Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I am too. Excellent
Dollar facing 'power-shift': analysts
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.ee8e6856c300b312ea0f64a4522381ca.481&show_article=1
Are you a Christian?
The video is preaching about Revelation 666 and the End Time.
UN meetings you probably never heard about.
http://vodpod.com/watch/1096627-towards-the-one-world-system-gary-kah
Thank you for the recommended readings.
For those who are familiar with the Fraudulent FED activities would enjoy the readings.
We need to organize and to make it simple.
This is not too complicated issues as we are dealing with 100 years old criminal activities which fooled most of Americans.
WE NEED ACTIONS.
Recommended reading:
http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal-Reserve/dp/0912986212
For those who haven'nt read it yet, this is one of the best books written on the subject. A book you cant put down.
>> How many troops are enough for Afghanistan strategy?
((( If American soldiers knew about who owns USA, they will not die at the battle fields or in wars. )))
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42439027
* Story Highlights
* The war in Afghanistan passed the 8-year mark last week
* Obama and his national security team are working on a new strategy
* His top commander there has reportedly called for 40,000 more troops
From Ed Hornick
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Determining the amount of troops necessary to win a war is never an easy decision for a commander in chief and his military commanders if history is any guide.
And it's a dilemma President Obama facesas pressure mounts on him to decide what strategy will improve conditions in Afghanistan.
The president and his top military, national security and foreign policy advisers are conducting an intensive strategic review of the U.S. military presence in the war-torn nation.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is calling for a counterinsurgency strategy that would add as many as 40,000 troops.
But others in the administration want a different approach.
Vice President Joe Biden has called for a counterterrorism strategy, which would focus on using special forces and technology to reduce the number of al Qaeda insurgents on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
If the president should listen to McChrystal and adopt a troop "surge," the question remains: How many is enough?
One expert said such a large number is needed to reduce violence throughout the country -- the 40,000 troops would allow the U.S. military to "reverse the momentum of the insurgency, which has been on the rise," said Kimberly Kagan of the Institute for the Study of War, who has advised McChrystal on Afghanistan.
That number, Kagan said, would help fill in gaps around Kandahar in the southern part of the country where Taliban forces have amassed. But she warned that eventually, troops would also be needed to tamp down the insurgency in other parts of the country.
"If we had 40,000 more troops, it is likely that the initiative would be wrested from the enemy, and the U.S. and coalition forces would be able to mount a counteroffensive that would proceed in stages over time," she said. VideoWatch more on the violence in harsh outposts in Afghanistan »
Even with more troops, the fight will be a tough one if the last few weeks are any indication. Just last week, eight U.S. soldiers were killed in an intense firefight with hundreds of insurgents in Nuristan province, a remote area in northern Afghanistan. It was the seconddeadliest attack in a single day so far in the war, which recently entered its ninth year. Read soldiers' accounts from the battle
The White House is getting pressure from all sides of this issue. Many on the right have said the president should take the advice of the commanders on the ground.
Sen. John McCain, a staunch supporter of the 2007 troop surge in Iraq, said Sunday that any added military deployment in Afghanistan smaller than 40,000 troops "would be an error of historic proportions."
Asked whether he thought the war in Afghanistan could be won with fewer troops, the Arizona Republican said, "I do not."
"I think the great danger now is a half-measure, sort of a -- you know, try to please all ends of the political spectrum," McCain told John King on "CNN's State of the Union."
"And, again, I have great sympathy for the president, making the toughest decisions that presidents have to make, but I think he needs to use deliberate speed." VideoWatch more of McCain's comments »
Democrats are split over increasing troops.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said U.S. troops would be put in "jeopardy" if Obama does not listen to McChrystal.
"I don't know how you put somebody in who's as crackerjack as Gen. McChrystal, who gives the president very solid recommendations, and not take those recommendations if you're not going to pull out," she said on ABC's "This Week."
But Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Massachusetts, who also appeared on ABC, said that enlarging the U.S. footprint in Afghanistan would be a mistake.
"We need to come up with a strategy that includes an exit strategy, because it'll also put pressure on the government of Afghanistan to step up to the plate, which it has not done so far."
McGovern said adding more troops and resources will make the country go "bankrupt."
"We have wars in Iraq, in Afghanistan, hundreds of billions of dollars that are all going onto our credit card. Our kids and our grandkids are paying for this."
But the troop number argument is nothing new for presidents and their defense secretaries.
Criticism surrounded then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as conditions in Iraq deteriorated and insurgents increased attacks on U.S. forces. He was largely criticized for not sending enough troops early in the Iraq war.
Rumsfeld's plan, observers have said, was to win the war in Iraq with smaller troop numbers and a large emphasis on technology, which would in turn let democracy take root.
At the beginning of the war in 2003, troops quickly filled the country, took out Saddam Hussein's government and gained control of Baghdad, the capital. The force was small, and success came quickly.
But three years later, civil war broke out, and U.S. forces struggled to maintain control of cities they had once secured.
Rumsfeld admitted in a 2006 CNN interview that no one was well-prepared for what would happen after major combat ended.
"Well, I think that anyone who looks at it with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight has to say that there was not an anticipation that the level of insurgency would be anything approximating what it is," Rumsfeld told CNN for the 2006 documentary, "CNN Presents Rumsfeld -- Man of War."
CNN's Tom Evans and Kate Bolduan contributed to this report.
FYI: educate others about the FED Fraud: Americans need to unite to solve the problems which we are facing.
http://trend-signals.com/Fedfraud.pdf <<<~~~Let all know about the Fed fraud.
We still have millions of Americans thinking the FED is a government entity!
Download it and email to your family, friends, and your groups.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
When Americans are fighting over small issues, we will never get out of the mess as the tactic is:
Divide, confuse, and destroy...
If you truly concern and love the country, we need to focus on real issues which is our country is being destroyed and manipulated by the FED greed and power.
Also, you need to be able to tell those who are intentionally dividing Americans -- many are in disguise to manipulate; so, we need to be able to tell with whom we are talking to.
Of course, also, we need to keep in mind that Non-Americans want us to be destroyed.
So, in that case, since the GREED and POWER is using international power -- i.e. that is how they own 90% wealth around the world, we can say that they are also in the similar situation, i.e. foreigners who want to see America to fall.
I believe that the 912 movement is the answer as people is being educated about the Greedy FED own by foreigners manipulating the world. And they will continue to do so.
We still have millions of Americans and most of foreigners do not know the truth.
God bless America.
Have a good day
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Union Bank ~ Hitler: During the final days of the war in 1945, Hitler married his long-time mistress Eva Braun. Less than two days later, the two committed suicide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler ADOLF + EVA Hitler
Tape 2:10/9:37 Union Bank Fraud -- support for NAZI
>> First woman wins Nobel Prize for economics
((( ~~ What are real motives for the award?~~ ))))
* Story Highlights
* U.S. professors Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson win Nobel Prize for economics
* Ostrom becomes the first woman to win the prize in its 40-year history
* Nobel panel: Winners' work focuses on how community institutions can stop conflict
(CNN) -- Americans Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson won the Nobel Prize for economics for work on how community institutions can prevent conflict, the Nobel Committee announced Monday.
Ostrom becomes the first woman to win the prize in its 40-year history.
The award was a "great surprise... I'm still a little bit in shock," she said by phone at the news conference announcing the prize.
Ostrom, a professor of political science at Indiana University, was praised "for her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons."
Ostrom's work shows that local communities often manage common resources -- such as woods, lakes and fish stocks -- better on their own than when outside authorities impose rules, the committee said.
"Bureaucrats sometimes do not have the correct information, while citizens and users of resources do," she said to explain the significance of her work.
The committee highlighted her research on a dam in Nepal as an example, saying her research has moved analysis of nonmarket institutions "from the fringe of economic analysis to the very center."
Ostrom said she had not yet thought about what she would do with her half of the $1.4 million prize.
Williamson, a professor in the graduate school at the University of California, Berkeley, was cited "for his analysis of economic governance, especially the boundaries of the firm."
Williamson's work examines why large corporations tend to arise -- and why they do not -- based on the cost and complexity of transactions, according to the Nobel committee.
"He has taught us to regard markets, firms, associations, agencies and even households from the perspective of their contribution to the resolution of conflict," the panel said.
Forbes magazine said, "He authored 'The Economic Institutions of Capitalism' in 1975, a landmark text of the 'new institutional economics' movement that challenged the idea of firms as simple profit-making machines. He focused on the contracts and transactions that could explain the structure and boundaries of companies."
Williamson did not speak at the announcement ceremony.
"At some fundamental level, they are really both addressing the fundamental issue of how we create human cooperation through the design of appropriate institutions," committee member Tore Ellingsen said.
"They want to understand nonmarket institutions. ... Both laureates look at such institutions very much as conflict-resolution mechanisms," he said.
While the two professors' work has much in common at an "abstract level," their methods are different, Ellingsen said.
Ostrom works from case studies to derive general patterns, while Williamson uses theoretical reasoning.
The global financial crisis did not affect the committee's deliberations "that much," committee member Beril Holmlund said, noting that Nobel prizes "tend not to be for work done last year."
The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was established in 1968 by the Central Bank of Sweden in memory of Alfred Nobel. It is given by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which since 1901 has been awarding Nobel Prizes for achievements in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature and for peace.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/12/nobel.economics/index.html
Population distribution
Welcome and Thanks, as I think that the 912 movement is the Key for correcting the problems in our country.
We have the 912 group leaders link and hopefully, we can get in touch with them to educate, to organize, and to propose solutions for problems which many Americans are facing.
I gave you a person mark as well and hope that we could continue to save America -- once the great country.
marked your board..
14 Points of fascism: The warning signs
In his original article, "Fascism Anyone?", Laurence Britt (interview) compared the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Suharto, and Pinochet and identified 14 characteristics common to those fascist regimes. This page is a collection of news articles dating from the start of the Bush presidency divided into topics relating to each of the 14 points of fascism. Further analysis of American Fascism done by the POAC can be read here.
1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
bushdoll.jpg (14012 bytes) shockand we.jpeg (28299 bytes) lets-roll-s.jpg (9418 bytes) oklicense.JPG (19764 bytes) derphooey.jpg (28081 bytes)
September 11 Freedom Walk
Family Security Matters — the right-wing front group, claims ‘multiculturalism’ threatens U.S.
New Majority Leader: Iraq War “May Be The Greatest Gift That We Give” Our Grandchildren
Headstones of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan are inscribed with the Pentagons war-marketing slogans
White House and the RNC are going to make a habit of using uniformed military personnel as props at Republican political rallies, despite the fact that it is a plain violation of military regulations banning politicization of the armed forces.
"You must glorify war in order to get the public to accept the fact that your going to send their sons and daughters to die." The inside story of the cozy relationship between big box office American war movies and the Pentagon
More...
2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Oopsie: Torture victim's records lost at Guantánamo, admits camp general
One of the worst things you'll ever read about your government
We are now a torturing police state: Bush signing into law that will get rid of habeas corpus, allow hearsay evidence, and allow the President to determine what is allowable torture.
Bush Offers Himself Amnesty for Human Rights Crimes
Bush threatens to veto $442b defense bill if Congress investigates detainee abuses.
Guantanamo Judge: “I don’t care about international law. I don’t want to hear the words ‘international law’ again. We are not concerned with international law.”
Rumsfeld to approve new guidelines that will formalize the administration's policy of imprisoning without the protections of the Geneva Conventions and enable the Pentagon to legally hold "ghost detainees,"
US 'preparing to detain terror suspects for life without trial'
U.S. oks evidence gained through torture
July 1, 2003: U.S. Suspends Military Aid to Nearly 50 Countries: because they have supported the International Criminal Court and failed to exempt Americans from possible prosecution.
US has at least 9000 prisoners in secret detention
More...
3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Congressman: Muslims 'enemy amongst us'
SB 24, Ohio law to muzzle "liberals"
Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum has joined a conservative Washington think tank, where he will found and direct a program called "America's Enemies."
Sean Hannity creates weekly "Enemy of the State" segment on his new program
Fox radio hosts suggests putting liberal commentators and activists in concentration camps.
World history textbook used by seventh-graders at Scottsdale’s Mohave Middle School was pulled from classrooms mid-semester amid growing right criticism of the book’s unbiased portrayal of Islam
Rallies planned against 'Islamofacism': Event to 'unify all Americans behind common goal'
More...
4.) Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
fy05.gif (16496 bytes) USvsWorld2004Top25.gif (12281 bytes)
If you haven't seen the Oreo flash animation yet, see it here
Bush’s Domestic Program Hit List
Bush slashes domestic programs, boosts defense. Arlen Spector calls it "scandalous"
onlyonfox-20050817-1.jpg (36748 bytes)
Funding for job training, rural health care, low-income schools and help for people lacking health insurance would face big cuts under a bill passed Friday by the House
Pentagon to spend 75 billion for three new brigades
Bush budget to cut funding for just about anything that helps people, gives $35 billion more to the Pentagon (not including war costs), and guarantees record deficits for decades to come.
President threatens veto of $11B increase in education, health research and border security funding. Meanwhile, Iraq war costs taxpayers $12B a month
Bush lobbies Congress to have the funds saved from his veto of children's health care to be spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. The $45.9-billion emergency request would push the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over $600 billion.
8 states sue Bush Administration for cuts to Children Insurance Programs
Many national parks will have to cut back on staff due to a $2.5 billion budget cut, the equivalent to one week of the
Iraq war
Bush wants to cut Iraq war funding. Just kidding, he wants to cut funding for a program that gives health insurance to poor children. Governors from both parties are opposing it.
Three cable channels now feed news, information and entertainment about the armed services into millions of living rooms 24 hours a day, seven days a week: The Military Channel, the Military History Channel and the Pentagon Channel.
More...
5.) Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
It's legal again, to fire gov't workers for being gay
Bush calls for Constitutional ban on same-sex marriages
Bush refuses to sign U.N proposal on women's "sexual" rights
W. David Hager chairman of the FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee does not prescribe contraceptives for single women, does not do abortions, will not prescribe RU-486 and will not insert IUDs.
The State Department has awarded an explicitly anti-feminist U.S. group part of a US$10 million grant to train Iraqi women in political participation and democracy.
More...
6.) Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
At the White House Christmas party for the press last night, “conservative talk radio hosts dominated the place: President Bush “smiled, patted him on the back and said, ‘Keep it up. We need you guys.’”
