is the link to the law: Public Law 110-343 - www.house.gov...

sorry for the delay in responding



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Yea you notice their was no applause at the end of his speech?

Gutless wretches in government..



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
In related news, The Federal Reserve states its intention to put Dennis Kucinich into another dimension.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Spending money into existence is not inflationary as long as it is spent to create something of value. For example, a bridge. If, however, the government spends money created out of thin air on destroying things (like we do in the Iraq war) then you have inflation.


Creating money by loaning it into existence is the real cause of inflation. During Benjamin Franklin's time, money was created and spent by the government without causing inflation, because it was spent on facilitating commerce, infrastructure, services, and items of value.


peoplesmandate.essentialsecurity.com.au...



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Replace small time crooks with the biggest crooks known to mankind? No thanks.

How about you abolish the dinosaur that is the Fed instead?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
Replace small time crooks with the biggest crooks known to mankind? No thanks.

How about you abolish the dinosaur that is the Fed instead?


Then who would control the money? What kinds of banking system would we have? Who controls the supply? You know...that small stuff?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by username371

Spending money into existence is not inflationary as long as it is spent to create something of value. For example, a bridge. If, however, the government spends money created out of thin air on destroying things (like we do in the Iraq war) then you have inflation.


Creating money by loaning it into existence is the real cause of inflation. During Benjamin Franklin's time, money was created and spent by the government without causing inflation, because it was spent on facilitating commerce, infrastructure, services, and items of value.


peoplesmandate.essentialsecurity.com.au...


Correct. It has intrinsic value because of the work that was used. This is why the gold standard works because it costs money to mine that gold so there is value there. If you didnt want a gold standard spending it into existence via projects like roads and bridges without the big interest payments can work just as good.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join