FBI Acknowledges: Journalists Phone Records are Fair Game
Report shows U.S. government has been engaged in illegal propaganda aimed at its own citizens and the story gets only 41 mentions in the media
Free Press details recent governmental propaganda efforts, from faux-correspondent Jeff Gannon to paid-off pundit Armstrong Williams, and from the demise of FOIA to video news releases passed off as news. also... See a Whitehouse fake news release here (opens realplayer)
Fox"news" hack lets it slip: Shep Smith says ‘Fox is Bush’s network after all.
FF_SC.jpg (27041 bytes) US seizes webservers from independent media sites FF_SC1.jpg (25984 bytes)
Bush's war on information: US editors forbidden to publish certain foreign writers
More...
7.) Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses
elev.jpeg (11000 bytes) Bush Aides ADMIT 'stoking fear' for political gain: Bush adviser said the president hopes to change the dynamics of the race. The strategy is aimed at stoking public fears about terrorism, raising new concerns about Kerry's ability to protect Americans and reinforcing Bush's image as the steady anti-terrorism candidate, aides said.
The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level.
TSA agents save us from a 5 foot 1, 74-year-old Holocaust survivor grandmother who didn't want to drop her pants in the Palm Beach International Airport
GOP Ad These are the stakes
Keith Olbermann: "The Nexus of Politics and Terror." CO10206091618-big.jpg (34188 bytes)
Cheney warns that if Kerry is elected, the USA will suffer a "devastating attack"
GOP convention in a nutshell (quicktime)
Rove: GOP to Use Terror As Campaign Issue in 2006
More...
8.) Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Jerry Falwell cleared of charges that he broke federal election law by urging followers to vote for Bush
NC congressman proposes law making it ok to preach politics from the pulpit
Texas Governor Mobilizes Evangelicals
Family research council: Justice Sunday
Thou shalt be like Bush: What makes this recently established, right-wing Christian college unique are the increasingly close - critics say alarmingly close - links it has with the Bush administration and the Republican establishment.
Park Service Continues to Push Creationist Theory at Grand Canyon and other nat'l parks
9.) Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
The I.R.S.’s scrutiny of the nation’s biggest companies is at a 20-year low
A Bush administration plan to crack down on contract fraud has a multibillion-dollar loophole: The proposal to force companies to report abuse of taxpayer money will not apply to work overseas, including projects to secure and rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bush continues to abuse his power and issues a signing statement to avoid pesky things like a "commission to probe contracting fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan"
4,000 Mine Safety Violations Ignored On Bush Administration Watch
Bush Reappoints Mine Safety Chief Who Bungled Crandall Canyon Disaster
GAO report: The White House “pressured the Environmental Protection Agency to weaken requirements that companies annually disclose releases of toxic chemicals
The K Street Project is a project by the Republican party to pressure Washington lobbying firms to hire Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists with access to influential officials. It was launched in 1995, by Republican strategist Grover Norquist and House majority leader Tom DeLay.
American Conservative Magazine: One U.S. contractor received $2 million in a duffel bag... and a U.S. official was given $7 million in cash in the waning days of the CPA and told to spend it “before the Iraqis take over.”
There are 6 Congressional Committees investigating the Oil-for-Food (UN) scandal, yet not a single Republican Committee Chairman will call a hearing to investigate the whereabouts of 9 billion dollars missing in Iraq
Bush money network rooted in Florida, Texas: Since Mr. Bush took office in 2001, the federal government has awarded more than $3 billion in contracts to the President's elite 2004 Texas fund-raisers, their businesses, and lobbying clients
More...
10.) Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Bush vows to veto anti-terror security bill if it allows airport screeners to unionize.
Labor Department warns unions against using their money politically
President Bush Attacks Organized Labor: Bush attacked organized labor Saturday, issuing orders effectively reducing how much money unions can spend for political activities and opening up government contracts to non-union bidding.
March 2001: President Bush signed his name to four executive orders on organized labor last month, including one that cuts the money unions will have for political campaign spending.
Congress and the Department of Labor are trying to change the rules on overtime pay, eliminating the 40 hour work week, taking eligibility for overtime pay away from millions of workers, and replacing time and a half pay with comp days.
More...
11.) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
The A to Z guide to political interference in science
Bush's new economic plan cuts funding for arts, education
Artists from all over the world are being refused entry to the US on security grounds.
A group of more than 60 top U.S. scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates and several science advisers to past Republican presidents, on Wednesday accused the Bush administration of manipulating and censoring science for political purposes
Freedom of Repression: New ruling will allow censorship of campus publications
More...
12.) Obsession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations
Citizens who have done no more than criticize the president are being banned from airline flights, harassed at airports’, strip searched, roughed up and even imprisoned
The 10 most outrageous civil liberties violations of 2006
The United States has now become the world leader in its rate of incarceration, locking up its citizens at 5-8 times the rate of other industrialized nations.
American Gestapo is here: "There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the 'United States Secret Service Uniformed Division.'"
America: secret jails, secret courts, secret arrests, and now secret laws
Snitch-or-Go-to-Jail bill will make pretty much anything short of reporting on everyone you see for doing just about anything a jailable offense. With minimum sentences, up to and including life without parole.
The problem with Gonzales is that he has been deeply involved in developing some of the most sweeping claims of near-dictatorial presidential power in our nation's history, allowing him to imprison and even (at least in theory) torture anyone in the world, at any time
Police officers don't have to give a reason at the time they arrest someone, the U.S. Supreme Court said in a ruling that shields officers from false-arrest lawsuits.
More...
13.) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
1161889068JurisdictionChart-big.jpg (195560 bytes) Bush
Cronyism: Foxes Guarding the henhouse
An illustrated guide to Republican scandals
Who's been indicted, named as a co-conspirator or convicted? The Grand Ole Docket tracks trial dates, court appearances and sentencing hearings for players in the current array of national political scandals.
The Great List of Scandalized Administration Officials
FEMA official who coordinated the fake news conference resigns, lands a new gig heading public affairs at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) was forced to give up his seat on the powerful committee after the FBI raided his home as part of the Abramoff scandal. To replace him, the GOP leadership tapped Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who was himself recently named one of Congress’ most corrupt lawmakers.
Making Sense of the Abramoff Scandal
In preparation for upcoming Congressional hearings, Bush Administration firing federal attorneys and appointing ringers without Senate confirmation via the patriot act.
If Bush's pick is confirmed, that will mean the five top appointees at Justice have zero prosecutorial experience among them.
Iran-Contra Felons Get Good Jobs from Bush
Big Iraq Reconstruction Contracts Went To Big Donors
Bush Wars -- Crooks Get Contracts : The main companies that were awarded billions of dollars worth of contracts in Iraq have paid more than $300 million in fines since 2000, to resolve allegations of fraud, bid rigging, delivery of faulty military equipment, and environmental damage.
US Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) lost track of $9 billion
"Contracting in the aftermath of the hurricanes has been marked by waste, corruption and cronyism"
More...
14. Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Secure elections bill defeated in House after Whitehouse intervenes.
A couple of election workers have been convicted of rigging a recount in Ohio following the 2004 election
Rolling Stone does some investigative and rather exhaustive digging into public documents and says we’re almost guaranteed the 2004 election results were massively rigged
Powerful Government Accounting Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings
Conyers hearing in which Clinton Curtis testifies that he was hired to create hackable voting machines (.wmv)
The Republican Party has quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide private defense lawyers for a former Bush campaign official charged with conspiring to keep Democrats from voting in New Hampshire.
The Conyers Report (.pdf)
No explanation for the machines in Mahoning County that recorded Kerry votes for Bush, the improper purging in Cuyahoga County, the lock down in Warren County, the 99% voter turnout in Miami County, the machine tampering in Hocking County
Less access than Kazakhstan. Fewer fail-safes than Venezuela. Not as simple Republic of Georgia. The 2004 Elections according to international observers.
This picture is what stopped the ballot recounts in Florida shortly after it seemed that legitimate President Gore had a lead. The "citizens" started what was later called "the preppy riot". Screaming, yelling, pounding on the walls, these "outraged citizens" intimidated the polling officials to halt the court mandated recount. A closer look reveals who they really were. They were bussed and flown in at Republican lawmakers expense. Some even flew in on Tom Delay's private plane.
More...
If Mussolini defines fascism as "the merger of corporate and government power" what does that make the K Street project?
Related Articles:
"Now and Then"- Part 1 A 3 part series by W David Jenkins III on the similarities between America now and Germany post Reichstag fire
"Now and Then"- Part II: The Propaganda Machine
Now and Then- Part III Hitler's Playbook: Bush and the Abuse of Power
It may sound crazy to some, but the style of governing into which America has slid is most accurately described as fascism.
Is America Becoming Fascist?
Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt
The Danger of American Fascism: With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.
Sheila Samples: Freedom To Fascism -- A Bumpy Ride: Republicans don't seem to realize that they are no longer individual members of a coherent "party," but are merely part of a mean-spirited and dangerous movement that is threatening to sweep away democracy as we know it.
Germany In 1933: The Easy Slide Into Fascism
The Brownshirting of America: Bush’s supporters demand lock-step consensus that Bush is right. They regard truthful reports that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and was not involved in the September 11 attack on the US – truths now firmly established by the Bush administration’s own reports – as treasonous America-bashing.
Fascism then. Fascism now? When people think of fascism, they imagine Rows of goose-stepping storm troopers and puffy-chested dictators. What they don't see is the economic and political process that leads to the nightmare.
What is Fascism? Some General Ideological Features
Neo-fascism in America : Too many people believe fascism is only about goose-stepping, jack-booted Nazis. Too many people believe that American democracy is so strong that fascists could never take control of America. If you are sympathetic to those views, I invite you to consider the possibility that you are mistaken.
It is in times of fascism rising that armies of ignorance are once more resuscitated from the bowels of a society bordering on the edge of mass psychosis. The America at the dawn of the twenty-first century is no exception...
Republican Party Brown Shirts: "The Wide-Awakes": The organization was known for virulent anti-Catholicism, secretive rituals, and a military-style organization complete with "officers" and units.
Harper's Magazine: We Now Live in a Fascist State
They Saw It Coming: The 19th-Century Libertarian Critique of Fascism
Victims of Creeping Fascism: We are witnessing nothing less astonishing than the demise of the American experiment. 12-20
The ten phases of a Bush scandal. 12-22
America is headed for a soft dictatorship by the end of Bush’s second term.
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
The Democrat Party's Long and Shameful History of Bigotry and Racism
A common attack upon conservatives and republicans by the ultra left is to engage in what has come to be known as "playing the race card" but is more accurately described as racial McCarthyism. Hardly a day goes by without a member of the far left wing falsely accusing conservatives of racism, bigotry, and a wide array of similar nasty things. They are not only dishonest, but they often border on the absurd, as in NAACP leader and hyper bigot Julian Bond's recent implication to his organization that Bush administration officials supported confederate slavery. Amazingly, Bond's statements went without condemnation from the radical Democrat party or others in his organization.
Not surprisingly, in all the lies and accusations of racism by the radical left wing, the truth becomes distorted not only about the Republicans but also the Democrats who make these accusations themselves. For instance, you may or may not have heard Democrat Senator Robert Byrd's outburst of racist bigoted slurs, more specifically the "n-word," on national television in March of 2001. Amazingly, this incident of blatant racism on national television drew barely a peep from the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Julian Bond, Mary Frances Berry, or any of the other ambulance chasers who purport themselves to be the leaders of the civil rights movement. In contrast, the main source of well deserved criticism for Byrd's racist outburst came not from any of the so called leaders of the civil rights movement but from from Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey (source). The race hustlers Jackson, Mfume et al turned a blind eye towards this act of racism by one of their own party, at most issuing an unpublicized slap on the wrist, or, as was more often the case, making not a peep. But where the race hustlers turn a blind eye and spew their lies, it is up to conservatives to set the record straight with the truth.
In response to the growing practice of racial McCarthyism by prominent left wing Democrats, it is necessary to expose the truth about the Democrat Party's record on Civil Rights:
I. Acts of Bigotry by Prominent Democrats and Leftists:
Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Franklin Roosevelt, the long time hero and standard bearer of the Democrat Party, headed up and implemented one of the most horrible racist policies of the 20th Century – the Japanese Internment Camps during World War II. Roosevelt unilaterally and knowingly enacted Japanese Internment through the use of presidential Executive Orders 9066 and 9102 during the early years of the war. These orders single-handedly led to the imprisonment of an estimated 120,000 law abiding Americans of Japanese ancestry, the overwhelming majority of them natural born second and third generation American citizens. Countless innocents lost their property, fortunes, and, in the case of an unfortunate few, even their lives as a result of Roosevelt's internment camps, camps that have been accurately described as America's concentration camps. Perhaps most telling about the racist nature of Roosevelt's order was his clearly expressed intention to apply it almost entirely to Japanese Americans, even though America was also at war with Germany and Italy. In 1943, Roosevelt wrote regarding concerns of German and Italian Americans that they t0o would share in the fate of the interned Japanese Americans, noting that "no collective evacuation of German and Italian aliens is contemplated at this time." Despite this assertion, Roosevelt did exhibit his personal fears about Italian and German Americans, and in his typical racist form he used an ethnic stereotype to make his point. Expressing about his position on German and Italian Americans during World War II, Roosevelt stated “I don’t care so much about the Italians, they are a lot of opera singers, but the Germans are different. They may be dangerous.”
Roosevelt also appointed two notorious segregationists to the United States Supreme Court. Roosevelt appointed South Carolina segregationist Democrat Jimmy Byrnes to the court. Roosevelt later made Byrnes a top advisor, where the segregationist earned the nickname “assistant president.” Byrnes was Roosevelt’s second choice behind Harry Truman for the VP nod in his 1944 reelection bid. Roosevelt also appointed segregationist Democrat Senator Hugo Black of Alabama to the court. Black was a former member of the Ku Klux Klan with a notorious record of racism himself.
Hugo Black: A former Democrat Senator from Alabama and liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice appointed by FDR, Hugo Black had a lengthy history of hate group activism. Black was a member of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920's and gained his legal fame defending Klansmen under prosecution for racial murders. In one prominent case, Black provided legal representation to Klansman Edwin Stephenson for the hate-induced murder of a Catholic priest in Birmingham. A jury composed of several Klan members acquited Stephenson of the murder, reportedly after Black expressed Klan gestures to the jury during the trial. In 1926 Black sought and won election as a Democrat to the United States Senate after campaigning heavily to Klan membership. He is said to have told one Klan audience "I desire to impress upon you as representatives of the real Anglo-Saxon sentiment that must and will control the destinies of the stars and stripes, that I want your counsel." In the Senate Black became a stauch supporter of the liberal New Deal initiatives of FDR and a solid opponent of civil rights legislation, including a filibuster of an anti-lynching measure. Black led the push for several New Deal programs and was a key participant in FDR's court packing scandal. Roosevelt appointed Black, a loyal ally, to the U.S. Supreme Court. During the Senate confirmation of Black's nomination, the issue of his strong Klan affiliations caused a public controversy over his appointment. Following the confirmation Roosevelt claimed ignorance of Black's Klan past, though this claim was dubious at best. Black's first Senate election, which occurred with Klan support, had been covered nationally a decade earlier in 1926. Black's Klan affiliations were a well known part of his political background and recieved heavy coverage in the newspapers at the time of his appointment. On the court, Black became a liberal stalwart. He also continued his career of supporting racism by authoring the opinion in favor of FDR's Japanese internment program in the infamous Korematsu ruling.
Senator Robert Byrd, D-WV: Byrd is a former member of the Ku Klux Klan and is currently the only national elected official with a history in the Klan, a well known hate group. Byrd was extremely active in the Klan and rose to the rank of “Kleagle,” an official Klan membership recruiter. Byrd once stated that he joined the Klan because it was effective in "promoting traditional American values" (Source). Byrd's choice of words speak volumes about his bigotry considering the fact that the Klan is a notorious hate group, and the racist "values" it promotes are anything but American. One of the earliest criticisms of Byrd's Klan ties came in 1952 when he was running for Congress. Byrd responded by claiming that he had left the Klan in 1943 while noting that "(d)uring the nine years that have followed, I have never been interested in the Klan." Byrd was lying, however, as he engaged in correspondence with a Klan Imperial Wizard long after he claims to have ended his ties with the hate group.
In a letter to the Klan leadership (Source) dated 3 years after he purported to have ended his ties with them, Byrd wrote "I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state. The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia." Byrd continued his racist diatribe "It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union" and followed with a request for assistance from the hate group's leadership in "rebuilding the Klan in the realm" of West Virginia.
Byrd's racism extends far beyond his Klan membership. In a letter he wrote on the subject of desegregating the armed forces, Byrd escalated his racist rhetoric to an appalling level. In the letter, Byrd vowed that he would never fight in an integrated armed services noting "(r)ather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds" (Source).
Byrd's racist opinions have shown their ugly face in his behavior in the Senate. Byrd led the filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, according to the United States Senate's own website, filibustered the legislation to the bitter end appearing as one of the last opponents to the act before a coalition of civil rights proponents led by Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen invoked cloture so that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could pass. At the time, Byrd was in the the midst of a 14 hour and 13 minute filibuster diatribe against the key civil rights measure (Source). Throughout the 1960's, Byrd was was one of the staunchest opponents to civil rights in the U.S. Senate. Byrd’s racist history drew attention recently when he went on national television and repeatedly used the n-word, one of the most vicious racial slurs in existence, in an appearance on national television. Byrd uttered the slur on Fox News Sunday with Tony Snow on March 5, 2001. Despite the appalling nature of the remark, it went largely ignored by the mainstream media and the self appointed "civil rights" leadership. Whereas a similar remark by anyone other than a leading Democrat Senator would assuredly prompt the likes of Jesse Jackson to assemble protest rallies demanding resignations, the Jackson crowd was eerily quiet following Byrd's remarks, issuing only low key suggestions that Byrd should avoid making such bigoted remarks.
In a sickening recognition of Byrd's appalling political career, the national Democrat party has done nothing but embrace the West Virginia senator with leadership roles and practically every honor imaginable. To this very day the Democrats call former Klansman turned U.S. Senator Robert Byrd the "conscience of the Senate." They have embraced him as their party's central pillar in all ways possible. Byrd has been reelected more times than any other Democrat senator, has served as a Democrat in Congress, a Democrat State Senator in West Virginia, and a Democrat State Delegate in West Virginia. Democrats have made repeatedly elected Byrd into their national party leadership and into the U.S. Senate leadership. He became secretary of the Senate Democrat Caucus in 1967, and Senate Democrat Whip in 1971. The Democrats elected former Klansman Byrd as their Senate Majority Leader from 1977-1980 and as their Senate Minority Leader from 1981-1986. Byrd was again elected Democrat Majority Leader from 1987-1988. Democrats made Byrd the chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee and President Pro Tempore of the Senate from 1989 until the Republicans won control of the Senate in November 1994. Following the defection of Jim Jeffords in June 2001, the Democrats again made Byrd the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and elected him to the highest ranking office in the Senate: the President Pro Tempore, a position which also put this former Klansman 4th in line for the presidency. Byrd lost his position when Republicans retook the Senate in late 2002, but continues to serve as one of the highest ranking members of the Democrat Senate leadership today.
Senator Ernest Hollings, D-SC: Hollings is liberal Democrat Senator from South Carolina who is also notorious for his use of racial slurs. He rose out of the Democrat Party's segregationist wing in the 1960's as governor of South Carolina. While in office as governor, Hollings personally led the opposition to lunch counter integration in his state. The New York Times reported on March 17, 1960 that then-governor Hollings "warned today that South Carolina would not permit 'explosive' manifestations in connection with Negro demands for lunch-counter services." According to the article, Hollings gave a speech in which he "challenged President Eisenhower's contention that minorities had the right to engage in certain types of demonstrations" against segregation. In the speech Hollings described the Republican president as "confused" and asserted that Eisenhower had done "great damage to peace and good order" by supporting the rights of minorities to protest segregation at the lunch counters.
Governor Hollings' support for segregation continued throughout his term and included his attendance at a July 23, 1961 meeting of segregationist Democrats to organize their opposition to the civil rights movement. Hollings was one of four governors in attendence, all of them Democrats. The others included rabid segregationists Orval Faubus of Arkansas and Ross Barnett of Mississippi. The New York Times reported on the meeting, noting that among the strategies discussed were using the segregationist White Citizens Council organization to mobilize political opposition to desegregation.
In more recent years Hollings, a senior Democrat senator, has made disparaging racial remarks and slurs against minorities. Senator Hollings, who was a contender for his party's presidential nomination in 1984, blamed his defeat in the primaries by using a racial slur against Hispanics. After losing the Iowa Straw Poll, Hollings stated "You had wetbacks from California that came in here for Cranston," referring to one of his opponents, Alan Cranston. A few years later Hollings reportedly used the slur "darkies" to derogatorily refer to blacks. He also once disparagingly referred to the Rainbow PUSH Coalition as the "Blackbow Coalition," and called former Senator Howard Metzenbaum, who is Jewish, "the Senator from B'nai B'rith." Hollings gained international criticism for his remarks about the African Delegation to the 1993 Geneva GATT conference, where he crudely remarked "you'd find these potentates from down in Africa, you know, rather than eating each other, they'd just come up and get a good square meal in Geneva." Hollings was also the Governor of South Carolina who raised the confederate flag over the state capitol in the early 1960's in what was considered at the time to be an act of defiance to civil rights. The press ignored Hollings and his role in the flag issue at the same time the political correctness police were smearing George W. Bush during his campaign after Bush correctly remarked that the flag was a state issue to be decided upon by South Carolina and not the national government.
Jesse Jackson: Jackson was the featured prime time speaker at the 2000 Democrat Convention. Jackson has a history of using anti-Semitic slurs and derogatorily calling New York City “Hymietown.” Jackson, a prominent self proclaimed "civil rights leader," is himself guilty of the same bigotry he dishonestly purports to oppose.
Dan Rather: Rather, the well known television anchor for CBS, is also a liberal Democrat who has spoken at fundraisers for the Democrat party in the past. The notoriously left wing reporter appeared on the Don Imus radio show on July 19, 2001 where he was interviewed about his long term refusal to cover the Gary Condit (D-CA) scandal involving an affair with a missing intern despite the scandal's national prominence. Rather noted on the air that CBS had basically forced him to cover the story that was on every other network and on the front page of all the major newspapers, all this after Rather avoided it for months. Rather stated on the air, refering to CBS, that "they got the Buckwheats" and made him cover the Condit scandal. The term "Buckwheat" is considered an offensive racial stereotype that stems from an easily frightened black character named "Buckwheat" on the Little Rascals comedies. It is widely regarded as a racial epithet and has long been condemned as an offensive stereotype by several civil rights organizations. In several past incidents (see here and here) the use of the epithet "Buckwheat" has recieved condemnation by the NAACP, Al Sharpton and other left wing organizations. These left wing organizations and personalities have demanded that other media personalities be fired over using the epithet, and even staged a protest at a school over the mere allegation that the racist stereotype had been used by a teacher. Yet these same liberal groups have, to date, remained completely silent now that one of their own, Dan Rather, is guilty of using the same offensive racial stereotype they have condemned elsewhere on a national radio show. It's just more proof of how the left wingers who cry the loudest with accusations of racism against others turn a blind eye when somebody of their own left wing ideology is the undeniable culprit of a blatantly racist act or statement!
Cragg Hines: Hines is one of the most rabidly partisan DC based Democrat editorial columnists to work for a major newspaper, and he makes no attempts to hide it. To Hines, pro-lifers are "neanderthals," as is often the case with those who differ in opinion with him. Ironically, Hines, a columnist who regularly touts himself as an enlightened progressive, is also known for racial remarks and religious intolerance. He attacked Senator Jesse Helms in an August 26, 2001 editorial with not only the usual liberal name calling, but also with a racial epithet. Hines used the racial slur "cracker" to attack Helms. He used the epithet not only within the article's text, but he even included it in the piece's title. In a sense of heavy irony, Hines' article accused Helms of bigotry for, among other things, opposing liberal policies like affirmative action. He didn't seem to object to himself for his own bigotted language in the same article. Hines has also drawn heavy criticism from Catholics including a letter to the editor from the former President of the U.S. Catholic Bishop's Conference for his seemingly agenda-driven criticisms of Catholicism and its religious leaders, often based on little or no historical evidence, which he has expressed in numerous editorial columns.
Al Sharpton: Sharpton, a perrenial Democrat candidate and one of the rumored candidates for the Democrat's 2004 presidential nomination, has a notorious racist past. Sharpton was a central figure who fanned the 1991 Crown Heights race riot, where a mob shouting anti-semetic slurs murdered an innocent Jewish man. Sharpton also incited a 1995 protest of a Jewish owned store in Harlem where protesters used several anti-semetic slurs. During the protests, a Sharpton lieutenant called the store's owner a "bloodsucker" and declared an intent to "loot the Jews." A member of the protest mob later set fire to the store, resulting in the death of seven (source).
Representative Dick Gephardt, D-MO: Gephardt, the former Democrat Minority Leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, gave several speeches to a St. Louis area hate group during his early years as a representative. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Gephardt spoke before the Metro South Citizens Council, a now defunct white supremacist organization, during his early years as a congressman. Newsmax.com further reported that Gephardt had openly asked the group for an endorsement of his candidacy during one of his many visits with the organization. Gephardt has long avoided questions about his past affiliation with this group.
Andrew Cuomo: Cuomo, Bill Clinton's former Housing Secretary and a prominent Democrat political player in New York, was tape recorded using racially inflamatory rhetoric to build opposition to a potential Democrat primary opponent while speaking to a Democrat group. Cuomo stated that voting for his rival for the New York Democrat gubernatorial nomination Carl McCall, who is black, would create a "racial contract" between Black and Hispanic Democrats "and that can't happen." Upon initial reports, Cuomo denied the statement but later a tape recording surfaced. Cuomo later dropped out of the race for governor (source).
Lee P. Brown: Brown, Bill Clinton's former drug czar and Democrat mayor of Houston, engaged in racist campaigning designed to suppress Hispanic voter turnout during his 2001 reelection bid. Brown faced challenger Orlando Sanchez, a Hispanic Republican who drew heavy support from the Hispanic community during the general election. Two weeks prior to the runoff, Brown's campaign printed racist signs designed to intimidate Hispanic voters. The signs featured a photograph of Sanchez and the words "Anti-Hispanic." The signs drew harsh criticism from Hispanic leaders as their message was designed to intimidate and confuse Hispanic voters. Around the same time the signs were being used, Brown supporter and city councilman Carol Alvarado made a series of racially charged attacks on Sanchez, implying a desire to see the supression of Hispanic voter turnout in the runoff. Brown staffers also went on record claiming that Sanchez was not a true Hispanic. The racist anti-Hispanic undertones of Brown's reelection bid were so great that liberal Democrat city councilman John Castillo, himself Hispanic, retracted his endorsement of Brown in disgust and became a Sanchez supporter in the final week of the campaign. Following the harsh condemnation of the racist signs and tactics, Brown purported that his campaign was removing them even though many still lingered around Houston up until the election. When election day came along, Brown placed more of the racist signs at polling places, despite his claim to have stopped using them. The large campaign billboard style election day signs featured, in Spanish, the word "Danger!" on them followed by Sanchez's name with a large red circle and slash through it. The signs identified the Brown campaign as their owner on the bottom. Brown's racially charged reelection effort barely squeeked by Sanchez on election day, winning 51% to 49% following a series of racially motivated advertisements in which the Brown campaign appealed to the fear of black voters by invoking images of the gruesome lynching death of James Byrd, Jr. and by attempting to pit them against Hispanics. While Brown had the audacity to declare himself a mayor for all people and all ethnicities at his victory party, many in Houston fear the racial wounds inflicted by his campaign will take years to heal.
Mary Frances Berry: Berry is the Democrat chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR). She purports herself to be an "independent" in her political affiliation in order to hold her job on the civil rights commission where partisan membership may not exceed 4 for either party, but is in fact a dedicated liberal Democrat who openly supported Al Gore for president and has given a total of $20,000 in personal contributions to the Democrat Party, Al Gore for President, and other Democrat candidates over the last decade. Berry is an open racist who is affiliated with the far-left Pacifica radio network, a group with ties to black nationalist causes. Berry once stated "Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them," indicating that she believes the USCCR should only look out for civil rights violations against persons of certain select skin colors.
Billy McKinney: Former Democrat State Representative Billy McKinney of Georgia, who is also the father of former Democrat congresswoman Cynthia McKinney of the same state. During his daughter's failed 2002 reelection bid, McKinney appeared on television where he blamed his daughter's difficulties on a Jewish conspiracy. McKinney unleashed a string of anti-semitic sentiments, stating "This is all about the Jews" and spelling out "J-E-W-S." McKinney lost his own seat in a runoff a few weeks later.
The Democrat Party and the Ku Klux Klan: Aside from the multiple Klan members who have served in elected capacity within the high ranks of the Democrat Party, the political party itself has a lengthy but often overlooked history of involvement with the Ku Klux Klan. Though it has been all but forgotten by the media, the Democrat National Convention of 1924 was host to one of the largest Klan gatherings in American history. Dubbed the "Klanbake convention" at the time, the 1924 Democrat National Convention in New York was dominated by a platform dispute surrounding the Ku Klux Klan. A minority of the delegates to the convention attempted to condemn the hate group in the party's platform, but found their proposal shot down by Klan supporters within the party. As delegates inside the convention voted in the Klan's favor, the Klan itself mobilized a celebratory rally outside. On July 4, 1924 one of the largest Klan gatherings ever occurred outside the convention on a field in nearby New Jersey. The event was marked by speakers spewing racial hatred, celebrations of their platform victory in the Democrat Convention, and ended in a cross burning.
II. Democrat opposition to the Civil Rights Movement:
A little known fact of history involves the heavy opposition to the civil rights movement by several prominent Democrats. Similar historical neglect is given to the important role Republicans played in supporting the civil rights movement. A calculation of 26 major civil rights votes from 1933 through the 1960's civil rights era shows that Republicans favored civil rights in approximately 96% of the votes, whereas the Democrats opposed them in 80% of the votes! These facts are often intentionally overlooked by the left wing Democrats for obvious reasons. In some cases, the Democrats have told flat out lies about their shameful record during the civil rights movement.
Democrat Senators organized the record Senate filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Included among the organizers were several prominent and well known liberal Democrat standard bearers including:
- Robert Byrd, current senator from West Virginia
- J. William Fulbright, Arkansas senator and political mentor of Bill Clinton
- Albert Gore Sr., Tennessee senator, father and political mentor of Al Gore. Gore Jr. has been known to lie about his father's opposition to the Civil Rights Act.
- Sam Ervin, North Carolina senator of Watergate hearings fame
- Richard Russell, famed Georgia senator and later President Pro Tempore
The complete list of the 21 Democrats who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes Senators:
- Hill and Sparkman of Alabama
- Fulbright and McClellan of Arkansas
- Holland and Smathers of Florida
- Russell and Talmadge of Georgia
- Ellender and Long of Louisiana
- Eastland and Stennis of Mississippi
- Ervin and Jordan of North Carolina
- Johnston and Thurmond of South Carolina
- Gore Sr. and Walters of Tennessee
- H. Byrd and Robertson of Virginia
- R. Byrd of West Virginia
Democrat opposition to the Civil Rights Act was substantial enough to literally split the party in two. A whopping 40% of the House Democrats VOTED AGAINST the Civil Rights Act, while 80% of Republicans SUPPORTED it. Republican support in the Senate was even higher. Similar trends occurred with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was supported by 82% of House Republicans and 94% of Senate Republicans. The same Democrat standard bearers took their normal racists stances, this time with Senator Fulbright leading the opposition effort.
It took the hard work of Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen and Republican Whip Thomas Kuchel to pass the Civil Rights Act (Dirksen was presented a civil rights accomplishment award for the year by the head of the NAACP in recognition of his efforts). Upon breaking the Democrat filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Republican Dirksen took to the Senate floor and exclaimed "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!" (Full text of speech). Sadly, Democrats and revisionist historians have all but forgotten (and intentionally so) that it was Republican Dirksen, not the divided Democrats, who made the Civil Rights Act a reality. Dirksen also broke the Democrat filibuster of the 1957 Civil Rights Act that was signed by Republican President Eisenhower.
Outside of Congress, the three most notorious opponents of school integration were all Democrats:
- Orval Faubus, Democrat Governor of Arkansas and one of Bill Clinton's political heroes
- George Wallace, Democrat Governor of Alabama
- Lester Maddox, Democrat Governor of Georgia
The most famous of the school desegregation standoffs involved Governor Faubus. Democrat Faubus used police and state forces to block the integration of a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. The standoff was settled and the school was integrated only after the intervention of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Even the Democrat Party organization resisted integration and refused to allow minority participation for decades. Exclusion of minorities was the general rule of the Democrat Party of many states for decades, especially in Texas. This racist policy reached its peak under the New Deal in the southern and western states, often known as the New Deal Coalition region of FDR. The Supreme Court in Nixon v. Herndon declared the practice of "white primaries" unconstitutional in 1927 after states had passed laws barring Blacks from participating in Democrat primaries. But the Democrat Parties did not yield to the Court’s order. After Nixon v. Herndon, Democrats simply made rules within the party's individual executive committees to bar minorities from participating, which were struck down in Nixon v. Condon in 1932. The Democrats, in typical racist fashion, responded by using state parties to pass rules barring blacks from participation. This decision was upheld in Grovey v. Townsend, which was not overturned until 1944 by Smith v. Allwright. The Texas Democrats responded with their usual ploys and turned to what was known as the "Jaybird system" which used private Democrat clubs to hold white-only votes on a slate of candidates, which were then transferred to the Democrat party itself and put on their primary ballot as the only choices. Terry v. Adams overturned the Jaybird system, prompting the Democrats to institute blocks of unit rule voting procedures as well as the infamous literacy tests and other Jim Crow regulations to specifically block minorities from participating in their primaries. In the end, it took 4 direct Supreme Court orders to end the Democrat's "white primary" system, and after that it took countless additional orders, several acts of Congress, and a constitutional amendment to tear down the Jim Crow codes that preserved the Democrat's white primary for decades beyond the final Supreme Court order ruling it officially unconstitutional.
Hispanics in South Texas were treated especially poorly by the Democrat Party, which relied heavily on a system of political bosses to coerce and intimidate Hispanics into voting for Democrat primary candidates of choice. Though coercion is illegal, this system, known as the Patron system, is still in use to this day by local Democrat parties in some heavy Hispanic communities of the southwest.
The next time Democrats take to the national airwaves to dishonestly accuse Republicans of racial hatred, remember who the historical record up until this very day points to as the real bigots: The Democrat Party. In all possible ways, the Democrat Party is built around the pillars of ultra leftists, many of whom are known participants in racism and/or affiliates of racist hate groups. Consider the Democrat Party of today's heroes and leaders:
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Democrat icon and orchestrator of Japanese Internment
- Ex-House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, former affiliate of a St. Louis area racist group
- Ex-Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd, former Ku Klux Klansman known for making bigoted slurs on national television
- Rev. Jesse Jackson, Democrat keynote speaker and race hustler known for making anti-Semitic slurs
- Rev. Al Sharpten, Democrat activist and perennial candidate and race hustler known inciting anti-Semitic violence in New York City
- Sen. Ernest Hollings, leading Democrat Senator known for use of racial slurs against several minority groups
- Lee P. Brown, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat mayor of Houston who won reelection using racial intimidation against Hispanic voters
- Andrew Cuomo, former Clinton cabinet official and Democrat candidate for NY Governor who made racist statements about a black opponent.
- Dan Rather, Democrat CBS news anchor and editorialist known for using anti-black racial epithets on a national radio broadcast
- Donna Brazile, former Gore campaign manager known for making anti-white racial attacks. Brazile has also worked for Jackson, Gephardt, and Michael Dukakis
The simple truth is that the Democrat Party's history during this century is one closely aligned to bigotry in a record stemming largely out of the liberal New Deal era up until the modern day. Bigots are at the center of the Democrat party's current leadership and role models. And in a striking display of hypocrisy, many of the same Democrats who dishonestly shout accusations of "bigotry" at conservatives are practicing bigots of the most disgusting and disreputable kind themselves.
http://gopcapitalist.tripod.com/democratrecord.html
Federal Spending FY 2009 YTD
Pie chart displaying Federal spending FY 2009 YTD
purple for contracts Contracts $310,620,677,722
light blue for loans Loans $168,021,167
red for grants Grants $559,162,157,707
dark blue for others Other Assistance $38,244,053,729
orange for direct payments Direct Payments $86,587,893,819
green for insurance Insurance $5,450,006,693
TOP 5 Assistance Recipients FY 2009 YTD
1 NEW YORK STATE DEPT OF HEALTH $32,030,944,106
2 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES $30,800,214,952
3 TEXAS HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION $19,576,807,751
4 OHIO DEPT OF JOB & FAMILY SERVICES $14,583,698,393
5 PENNSYLVANIA DEPT OF PUBLIC WELFARE $14,231,645,161
Top 5 Contractors FY 2009 YTD
1 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION $26,162,716,825
2 THE BOEING COMPANY $17,063,358,956
3 NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION $10,950,315,843
4 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION $10,411,780,985
5 RAYTHEON COMPANY $9,013,870,367
http://www.usaspending.gov/
True History: The FED Bernanke and its slaves have done to America and Americans using Bush -- now Obama. I believe that history will be able to tell what the Fraudulent greedy entity has done to America and many around the world even though they are writing false American History. Even though we may never see true history in published books, GOD knows all the facts.
The word "Liberal" originally described honorable and principled men who held to a philosophy of government that advocated Constitutional Republicanism. Constitutional Republicanism is a type of government almost unknown to most of the world. America was originally a Constitutional Republic. A Constitutional Republic defined is characterized by a very small government with limits on its powers of taxation and whose other powers are strictly limited by rigorously enforced Constitutional edicts. The honorable old Liberals of the 19th century would certainly not recognize the "liberals" of today. Modern Liberals promote, advocate, and enforce the centralization of all political power into an all powerful central government.
Some thoughts about modern liberals:
At the most basic level, the Liberal is anti-God. The Liberal attempts to use government to eliminate all moral consequences for immoral behavior. The Liberal imagines that freedom from moral consequence can be secured by a collectivist, totalitarian state.
Liberals use moralistic platitudes and catchy phrases like "social justice" and "The Brotherhood of Man" to appeal to the naive masses who are duped into believing that the ultimate goals of Liberals are genuinely good..
The fundamental power struggle of Liberals may be classified as the individual versus the collective. The Liberal supports the collective in every contest against the individual. Liberals hate Individualism because it demands moral responsibility. Liberals support collectivism because they hope to eliminate the need for moral responsibility.
The U.S. Constitution and specifically the support for rugged individualism which is evident in the Bill of Rights, is the enemy of the Liberal. The Liberal despises the United States because it is the premier protector and promoter of individualism in the world.
In the mind of a Liberal, all institutions and concerns schools, environment, courts, etc. - serve no relevant purpose other than the promotion of collectivism.
To a Liberal, abortion becomes necessary to guarantee sexual freedom and eliminate moral consequence.
Any religion or religious person who believes or teaches that there are moral consequences for sin, is the enemy of Liberalism and must be oppressed. Thus for the collectivist Liberal bent on imposing socialism upon a nation, Christianity is the number one enemy above all other enemies. Christianity must be eliminated..
Strong families are one of the greatest threats to the final goals of Liberalism. The total disintegration of the American family in recent decades among some ethnic communities has occurred as a direct result of the design and intention of Liberals.
Private ownership of guns is the single greatest symbol of individual power, and therefore is despised by Liberals.
The Liberal despises national sovereignty. Why? Because the best protection of individual freedoms is found in small decentralized governments.
The Liberal promotes the growth of multi-national and international governments such as the European Union and the United Nations because these organizations advance the cause of socialism and seek to destroy the very individualism that is best protected by sovereign states.
The Liberal fears any hint of individualism in any part of the world, and is obsessed with the centralized control of all human activity and thought. Thus the Liberal constantly seeks total control over all forms of media.
"Multi-culturalism" is the liberal code word for a single, oppressive, collectivist culture.
Liberals speak often of tolerance, but they only tolerate Liberals and Liberal ideas.
The Liberal seeks to criminalize any speech that promotes morality or individualism as "hate speech." Thus we see Liberal Judges and Liberal Courts outlawing the Bible and gutting the free speech provisions of the first amendment of the constitution. Liberal Judges are now declaring that the Bible's proscriptions against homosexuality are illegal "hate speech" and scripture is now in the process of being outlawed from any appearance in public discourse or the public square.
The Liberal's only method of debate is to appeal to the emotions of uneducated and illogical persons. Liberals seek to insult and discredit anyone who dares to disagree with them, especially in the college classroom. Why? Because the facts of logic and history do not support the agenda they are seeking to advance.
When possible, Liberals oppress anyone who questions their beliefs.
Liberals despise all innocence - especially the innocence of a child. Thus Hollywood Liberals seek to steal the innocence of our children as early as possible and the public schools assist them in this goal.
Liberals seek to sexualize our children, eliminate age of consent laws and promote the normalization of pedophilia, all in the pursuit of sexual freedom.
The Liberal typically chooses a career in a field that produces nothing of value. A Liberal will look for employment in field such as public education, an employee of local, county, state or federal government, an "activist," a lawyer, or a bureaucrat in a tax free foundation or an NGO devoted to advancing Liberal goals, etc.
Liberal do-good programs enrich Liberals and do little to actually help the poor.
Liberals are not obsessed with sex, but with promiscuity. Promoting promiscuity among the masses is the primary mission of the Liberals who control the Hollywood, Television and print media monopoly. Why? Because Liberals know that the twin pillars that support conservatism are family values and faith in God. By promoting promiscuity Liberals know that they are simultaneously attacking both of the main support pillars of rugged individualism.
Liberals say that they despise marriage and family because they are "patriarchal institutions" that oppress women and children. But the real reason they despise marriage and family values is because these institutions oppose, disapprove and limit promiscuity thus undermining one of the principal supports for Liberalism.
Liberals seek to control public schools, and force all children into them, in order to foster promiscuity and instill collectivist ideology into the minds and hearts of our children.
Liberals are obsessed with demonstrating their putative "moral superiority." Thus even though they live their lives without really helping anyone, the political activism they engage in is dedicated to convincing themselves that they are truly good people. Liberals are driven by the need to validate the unspoken assertion that "I care more than you do," which is ironic in the extreme since none of the government programs liberals have designed can be shown to have an overall positive influence in our society.
Whenever a Liberal expresses concern "for the children," invariably they are using and targeting children to expand their own power, promote promiscuity, advance collectivism and enlarge their personal income at the expense of the taxpayer.
Liberals are elitists who exempt themselves from the oppressive rules they impose on the general population.
Liberals howl if a homosexual transvestite or convicted felon is even slightly offended, but they openly bash Christians.
Liberals claim to be against violence, but make excuses for Liberals like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Castro who murder and torture political dissidents. Liberals claim to be against violence, but they seek to disarm individuals and render them powerless before the thugs, thieves and murderer's who rule the inner cities.
Liberals have enormous compassion for criminal predators, but little for the victims.
In the Liberal world, all problems stem from individualism, and all solutions are collective.
http://www.armchairviews.com/commie.htm
>> Does 'strengthening diplomacy' warrant Nobel? Americans split (((~~ Obviously this is mainly strategic manipulation of a political figure to profit from and to achieve ruthless greed mammon's agenda against the Will of GOD defiling the world. The greedy mammons are bankrupting the United States and creating diversion from their fraudulent acts. ~~~)))
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42341770
(CNN) -- The decision to award President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to "strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" appears to have left some in the United States divided over whether intangible achievements are worthy of such an esteemed award.
"So can anyone tell me how this man won the Nobel Peace Prize?" iRepoter Katy Brown wondered, asking whether it had more to do with him becoming the first black U.S. president. "The people who have won the Nobel Peace Prize in the past �-- I'm sorry but the legitimacy of this award has gone down the drain."
Twenty other Americans have won Nobel peace prizes. Among them, President Theodore Roosevelt won the Nobel Prize in 1906 for negotiating a peace settlement in the Russo-Japanese War, and President Wilson for the creation of and advocacy for the League of Nations.
While the committee's decision to honor Henry Kissinger in 1973 was widely criticized by some, his peace prize was awarded for helping to end the Vietnam War.
The Nobel committee said of Obama: "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future."
Brown, who goes to school in Kent, Ohio, and calls herself a conservative, said she couldn't believe based on the lack of accomplishments so far in his first term as president that Obama was given the award. VideoiReporters mixed on Obama's Nobel win »
" 'SNL' put it best, whether you want to call it a comedy skit or not, this man has done two things: jack and squat," Brown said, referring to this past weekend's "Saturday Night Live" skit that characterized Obama as a man with many promises who hasn't fulfilled them.
"Has he ended a war? No. He's only made matters worse. Has he provided health care for everyone? No. He's just caused a big disaster in Congress.
"And has he even closed Guantanamo Bay, the first thing he [said he would do] when he was in office? No; hasn't even done that." Rollins: Obama must now "earn" Nobel Peace Prize
For others, it's not about Obama's political initiatives. For them, it's more about the message Obama is sending to the rest of the world and the hope he has given them.
"To move a country like the United States -- in the eyes of all countries around the world -- from being perceived as one of the most belligerent Americas ever to one that decides it wants to work with the rest of the world -- that is the real definition of a path towards peace," iReporter Egberto Willies said. Zakaria: Nobel honors Obama's "bold gambit"
Willies, a 48-year-old from Kingwood, Texas, who described himself as a liberal, was proud of Obama's intangible achievements.
"I felt like we were reintegrating back into the world," the software developer said. Obama is more inclusive of other countries. That's important."
Like Brown, Thomas Strom, a 39-year-old salesman from Wallingford, Connecticut, who described himself as a conservative, couldn't grasp the committee's decision.
"Obama hasn't accomplished anything to deserve an award of such stature," he said.
Strom couldn't help but wonder what it meant for future recipients.
"This is almost turning the Nobel Peace Prize into a bogus award," he said.
Matt Milam, an iReporter and Obama supporter from Chicago, Illinois, said while he was thrilled to see Obama win, he understood why some people might question it.
"I'm personally glad for the man, but some people are sitting around scratching their heads. And perhaps there's a good reason. He's still fresh in the White House and yet he's getting the Nobel Peace Prize. Maybe it's just that he's just that good."
And the fact that Obama said he was surprised at the award and humbled, and didn't question it, made Milam support it even more. He compared it to Cuba Gooding Jr.'s surprising Oscar win for his role in "Jerry McGuire."
"He didn't sit there and question it. He didn't sit there and analyze it," Milam said.
Milam hoped that despite what people felt about Obama winning the award, it would serve as an inspiration for the country.
"We need to give each other hope, we need to give ourselves hope," he said.
"It's something to strive for so let's be glad for President Obama."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8518
Court Rules Federal Reserve is Privately Owned
Case Reveals Fed's Status as a Private Institution
Below are excerpts from a court case proving the Federal Reserve system's status. As you will see, the court ruled that the Federal Reserve Banks are "independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations", and there is not sufficient "federal government control over 'detailed physical performance' and 'day to day operation'" of the Federal Reserve Bank for it to be considered a federal agency:
Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
John L. Lewis, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
United States of America, Defendant/Appellee.
No. 80-5905
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 2, 1982.
Decided April 19, 1982.
As Amended June 24, 1982.
Plaintiff, who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, David W. Williams, J., dismissed holding that federal reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.
Affirmed.
1. United States
There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, but critical factor is existence of federal government control over "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of an entity. . . .
2. United States
Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Tort Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations in light of fact that direct supervision and control of each bank is exercised by board of directors, federal reserve banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks, banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations nor as "mixed ownership" corporations; federal reserve banks receive no appropriated funds from Congress and the banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own names. . . .
3. United States
Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when a tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Bank, which performs important activities for the government. . . .
4. Taxation
The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation.
5. States Taxation
Tests for determining whether an entity is federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, is very broad: whether entity performs important governmental function.
--------------
Lafayette L. Blair, Compton, Cal., for plaintiff/appellant.
James R. Sullivan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., argued, for defendant/appellee; Andrea Sheridan Ordin, U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., on brief.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Before Poole and Boochever, Circuit Judges, and Soloman, District Judge. (The Honorable Gus J. Solomon, Senior District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation)
Poole, Circuit Judge:
On July 27, 1979, appellant John Lewis was injured by a vehicle owned and operated by the Los Angeles branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Lewis brought this action in district court alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Clains Act (the Act), 28 U.S.C. Sect. 1346(b). The United States moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court dismissed, holding that the Federal Reserve Bank is not a federal agency within the meaning of the Act and that the court therefore lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
In enacting the Federal Tort Claims Act, Congress provided a limited waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States for certain torts of federal employees. . . . Specifically, the Act creates liability for injuries "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of any federal agency acting within the scope of his office or employment. . . . "Federal agency" is defined as:
the executive departments, the military departments, independent
establishments of the United States, and corporations acting
primarily as instrumentalities of the United States, but does not
include any contractors with the United States.
28 U.S.C. Sect. 2671. The liability of the United States for the negligence of a Federal Reserve Bank employee depends, therefore, on whether the Bank is a federal agency under Sect. 2671.
[1,2] There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act, but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the "detailed physical performance" and "day to day operation" of that entity. . . . Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation . . ., whether the government is involved in the entity's finances. . . ., and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States, . . . Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.
Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activites include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 341-361.
Each Bank is statutorily empowered to conduct these activites without day to day direction from the federal government. Thus, for example, the interest rates on advances to member banks, individuals, partnerships, and corporations are set by each Reserve Bank and their decisions regarding the purchase and sale of securities are likewise independently made.
It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks:
It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over
the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when
necessary to do so, but that it shall in no way attempt to carry on
through its own mechanism the routine operations and banking which
require detailed knowledge of local and individual credit and which
determine the funds of the community in any given instance. In other
words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the
exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to
individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of
routine.
H.R. Report No. 69 Cong. 1st Sess. 18-19 (1913).
The fact that the Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks does not make them federal agencies under the Act. In United States v. Orleans, 425 U.S. 807, 96 S.Ct. 1971, 48 L.Ed.2d 390 (1976), the Supreme Court held that a community action agency was not a federal agency or instrumentality for purposes of the Act, even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and heavily funded by the federal government. Because the agency's day to day operation was not supervised by the federal government, but by local officials, the Court refused to extend federal tort liability for the negligence of the agency's employees. Similarly, the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by worker's compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees Compensation Act. Employees travelling on Bank business are not subject to federal travel regulations and do not receive government employee discounts on lodging and services.
The Banks are listed neither as "wholly owned" government corporations under 31 U.S.C. Sect. 846 nor as "mixed ownership" corporations under 31 U.S.C. Sect. 856, a factor considered is Pearl v. United States, 230 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1956), which held that the Civil Air Patrol is not a federal agency under the Act. Closely resembling the status of the Federal Reserve Bank, the Civil Air Patrol is a non-profit, federally chartered corporation organized to serve the public welfare. But because Congress' control over the Civil Air Patrol is limited and the corporation is not designated as a wholly owned or mixed ownership government corporation under 31 U.S.C. Sub-Sect. 846 and 856, the court concluded that the corporation is a non-governmental, independent entity, not covered under the Act.
Additionally, Reserve Banks, as privately owned entities, receive no appropriated funds from Congress. . . .
Finally, the Banks are empowered to sue and be sued in their own name. 12 U.S.C. Sect. 341. They carry their own liability insurance and typically process and handle their own claims. In the past, the Banks have defended against tort claims directly, through private counsel, not government attorneys . . ., and they have never been required to settle tort claims under the administrative procedure of 28 U.S.C. Sect. 2672. The waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the Act would therefore appear to be inapposite to the Banks who have not historically claimed or received general immunity from judicial process.
[3] The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes. In United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1982), this court held that a Federal Reserve Bank employee who was responsible for recommending expenditure of federal funds was a "public official" under the Federal Bribery Statute. That statute broadly defines public official to include any person acting "for or on behalf of the Government." . . . The test for determining status as a public official turns on whether there is "substantial federal involvement" in the defendant's activities. United States v. Hollingshead, 672 F.2d at 754. In contrast, under the FTCA, federal liability is narrowly based on traditional agency principles and does not necessarily lie when the tortfeasor simply works for an entity, like the Reserve Banks, which perform important activities for the government.
[4, 5] The Reserve Banks are deemed to be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation. . . . The test for determining whether an entity is a federal instrumentality for purposes of protection from state or local action or taxation, however, is very broad: whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . . The Reserve Banks, which further the nation's fiscal policy, clearly perform an important governmental function.
Performance of an important governmental function, however, is but a single factor and not determinative in tort claims actions. . . . State taxation has traditionally been viewed as a greater obstacle to an entity's ability to perform federal functions than exposure to judicial process; therefore tax immunity is liberally applied. . . . Federal tort liability, however, is based on traditional agency principles and thus depends upon the principal's ability to control the actions of his agent, and not simply upon whether the entity performs an important governmental function. . . .
Brinks Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 466 F.Supp. 116 (D.D.C.1979), held that a Federal Reserve Bank is a federal instrumentality for purposes of the Service Contract Act, 41 U.S.C. Sect. 351. Citing Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the court applied the "important governmental function" test and concluded that the term "Federal Government" in the Service Contract Act must be "liberally construed to effectuate the Act's humanitarian purpose of providing minimum wage and fringe benefit protection to individuals performing contracts with the federal government." Id. 288 Mich. at 120, 284 N.W.2d 667.
Such a liberal construction of the term "federal agency" for purposes of the Act is unwarranted. Unlike in Brinks, plaintiffs are not without a forum in which to seek a remedy, for they may bring an appropriate state tort claim directly against the Bank; and if successful, their prospects of recovery are bright since the institutions are both highly solvent and amply insured.
For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgement of the district court.
AFFIRMED.
It is clear from this that in some circumstances, the Federal Reserve Bank can be considered a government "instrumentality", but cannot be considered a "federal agency", because the term carries with it the assumption that the federal government has direct oversight over what the Fed does. Of course it does not, because most people who know about this subject know that the Fed is "politically independent."
The only area where one might disagree with the judge's decision is where he states that the Fed furthers the federal government's fiscal policy, and therefore performs an important governmental function. While we would like to think that the federal government and the Fed work cooperatively with each other, and they may on occasion, the Fed is by no means required to do so. One example is where Rep. Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking Committee, said in the Congressional Record back in the '60s, that depending on the temperament of the Fed's Chairman, sometimes the Fed worked with the government's fiscal policy, and other times either went in the complete opposite direction, or threatens to do so in order to influence policy.
The common claim that the Fed is accountable to the government, because it is required to report to Congress on its activities annually, is incorrect. The reports to Congress mean little unless what the Chairman reports can be verified by complete records. From its founding to this day, the Fed has never undergone a complete independent audit. Congress time after time has requested that the Fed voluntarily submit to a complete audit, and every time, it refuses.
Those in the know about the Fed, realize that it does keep certain records secret. The soon-to-be-former Chairman of the House Banking Committee, Henry Gonzales, has spoken on record repeatedly about how the Fed at one point says it does not have certain requested records, and then it is found through investigation that it in fact does have those records, or at least used to. It would appear that the Fed Chairman can say anything he wants to to Congress, and they'll have to accept what he says, because verification of what he says is not always possible.
Highline >> When aligning yourself with or against a party, consider this:
Socialism or Fascism?
Communism Is Not Dead!
by John Loeffler Steel on Steel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An outstanding salesman is one who can tell another to go to hell and make him feel very happy that he is on his way. Such a feat requires intense creativity, deceptive semantics, and the ability to lie creatively and utter warm, loving words to the victim while concealing the intense hatred the perpetrator feels for him. The victim must be convinced he's going to a warm, wonderful place and not understand until too late what is really happening to him.
Satan is a master at this. After all, it's his job and he's been at it for a long time. It is amusing nevertheless that generation after generation continues to fall prey to the same old tricks. But then again, fighting off old lies in new packaging is a full-time job, which requires effort, and few seem to muster the courage to do it.
Contrary to popular belief, communism is not dead! Rather, it is invading the West at an alarming pace - either overtly or covertly. China is a solidly communist country. Cuba remains communist and Venezuela is becoming such. The majority of southern Africa - South Africa included - is either controlled by communists or moving rapidly in that direction.
The new communists may not proclaim themselves to be such. They use other terms such as socialism, etc., but communist thought is alive and well in the halls of academia. The communist collective process has invaded our governments, schools, state, provincial and county governments, businesses and even Bible-based churches. Few pastors and Christians in churches utilizing the popular church growth programs realize they are based on the collective process designed by atheist Vladimir Lenin to brainwash the masses and impose Marxist control on society.
Something should be wrong with this picture, given communism's record of death and disaster and its persecution of Christians and Jews, but because of the nature of how the transition has occurred - repacking old ideas in new wrapping - few have noticed. In this article, we'll look at how socialism, communism's wicked stepsister, has replaced capitalism as the dominant economic and political paradigm in the West.
The Circle of Socialism
Most Westerners believe that fascism is extreme-right and socialism is far-left. Perhaps a more realistic model would be a circle at the top of which stands a free market economy, private enterprise, and a limited constitutional government with a bill of rights for the individual as a cornerstone of freedom. At the bottom of the circle rests a dictatorship, individual or oligarchic, sham rights revocable at any time by the state, and where the rule of law means everything is state controlled. The only practical difference between fascism and socialism is that in a communist society government owns all property and directs all enterprise, whereas in a fascist society private property ownership continues, but entrepreneurs must submit to government's ideologies and goals - chief of which is the task of funding government programs with the proceeds of private enterprise. Today's socialism is striving to straddle both models.
Socialism and fascism only appear different when they're sliding down the outside of their respective circles. Once they arrive at the bottom, both are functionally and historically alike. Both societies believe in total government control of the economy, education, and morals, suppression of free speech and other rights, imposition of a politically correct ideology, subordination of citizens' rights to the goals of the state or collective, and the use of law to coerce and prosecute those who dissent.
Bottom line: At the top of the circle is a free state, where the laws protect the people from government. At the bottom of the circle is a socialist or fascist state, where the laws protect government from the people.
100% Successful Failure
Much of public debate today is not about whether we're going to have a free society vs. state control, but simply about which side of the circle we're going to slide down during the move away from freedom towards a global, state-controlled society. Despite socialism's 100% track record of failure, the entire Western world seems determined to do it again, sliding down the left side of the circle, screaming epithets at fascism as it disappears around the curve, unaware that its current course leads to a head-on encounter with fascism going the other way at the bottom. Thereafter, both movements unite, causing their citizens to live miserably ever after. Few apprehend the inherent evil and diminishing rights in the emerging political structures or understand why they are inimical to the free society they are happily leaving behind. Since we're heading towards a global pantheistic socialism, it might be advisable to examine its three fundamentals: elitism, expropriation, and exemption.
1) Elitism
Genuine socialists are, above all, elitist. Socialists conceive themselves to be bright shining Quijotes,1 tilting with windmills, saving humanity from itself, the planet from humanity, the economy from capitalism, and from everything else except big government, which socialists love. On the other hand, they view the putrid pile of pusillanimous pus we call society as the unwashed ignorant who must be saved from themselves. In this capacity, the opinions of the unwashed are to be ignored.
There is a difference between hard-core socialist academics or politicians (ideologues) and the socialazzi (Lenin's "useful idiots"), the average Joe and Jane, who think government social programs are great, but never investigate to see if socialism delivers its promises, which it never does. To his credit, Joe Socialazzi is bothered that the rich seem to be getting richer and he seems to be getting poorer but he just can't figure it out. After all, Joe Socialazzi genuinely cares about people, but he doesn't understand that there's no such thing as a free lunch. The hard-core ideologues, however, understand it's all about power, money, and control.
La Visión Grande
Socialist Quijotes usually have their gran visión del mundo, 2 and ride in on the back of white Rocinantes 3 - a glittering response to appalling social conditions or the environmental crisis du jour. However, socialist solutions always ignore basic rules of both human nature and economics. As such they not only absolutely fail but also create far worse problems than existed before they started, which is why socialism always collapses of its own weight, but only after much damage has been wrought on the little guy.
Socialists do not like opinions in variance with the grand vision. Thus, high priority on the socialist docket is to suppress free speech by whatever method feasible. Suppression of speech in the elitism phase is important. By the time everyone arrives at the exemption phase, everyone knows socialism is a lie, but they can no longer say so. Indeed, a hallmark of Soviet society was that everyone had to give lip service to a series of official lies, which everyone knew were false but couldn't say so.
2) Expropriation
Once the socialist is in a position to implement the grand vision, he immediately faces a critical problem: funding. Grand designs require grand amounts of money. However, the ignorant unwashed masses don't like to work for free or have their hard-earned money taken from them. So the socialist creates warfare between classes of people. He demonizes the haves and sanctifies the haves-not. He demonizes those who don't see the wisdom in the grand vision. Then he tells the haves-not it is moral, just, and good to seize what the haves have by force and give it to the haves-not. He also says it is wrong for the haves to even try to earn what they have. Soak the rich and save the planet. ¡Viva el free lunch!
Here lies the core contradiction of socialism: socialists demonize capitalism but always require the wealth capitalism generates in order to implement and perpetuate their political schemes. The double speak must be maintained if socialists are to remain in power! The socialazzi never learn that there is no such thing as a free lunch until late in the game, when it's too late.
As socialist programs are created in rapid succession, a staggering bureaucracy comes into existence to support the administration of it, which siphons off the lion's share of what is supposed to be transferred from the haves to the haves-not. Once entrenched, this new bureaucracy has a vested interest in 1) perpetuating the problems it is supposed to be fixing, in order to 2) sustain its cash flow, in order to 3) keep itself in existence, regardless of who gets soaked. Remember, socialism is about power and control.
Socialism continues to exist as long as two factors remain in play:
1) The underlying capitalism is resilient enough to bear the load. This involves being able to pay increasing levels of confiscatory taxation and deal with a crushing regulatory burden or a horribly corrupt political system. Note that these factors always eliminate the little guy from the game! Little guys do not have the financial resources to fight an increasingly abusive system, resulting in one of socialism's most important dicta: Under socialism the middle class always disappears!
2) The masses must continue believing that there is a free lunch and that only rich people are being soaked.
3) Exemption
While the game is ongoing, socialists always exempt themselves from the restrictive laws and confiscations they impose on everyone else. In essence they become exactly what they preach against, but more importantly, once the jig is up, a more pernicious form of exemption sets in as socialists make themselves immune from responsibility for the havoc they have caused: morally, legally and above all, politically. Sooner or later even the most mentally challenged becomes dimly aware that socialists look a lot like the rich haves they perpetually promise to soak. The socialazzi discover their money has been devalued, their assets seized, their freedoms quashed, their economy wrecked, they're broke and the system is out of control.
At this point, revolutions - bloody or not - usually occur and exemption kicks in. When the economic horse collapses from abuse and overwork, socialists adamantly refuse to dismount, even when confronted with a very angry populace (vis a vis Argentina). First they try to convince the public that evil rich capitalists are responsible for the horse's ill health and that the horse will recover if the people just make more sacrifices of their money and property. Occasionally the socialazzi are stupid enough to believe this and the horse can be kept alive for a little while longer, but it never regains its former health. Invariably the games socialists play to keep Rocinante alive radically exacerbate an already desperate situation to its ultimate conclusion. In the end, the poor horse simply dies, leading socialists to the major challenge of their dubious careers. It is now impossible to convince the public that the bad smell isn't rotting horse carcass and that they're not responsible. Disaster is at hand when lo and behold, socialism meets its old enemy fascism going the other way in an encounter called by Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Third Way. Others refer to it as capitalistic communism.
Since the socialists don't want to give up money and power, they cut a deal with the big-time capitalists. The socialists make laws that are favorable only to the big guys, excluding the little guys from the game. At the same time the big capitalists agree to fund the socialists' dreams and agendas as long as they get exclusive preferential treatment.
It's a marriage made in political hell. When things go wrong, the socialists can blame the capitalists all the while they pound the bejeebers out of capitalist enterprise to pay for their socialist dreams. As such they are never held accountable for the horrible state of affairs that inevitably results from socialism in the first place! But now we must ask: When this socialist round collapses - which it will as all its ancestors did - given that this is the first time socialism will be implemented on a global scale, there will be no remaining source of external free-market capitalism to stop the endgame chaos, so what will the global dictatorship look like?
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2002/424/
Highline >> On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.
When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.
"United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.
President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.
Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110 should have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9 trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963) if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it. It would have almost immediately given the U.S. Government the ability to repay its debt without going to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its own money backed by silver and realm value worth something.
Again, according to our own research, just five months after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series 1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and they were subsequently removed from circulation. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all future presidents not to interfere with the private Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money. It seems very apparent that President Kennedy challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt:
1) war (Viet Nam); and,
2) the creation of money by a privately owned central bank. His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by 1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have destroyed the profits and control of the private Federal Reserve Bank.
Executive Order 11110
AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:
SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.
JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963
Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid. According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301 dated January 26, 1998:
Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, was as amended by:
EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R. 8725;
EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;
EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;
EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003;
EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R. 34617
The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's 1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and 1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or changes to EO 11110.
The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as: "Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors".
The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by their member banks. Once again, according to Black's Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:
"Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.)".
The privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is: "The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving to print them".
Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is exactly what the privately owned FED is!
No man did more to expose the power of the FED than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:
"Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it".
Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.
The FED basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the FED banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the FED over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, such as President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990 book Crossfire:"
Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.
Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks".
In a comment made to a Columbia University class on Nov. 12, 1963,
Ten days before his assassination, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:
"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight."
In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be the subject of his own book... a true Profile of Courage.
This research report was compiled for Lawgiver. Org. by Anthony Wayne
What is the Federal Reserve Bank?
What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it?
by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999
The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks. In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the public good but for profit.
There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED. What they all have in common is an insidious practice known as "fractional banking."
Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed. Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business.
In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double receipts for the gold, in effect creating money (certificates) from nothing and then lending those certificates (creating debt) to depositors and charging them interest as well.
Since the certificates represented more gold than actually existed, the certificates were "fractionally" backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault operations were transformed into banks and the practice of fractional banking continued.
Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20 years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used its control of the currency to defraud the public and establish a legal form of usury.
This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate, ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter continued for the entire 20 years of their existence. Public outrage over these abuses was such that the charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist in 1811.
The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos, seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy profits. They influenced Congress to charter the second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), in 1816.
The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS sold franchises and literally doubled the number of banks in a short period of time. The country began to boom and move westward, which required money. Using fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank and their franchisees created the debt/money for the expansion.
Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took control of the assets that were used as security against the loans.
Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of prosperity and depression. The central bank caused inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit and making these funds readily available. The economy boomed. Then they used the inflation which they created as an excuse to shut off the loans/credit/money.
The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The central bank then seized the assets used as security for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers during the boom was then transferred to the central bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the big guys ended up with all the marbles.
Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years? Think about the depression of the late '20s and all through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy and get the country back on track, but did they? No; in fact, they restricted the money supply quite severely. We all know the results that occurred from that action, don't we?
Why would the FED do this? During that period asset values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the dollar? I believe that it is referred to as consolidating the wealth. How many times have they already done this in the last 85 years?
Do you think they will do it again?
Just as an aside at this point, look at today's economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they do that? The market collapses.
Several months back, after certain central banks said they would be selling large quantities of gold, the price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks announced that they would be restricting the amount of gold released into the market for the next five years. The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did the central banks make with those two press releases?
Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the private banking families that own the FED are buying or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low, sell high.) How much money do you think these FED owners have made since they restricted the money supply at the top of this last current cycle?
Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians do not rule central banks, central banks rule governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his second term President Jackson withdrew all government funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off the national debt. He is the only president in history to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS expired in 1836.
Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of money, the United States experienced unprecedented growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, in collusion with representatives of the European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would covertly establish a private central bank.
This bank would assume control over the American economy by controlling the issuance of its money. After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas recess, with many members of the Congress absent. President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.
The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name carefully selected and designed to deceive. "Federal" would lead one to believe that this is a government organization. "Reserve" would lead one to believe that the currency is being backed by gold and silver. "System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that one would not conclude that a new central bank had been created.
In reality, the act created a private, for profit, central banking corporation owned by a cartel of private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.
Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit corporation in America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking families listed above get all that money.
Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses of the government. Do you want to know where your tax dollars really go? If you look at the back of any check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has been endorsed as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen. Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you pay in income taxes is given to those private banking families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.
Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the concept of creating money from nothing. You may have heard the term "monetizing the debt," which is kind of the same thing. As an example, if the US Government wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of one hundred dollars.
The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note, for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then lends the $1 million to the government at face value plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government has to create a bond for $1 million as security for the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just an example, because in reality the FED does not even print the money; it's just a computer entry in their accounting system. To put this on a more personal level, let's use another example.
Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve Banking System. This membership makes it legal for them to create money from nothing and lend it to you. Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize that only a small fraction of the money deposited in their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is simply a computer entry.
Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some home improvements. You know that the bank didn't actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it into your pile? They simply went to their computer and input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They created, from thin air, a debt which you have to secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio imposed by the FED.
It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your friendly bank, doesn't it? How about those loan committees that scrutinize you with a microscope before approving the loan they created from thin air. What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They don't want you to understand what they are doing. People fear what they do not understand. You are easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and afraid.
Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year that the FED was created, you get a gold star. Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that debt? The income tax was created to complete the illusion that real money had been lent and therefore real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini was good.
So, what can be done? My father taught me that you should always stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand up alone.
If "We the People" don't take some action now, there may come a time when "We the People" are no more. You should write a letter or send an email to each of your elected representatives. Many of our elected representatives do not understand the FED. Once informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and remain silent.
Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically says that Congress is the only body that can "coin money and regulate the value thereof." The US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.
Ask your representative, in light of that information, how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.
Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question is, "Can you now see what is in store for us if we allow the FED to continue controlling our country?"
"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime, and the punishment of his guilt."
John P. Curran
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm
Highline >> What the bible sets forth as the Ten Commandments is also things that our society sets forths as values to adhere to.
In court- people are sworn in on a bible. Our money says "In God We Trust". Our President is sworn in placing 1 hand on a bible. Our Pledge Of Allegiance include "One Nation Under God" etc....
I do believe that our Founding Fathers seen the potential/political danger that organized religion could use to distort the Christian values they founded the country on.
I'll give a little different perspective of Abe Lincoln and could do the same with the others but I have a strange feeling that your mind is set- therefore being a waste of time.
Another close individual, Lincoln's wife and widow, wrote exactly the opposite opinion of her husband's faith:
"… As my husband was known to be the most loving and devoted husband & father we will allow these falsehoods a place where they deserve. We all — the whole world have been greatly shocked — at the fearful ideas — Herndon — has advanced regarding Mr. Lincoln's religious views. You, who knew him so well & held so many conversations with him, as far back as twenty years since, know what they were. A man, who never took the name of the Maker in vain, who always read his Bible diligently, who never failed to rely on God's promises & looked upon Him for protection, surely such a man as this, could not have been a disbeliever, or any other than what he was, a true Christian gentleman. No one, but such a man as Herndon could venture — to suggest such an idea. From the time of the death of our little Edward, I believe my husband's heart was directed towards religion & as time passed on - when Mr. Lincoln became elevated to Office - with the care of a great Nation, upon his shoulders - when devastating war was upon us then indeed to my knowledge - did his great heart go up daily, hourly, in prayer to God - for his sustaining power. When too - the overwhelming sorrow came upon us, our beautiful bright angelic boy, Willie was called away from us, to his Heavenly Home, with God's chastising hand upon us - he turned his heart to Christ —"[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_and_religion
Excerpt from: Mark A Noll, "The Ambiguous Religion of President Abraham Lincoln" (see full text of link below):
Considerable uncertainty arises... when Lincoln's own religion is examined... it is obvious that Christianity exerted a profound influence on his life. His father was a member of Regular Baptist churches in Kentucky and Indiana. Lincoln himself read the Bible throughout his life, quoted from it extensively... during his years as president he did regularly attend the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington. On the other hand, Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of standard Christian beliefs... Lincoln's friend Jesse Fell [suggested that Lincoln's views on Christian theology] were not orthodox... It is probable that Lincoln was turned against organized Christianity by his experiences as a young man in New Salem, Illinois, where excessive emotion and bitter sectarian quarrels marked yearly camp meetings and the ministry of traveling preachers. Yet although Lincoln was not a church member, he did ponder the eternal significance of his own circumstances...
http://www.adherents.com/people/pl/Abraham_Lincoln.html
The FED criminal FRAUD and DECEPTION!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?Message_id=42155946&txt2find=rockefeller
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world - no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”
-President Woodrow Wilson
Obama serves that group of dominant men. He is empowering them as did Bush.
Obama is furthering a totalitarian world order. Foreign nations will not embrace such a system. Obama's diplomacy can not mask the global agenda.
Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
Read Rockefeller's words again. He actually admits to working against the "best interests of the United States."
Need more? Here's what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order." They're gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-flynt-obama-cant-stand-up-to-the-bankers-2009-8
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41907871
It's there for all to see and hear but most refuse to believe what is being told to them.
Obama is continuing global occupation, war that has no defined line of victory etc.... The only difference between Obama and Bush is the media spin.
SUE the FED fraud: Demise of the FED traitors and deceivers! What does the US Justices would do if an American did the similar fraudulent activities.... Most of all, the Fed criminals defiled and destroyed the God-fearing country into demonic money slaves.
http://trend-signals.com/Fedfraud.pdf <<<~~~Let all know about the Fed fraud.
We still have millions of Americans thinking the FED is a government entity!
Download it and email to your family, friends, and your groups.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42290261
_______________________________________________________
>> The Federal Reserve is not federal and it is not reserve. It is a coalition of independent banks and is not subordinate to the federal government. Federal Reserve System should be a "PRIVATE CORPORATION" as its stocks are owned by private investors.
It should be no big surprise to anyone who understands what the Fed is and isn't that their board rejected a request by U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for a public review of the central bank’s structure and governance.
The FED is disguised itself as if it is a US government entity, and millions of Americans are deceived!
No Wonder why Americans and the Nation is going bankrupted.
7 out 10 of the Fed is owned by non-US.
The top 10 owners of the Fed are:
1. The Rothschild Family - London
2. The Rothschild Family - Berlin
3. The Lazard brothers - Paris
4. Israel Seiff - Italy
5. Kuhn-Loeb Company - Germany
6. The Warburgs - Amsterdam
7. The Warburgs - Hamburg
8. Lehman Brothers - NY
9. Goldman & Sachs - NY
10. The Rockefeller Family - NY
The federal Reserve bank of NY is owned by:
1. Chase-Manhattan (controlled by the Rockefeller Family) 32.3%
2. Citibank - 20.5%
REQUEST: Class Action suit against the FED Fraud
Joseph H. Weiss and/or Mary A. Nastasi, (888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025 or via Internet electronic mail at infony@weisslurie.com or by writing Weiss & Lurie, The French Building, 551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, New York City 10176.
http://www.weisslurie.com/
******************************************************************
A class action lawsuit against Direxion Shares ETF Trust (“Direxion” or the “Company”) and certain individuals associated with the Company was commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired shares in the Financial Bear 3X Shares Fund (NYSE:FAZ) Arca (the “FAZ Fund”) offered by Direxion pursuant or traceable to Direxion’s allegedly materially false or misleading Registration Statement issued in connection with the FAZ Fund’s shares (the “Class”) during the period November 3, 2008 through April 9, 2009 (the “Class Period”).
The complaint charges Direxion and certain of its executive officers with violations of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented or omitted information regarding, among other things, true risks of the Company’s highly leveraged ETF products for those investors in the FAZ Fund for more than a day.
This action seeks to recover damages on behalf of investors who purchased Direxion securities. Plaintiff is represented by Weiss & Lurie, a law firm possessing significant experience and expertise in prosecuting class actions on behalf of shareholders in federal and state courts throughout the United States. Weiss & Lurie has been responsible for collectively recovering more than a billion dollars on behalf of class members and is one of the nation’s leading firms representing shareholders in securities class actions.
If you purchased or otherwise acquired shares in the FAZ Fund, you may move the court no later than November 17, 2009, to serve as a lead plaintiff of the class. In order to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must meet certain legal requirements. You do not need to seek appointment as a lead plaintiff in order to share in any recovery.
If you want to obtain a copy of the complaint or want more information about Weiss & Lurie or this action, or if you want to obtain a Certification form to serve as a lead plaintiff, please visit www.weisslurie.com. If you wish to receive an investor package or if you wish to discuss this action, have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to this matter, or if you have any information you wish to provide to us, please contact:
Joseph H. Weiss and/or Mary A. Nastasi, (888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025 or via Internet electronic mail at infony@weisslurie.com or by writing Weiss & Lurie, The French Building, 551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, New York City 10176.
The implication of the Fed/US corruption, greed, and deception. e.g. swineflu shot
-- actually this is done globally, obviously per G20.
-- it is the return of the demons in Matthew 8:28-34.
US Swine Flu Vaccination Effort Starts Monday: CDC
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33171756
~*~ Spirit of GOD vs Mammon ~*~ e.g. swineflu shot
The spiritual vision noted below communicates the message of God in this last days. As in Matthew 8:28-34, we need to guard against the demonic deception by wearing the holy armor of GOD in Ephesians 6:11-17.
The mammon power is using all kinds of deception fighting against the Lord Almighty deceiving those who follow Jesus and love GOD who created the Universe.
Even though the mammon is much powerful than us, GOD Almighty will deliver us from the demonic hands and deception as He promised that He will return and take us truly believing Him to the Heaven of God. Praise the LORD, ALMIGHTY!
Glory to GOD!! Amen
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
re: Swine Flu: An End-Time Vision...
http://www.stevequayle.com/News.alert/09_Prophetic/090728.swine.flu.dream.html
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Financial greed demons and deceivers going to ~~>>
Will be shot to there
http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=011008&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=81090cc3-4847-4b66-804c-a1ba82d1e9ea&referralPlaylistId=playlist
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
GLOBAL FINANCIAL MAFIAT: Have you checked the $NIKK Japan vs $SEC China financial markets in late 1980s and 1990s. It is global free marketeers money manipulation. Only God can prove that because big money is in together.
During that time, because they need to rotate the big money from one country to another country, global markets rotated cycles, but now, they are in sync because I commented on how the global marketeers rotated the big money from one country to another showing comparative charts. Since then as many came to the knowledge, the global marketeers, after draining trillions from the US financial markets, the marketeers decided to rob each country in joint session using national debts -- aka G20.
CLASS LAW SUIT -- the FED for devaluing USD 95%:
The FACT that 95% of USD has been lost under the FED is one example, how grossly negligent, deceptive, manipulative, and fraudulent the FED activities are since the FED 1913.
That is a classic example how this country is destroyed and manipulated under greedy FED who managed the country.
Talking about Traitors, i.e. whomever choose to deceive themselves by denying the facts or distorting the facts.
The dollar this past week continued to sink, setting a new year low against a variety of currencies, while commodities for the most part traded higher. The dollar was at $1.4702 per euro. Treasurys saw selling Friday ahead of $107 billion in 2-, 5- and 7-year note auctions in the coming week. The yield on the 10-year was at 3.476 percent.
>> Testing the Dexterity of a Crisis Manager (((~~ obviously, all those who know the reality knows that Bernanke/G20/Treasury/others are traitors of Americans, defrauding millions and the nation using all kinds of deception. ~~~))))
| 28 Sep 2009 | 10:21 AM ET
The startling disclosure of a secret Iranian nuclear facility late last week shoved the results of the G-20 economic conference here off center stage.
That was hardly surprising, since the conference was intended as a stay-the-course session affirming the promising early results of coordinated efforts to revive the global economy. And it was nothing new in the career of Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, a principal architect of those policies who is among the least prepossessing figures in an administration of large personalities.
Before taking the Treasury job, “I had spent most of my life trying not to be on television,” Mr. Geithner said in an interview here. Indeed, results so far suggest that is where he does his best work.
After stumbling in his transition from backstage player to out-front crisis manager, Mr. Geithner has since quieted critics inside and outside the administration at a time when health care and foreign policy challenges increasingly command the headlines. But with the economy still hovering between recession and recovery, multiple tests of his judgment and political dexterity lie ahead.
A Shaky Start
Mr. Geithner made his professional reputation over two decades of behind-the-scenes government work that began in the Reagan-era Treasury Department. His profile rose considerably last fall as president of the New York Federal Reserve, when he joined President George W. Bush’s Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., and the Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, in the frantic effort to prevent financial collapse.
His public struggles began when Mr. Obama chose him as Treasury secretary. First he survived a confirmation controversy over unpaid taxes; later he drew fire for comments about Chinese currency policies that some analysts considered too blunt.
Mr. Geithner’s shaky initial rollout of a plan to help banks clean up so-called toxic assets generated calls for his ouster. Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, grew concerned enough about Treasury’s performance that he escalated his own involvement in the department’s affairs.
As it happened, the toxic asset plan’s signal contribution was the announcement itself; the increase in market confidence it engendered all but obviated the need for financial institutions to use it. Meanwhile, signs that economic growth is resuming have eased the sense of crisis surrounding Mr. Geithner’s work.
The economic “message” meetings in Mr. Emanuel’s office have slowed from daily to weekly. The administration’s immediate domestic priority is health care, while foreign policy challenges with Iran and the war in Afghanistan have gained fresh urgency.
Aides say the president never lost confidence in Mr. Geithner, who was born two weeks after Mr. Obama in August 1961. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Obama values the same quality in Mr. Geithner that he values in himself: the ability to “stay calm and focused and dispassionate in a storm.”
Tempering Populism
Conservatives continue accusing Team Obama of dangerously expanding government control over the economy, from Wall Street to Detroit. But some Bush White House veterans credit Mr. Geithner with tempering the populist impulses of other Obama advisers.
One example: the administration has resisted calls, domestically and from G-20 allies like France, for specific dollar limits on executive compensation in the financial industry. “He’s doing as good a job as he can under the circumstances,” said Lawrence B. Lindsey, once Mr. Bush’s top economic adviser.
Such praise only fuels those on the left who cast Mr. Geithner as a tool of Wall Street interests for having rebuffed their calls to nationalize troubled banks.
“Progressives have been disappointed,” said Robert L. Borosage, director of the Committee for America’s Future. But he added, “I don’t think we see a lot of distance between Obama and Geithner.”
Mr. Geithner proved that point by successfully pushing for Mr. Obama to reappoint Mr. Bernanke, his close ally in the battles of the last year. The decision was fraught because a leading alternative was the National Economic Council director, Lawrence H. Summers, Mr. Geithner’s onetime mentor in the Clinton Treasury Department. Staying put in his current job, Mr. Summers will remain as a rival to Mr. Geithner for influence over administration economic policy.
The president’s decision to impose tariffs on imported Chinese tires, which Mr. Geithner opposed, showed he does not win every argument. Over the next year, he will face a raft of new fights over financial regulation in Congress, deficit reduction, and when to roll back Washington’s economic interventions.
That rollback may be the toughest strategic choice, pitting inflation fears against persistently high unemployment. Kevin M. Warsh, a Fed governor, warned in The Wall Street Journal last week that “policy likely will need to begin normalization before it is obvious it is necessary, possibly with greater force than is customary.”
His early public battering largely behind him, Mr. Geithner sounded sanguine last week. “As long as I feel confident we’re making the best decisions among a set of options,” he concluded, “I feel good.”
This story originally appeared in the The New York Times
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/33056434/
Anarchist G-20 protesters encouraged Friday morning demonstrations at various Pittsburgh businesses, but police said there haven't been any reports of large gatherings or vandalism.
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/slideshow/news/21115251/detail.html
The Pittsburgh G-20 Resistance Project had encouraged a so-called "Everywhere Protest" at dozens of locations, mostly banks and large corporations. A list was advertised on the group's Web site.
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/21113974/detail.html
Thousands March Against G-20 in Pittsburgh
| 25 Sep 2009 | 04:45 PM ET
About 10,000 protesters marched against capitalism and the Group of 20's summit agenda on Friday as businesses cleaned up from a night of skirmishes on Pittsburgh streets.
Protesters—from environmentalists, socialists, Palestinians and Tibetans to union workers—marched toward the convention center where G-20 leaders were meeting to discuss global economic issues.
They were flanked by large numbers of police decked out in body armor, and kept about 0.5 mile from the convention center by a ring of security.
Protesters held up signs such as "We Say No To Corporate Greed," and "G-20 = Death by Capitalism" and chanted "Hey hey ho ho, corporate welfare has to go.' Denise Edwards, 58, a local steel worker wearing a union T-shirt, said, 'The reason we're marching is because we need jobs but also there's the issue of justice."
'The G-20 makes the decisions that affect our lives. The decisions they're making are not working for the people.'
Protests—usually against some aspect of capitalism—have often marked summits since trade talks in Seattle in 1999, when demonstrators ransacked the city center, targeting businesses seen as symbols of U.S. corporate power.
Organizers said Friday's march, which ended with a rally at the City-County building downtown, was the largest protest in this western Pennsylvania city since Vietnam war protests.
The protests started on Thursday as leaders of 19 leading developed and developing economies and the European Union began a two-day meeting to discuss how to avoid another global economic crisis.
Police said they had arrested 80 people so far this week.
Rachel Kutz-Flamenbaum, 33, was at Friday's march with her 18-month old daughter Rosemary strapped to her back.
"We need to be able to show that we're not afraid to participate in democracy," she said. "Democracy will die if we don't protect it. We need to conduct our global decision making in a democratic way."
Thursday's protests began at lunchtime and continued well past midnight.
Starting with a march of about 2,000 people, the protests degenerated into running skirmishes with police.
Protesters smashed shop windows and threw rocks and bottles at police. Police responded with pepper gas, batons and by shooting pellet-filled bean bags.
Late on Thursday, several hundred protesters took to the streets near the Cathedral of Learning on the University of Pittsburgh campus. Police discharged gas and beanbags and protesters broke windows at a several stores and banks.
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/33024599/
Absurd >> 'Warren Buffett' Saves America In Ralph Nader's New Non-Novel (((( Anyone who knows real truth and facts would know that Super Rich is what is destroying Americans and the nation as the rich is made at the expense of others -- taking wealth out of others. ~~~))))
_________________________________________________
Posted By: Alex Crippen | Executive Producer
| 25 Sep 2009 | 01:49 PM ET
A fictional version of Warren Buffett assembles a "cadre" of "super-rich" billionaires to "fix" the U.S. government and return "power to the people," in a new book by political candidate and activist Ralph Nader.
"Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!" has just been published by Seven Stories Press.
Nader doesn't call his book a novel. He describes it as "a fictional vision that could become a new reality." He's also called it a "practical utopia."
In Nader's alternate reality, Warren Buffett is inspired to action by the government's inability to adequately respond to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. "He beheld in disbelief the paralysis of local, state, and federal authorities unable to commence basic operations of rescue and sustenance, not just in New Orleans, but in towns and villages all along the Gulf Coast. . . He knew exactly what he had to do. . ."
To quote the publisher's news release, Buffett "invites sixteen other super-rich individuals around a table to save America... (They) work together to unionize Wal-Mart, rebuild New Orleans with a speed and efficiency FEMA could only dream about, advance clean and transparent elections, effectively clean up the environment, and otherwise galvanize Congress and the corporate behemoths to be accountable to the people."
In an extended excerpt from the book posted by the publisher, the fictional Buffett tells a news conference:
"Our country is sinking deeper and deeper into troubles that are sapping its collective spirit and blinding it to the solutions that are ready at hand. From my observations of the rarefied world of business leaders, I’ve concluded that the vast majority are not leaders except for themselves. A society rots like a fish—from the head down. I want no part of that lucrative narcissism, that abdication from the realities that are blighting our country and the world. I am here to do my part, my duty, in persuading some of my very wealthy peers to live by the words of Alfred North Whitehead: ‘A great society is a society in which its men of business think greatly of their functions.’"
In the interviews he's been doing in recent days to promote the book, Nader says he's reached out to the real versions of the people in his book, telling the New Yorker he's made contact with "about half of his characters." Many of them have responded positively. So far, I haven't seen any mention of Buffett's reaction, if any.
And while the real Buffett is not as much of a political activist as his fictional counterpart, he has publicly supported Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for president and called on Congress to raise taxes on the "super-rich."
He also brought together some of the world's richest people last May in New York to informally discuss how they could make philanthropy more effective. We assume, however, that no one was wearing a superhero costume.
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/33019473/
Greed & Power mafia >> G20 Takes Center Stage in New World Order (((( NWO is fine except that it has turned to a big greed and power financial mafia defrauding many around the world. It has fallen from its grace into a money scamming organization just same as the Fed since 1913 bankrupting the country and millions of Americans. ~~)))))
| 25 Sep 2009 | 03:29 AM ET
The Group of 20 rich and developing countries were set to anoint themselves as caretakers of the global economy on Friday, giving rising stars such as China and India more say in world affairs.
Heading into their second day of meetings aimed at assuring the economy emerges from a deep global recession with better safeguards against another financial crisis, the G20 pledged to keep emergency economic supports in place until recovery is secured, according to a draft communique obtained by Reuters.
They also agreed to rein in financial industry excesses that led to the credit crisis, which first erupted in 2007, and to work together to tighten rules on how much capital banks must keep on hand to absorb losses.
The final version of the communique will be issued when the leaders wind up their meeting on Friday evening.
Emerging economies looked to be the surprise winners as the leaders sought to finalize agreements on an ambitious agenda that included building a more stable world economy, reforming bank regulations, and tackling climate change.
U.S. President Barack Obama's first G20 summit as host tests his ability to juggle domestic and foreign policy.
As Obama welcomed G20 leaders to a working dinner in Pittsburgh on Thursday, lawmakers in Washington were hashing out terms of a contentious healthcare reform bill that is the cornerstone of his domestic policy agenda.
After two years of financial turmoil, the global economy now appears to be recovering far faster than many economists predicted, thanks in large part to sharp interest rate reductions, emergency central bank lending programs, and roughly $5 trillion in government stimulus money.
But with unemployment high and banks still struggling to recoup heavy losses primarily from failing U.S. mortgage loans, the pressure is on the G20 to sustain the economic assistance.
"Today, leaders endorsed the G-20 as the premier forum for their international economic cooperation," the White House said in a statement after a summit dinner. "This decision brings to the table the countries needed to build a stronger, more balanced global economy, reform the financial system, and lift the lives of the poorest." The move means the G20 supplants the G7 and G8 — institutions dominated by rich Western economies, which will now remain forums for discussing geopolitical issues, diplomats said.
The G20, which includes the world's richest nations and fast-growing emerging economies including China, has become the primary venue for world leaders to meet on the financial crisis. Pittsburgh is the third G20 summit in less than a year.
In another boost for countries such as China, the G20 unexpectedly reached a deal on reshaping the International Monetary Fund to shift more voting power to some developing countries, recognizing their growing economic clout and the vital role they must play in helping the world economy climb out of the the worst recession in generations.
Rebalancing Act
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on Thursday there was broad support for a U.S.-backed plan to smooth out imbalances between debt-laden countries such as the United States and resource-rich export powerhouses including China.
That rebalancing act involves the United States saving more and China consuming more — some of which is already happening as a consequence of the global recession. U.S. consumers have cut spending as sinking home and stock values took a big chunk out of household wealth, while China spent more than $600 billion to stimulate its economy.
It was unlikely any countries would consent to G20-imposed rules on how to run their domestic economy.
However, the draft communique said that G20 countries with either "sustained, significant" surpluses — a description that could fit China — pledged to "strengthen domestic sources of growth." By the same token, countries with big deficits — such as the United States — pledged to undertake policies to support private savings.
The document also said G20 countries had a "responsibility to the community of nations to assure the overall health of the global economy." China has bristled at suggestions that its $2 trillion in reserves played a role in causing the financial crisis, and said on Thursday the main global economic balance that should worry G20 leaders was the gap between rich and poor nations.
The draft communique showed leaders endorsed an agreement on phasing out subsidies for fossil fuels, a measure aimed at helping combat global warming, but with no fixed date for the change.
Many G20 governments, including countries such as China, India and Russia, give tax breaks and direct payments to companies that help them produce coal, oil and other fossil fuels that cause greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/id/33015532/
Update: Should the Fed be abolished? * 16433 responses ~~>>> Yes 91%
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32881898/
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
~*~ U.S. House to Hold Hearings on Federal Reserve Audit ~*~
H.R. 1207: Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009
Friday, September 25th at 9:00 AM
(AP) Former U.S. vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, criticized for her lack of foreign policy experience, emerged in Asia on Wednesday to share her views from "Main Street U.S.A." with a group of high-flying global investors.
In her first trip to the region, the former Alaska governor addressed an annual conference of investors in Hong Kong in what was billed as a wide-ranging talk about governance, economics and U.S. and Asian affairs.
"I'm going to call it like I see it and I will share with you candidly a view right from Main Street, Main Street U.S.A.," Palin told a room full of asset managers and other finance professionals, according to a video of part of the speech obtained by The Associated Press. "And how perhaps my view of Main Street ... how that affects you and your business."
It marked Palin's first major appearance since she resigned as governor in July, and the speech's location and international scope could help boost her credentials ahead of a possible bid for president in 2012. While she's thought to be considering that, her Hong Kong trip bore no political overtones, said Fred Malek, a friend and Palin adviser.
"You can read a lot of things into it, 'Is she trying to burnish her foreign policy credentials?' and the like. But really, it's a trip that will be beneficial to her knowledge base and will defray some legal and other bills that she has," Malek said.
Palin left office in part because of the toll of multiple ethics complaints filed against her. Almost all of the complaints were dismissed, but she says she amassed more than $500,000 in legal fees.
In her speech - closed to reporters - Palin argued that many average Americans are uncomfortable with health care reforms that infringe on private enterprise, Chris Palmer, an American fund manager for Gartmore Investment Ltd., told reporters.
Discussing Sino-U.S. relations, Palin said she believes the U.S. has a role in helping China find its future and that the U.S. will always be on the side of promoting freedom, according to Palmer.
In an apparent reference to renewed tensions between Muslim Uighurs and Han Chinese that have led to violent riots, the former Alaska governor mentioned China's ethnic problems, arguing they are "a sign that China lacks mechanisms to deal with regional issues," Palmer said.
She also criticized the U.S. Federal Reserve's massive intervention in the economy over the last year and praised the conservative economic policies of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, according to another attendee who declined to be named because he didn't want to be seen as speaking on behalf of his company.
"She was careful not to be over-critical ... but she said she saw the fiscal situation is going out of control," said Gregory Lesko, managing director of New York-based Deltec Asset Management.
Palin, who burst on the U.S. political scene last year when she was chosen as Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, was ridiculed during the campaign after contending her state's proximity to Russia gave her foreign policy experience.
"You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska," she said.
Palin received her first passport in 2007, to visit Alaska National Guard members serving in Kuwait and Germany.
Since leaving office, Palin has vanished from public view, ducking mainstream news outlets and communicating with supporters largely via her popular Facebook page.
She also signed with the prestigious Washington Speakers Bureau and reportedly has been flooded with over a thousand offers.
Palin aides refused to disclose her fee for the appearance, which has been rumored to be in the low six figures.
CLSA requested Palin's speech be closed to reporters so she could make an "unfettered" presentation to investors, according to spokeswoman Wheeler. And Palin, whose supporters have long accused the media of bias and harsh treatment, agreed.
Hari Sevugan, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, said Tuesday the group knew little about Palin's speech.
"We're curious as to what she's willing to say in private but not in public," Sevugan said. "Are there other countries that she can see from her window that she doesn't want us to know about?"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/23/politics/main5331306.shtml?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesAreaMain;cbsnewsLeadStoriesHeadlines
Palin Criticizes Fed, China In Speech In Hong Kong
9/23/2009 11:44 AM ET -- RTT news
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin gave a speech at the CLSA Investors' Forum in Hong Kong Tuesday, addressing numerous topics, including leveling criticism towards the U.S. Federal Reserve for creating asset bubbles and encouraging excessive risk-taking that hurt working-class Americans.
"How can we think that setting up the Fed as monitor of systemic risk in the financial sector will result in meaningful reform," Palin said. "The words 'fox' and 'henhouse' come to mind."
Palin said the message sent to companies by the Fed and the federal government was "the bigger that you are, the more problems that you get yourself into, the more likely the government is to bail you out."
In addition, Palin took the opportunity to call the Obama administration's decision to impose duties on Chinese tires a mistake, calling for more cooperation with China. At the same time, she expressed concern about some of the communist nation's policies.
"We simply cannot turn a blind eye to China's policies and actions that could undermine international peace and security," Palin said.
"China has some 1,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan and no serious observer believes that it poses a military threat to Beijing," she added. "Those same Chinese forces made our friends in Japan and Australia kinda nervous. China provides support for some of the most questionable regimes from Sudan to Burma to Zimbabwe."
She further added that the U.S. needs "China to improve the rule of law and protect intellectual property."
"In the end, though," Palin said, "our economic relationship will truly thrive when Chinese citizens and foreign corporations can hold the Chinese government accountable when their actions are unjust."
The speech marked the first time Palin has given a major public address outside of North America.
Palin resigned her position as Alaska governor back in July. She had been John McCain's running mate on the Republican ticket during the 2008 Presidential election, and the large amount of exposure she received during the campaign has led to some speculation that she may be planning her own run for President in 2012.
Illuminati Greed which will be damned hell in Eternity for deception and killing.
~*~ American RE-FOUNDERS ~*~ http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Tree of Revolution 9/18/09 Part 1-5
Obama: In His Own Words 9/21/09 Part 1-4
>> Fed Rejects Geithner Request for Study of Governance, Structure (((~~~ Bernanke obviously does not give dam about what many are demanding ~~)))
By Craig Torres and Robert Schmidt
Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve Board has rejected a request by U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for a public review of the central bank’s structure and governance, three people familiar with the matter said.
The Obama administration proposed on June 17 a financial- regulatory overhaul including a “comprehensive review” of the Fed’s “ability to accomplish its existing and proposed functions” and the role of its regional banks. The Fed was to lead the study and enlist the Treasury and “a wide range of external experts.”
Last Updated: September 21, 2009 00:01 EDT
Bernanke hot air? He said that markets will face sell-off if the FED is audited -- it seems that is also a full of bag of hot air... as markets don't give dam about it.
Should the Fed be abolished? * 15503 responses
Yes 91%
No 4.6%
Not Sure 4.4%
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32881898/
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Goldman Sachs ~
Money controls most of political wolves.
Posted by: *~1Best~* Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:37:15 PM
In reply to: shermann7 who wrote msg# 9518 Post # of 9550
The banker pigs are invisible. The Fed can be destroyed but the banker pigs already stolen trillions leaving the nation bankrupted. They will find new ways to defraud.
You can't destroy invisible greedy hands.Only through vigilance of the people through sound policies.
I am not against demolishing the FED which is almost impossible without Economic revolution, but it is deadly mistaken if anyone thinks that the problem is fixed. It could get worse because of false perception of the problems are solved while greedy pigs and political wolves are continuing to defraud.
It will be just morphed into something else.
The Fed cannot be changed or abolished until there has been a mass weeding out of corruption in DC. If done before then, it will just be more of the same.
Goldman Sachs = Neo-Slavery = Government
Should the Fed be abolished? * 14887 responses
Yes 91%
No 4.8%
Not Sure 4.5%
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32881898/
The 911 Memorial ~ Message to Obama
(((~~the Fed & G20 deceived Americans bankrupting millions and the country. Literally international mafia bankrupting the nations. ~~~)))
The dollar this past week continued to sink, setting a new year low against a variety of currencies, while commodities for the most part traded higher. The dollar was at $1.4702 per euro. Treasurys saw selling Friday ahead of $107 billion in 2-, 5- and 7-year note auctions in the coming week. The yield on the 10-year was at 3.476 percent.
Followers
|
1
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
284
|
Created
|
09/05/09
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators |
~*~ Videos: 912 Unite Washington march 2009 ~*~
912dc.org | 912petitions | Principles | 912 Coalition | Video Library |
\\
912: America Awakens in 2009
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2338733/posts
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |