[gum5h03]

These videos do a pretty good job of Federal Reserve 101. Some things were controversial up to just about a year ago. Look at where we are today and make your own decision on if this was all planned or not.



Federal Reserve 1

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_dmPchuXIXQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_dmPchuXIXQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

Federal Reserve 2

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lBZne09Gf5A&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lBZne09Gf5A&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

Federal Reserve 3

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SjUrib_Gh0Y&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SjUrib_Gh0Y&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

Federal Reserve 4

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_BVNN1wqw3k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_BVNN1wqw3k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[NoKids]

when mccain was picking his VP i heard rumors that he was thinking about taking his long time friend joe lieberman. it sent chills down my spine because i am deathly afraid of that snake in the grass traitor being anywhere near power. americans need to NEVER elect this soulless demon, or risk the republic turning into the evil empire with him as Emperor! Darth Sidious, I have my eyes on you!

[Los Angeles]

OK, enough ^^.

Back on topic...

[gum5h03]

Good observation jacker

[donkeymoto]

Wait, wait, wait, wait....WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No law for federal income tax!!!!!!...hmmmmmm if that is for real fuck a 335 im getting an m3. How legit are these videos??!?!?!? Wow kinda scary!

[gum5h03]

Originally Posted by donkeymoto

Wait, wait, wait, wait....WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No law for federal income tax!!!!!!...hmmmmmm if that is for real fuck a 335 im getting an m3. How legit are these videos??!?!?!? Wow kinda scary!

It's true, but I wouldn't advise trying to claim that the next time the IRS says to cough it up. Wesley Snipes is training for his new role as convict because of it.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by donkeymoto

Wait, wait, wait, wait....WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No law for federal income tax!!!!!!...hmmmmmm if that is for real fuck a 335 im getting an m3. How legit are these videos??!?!?!? Wow kinda scary!

I find this part of the Zeitgeist movie on the Federal Reserve to be very interesting. I have seen it before in context of the the other two parts which I did not care for.

For those interested in the Federal Reserve, there are other sources of information. I would not try to get away without paying income tax as long as the Federal Government holds that the 16th Amendment is properly in effect. I do fully support the effort to repeal the 16th Amendment, thereby eliminating the income tax.

Here is an interesting video:
America: Freedom to Fascism - Director's Authorized Version

[Day Laborer]

The 16th Amendment to the US Constitution:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Therefore, the Federal Income Tax (unapportioned) IS completely constitutional

According to the US Government Printing Office: The 16th Amendment HAD BEEN RATIFIED

Amendment XVI. \8\

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment

[[Page 34]]
among the several States, and without regard to any census or
enumeration.
\8\ The Sixteenth Amendment was proposed by Congress on July 12,
1909, when it passed the House, 44 Cong. Rec. (61st Cong., 1st Sess.)
4390, 4440, 4441, having previously passed the Senate on July 5. Id.,
4121. It appears officially in 36 Stat. 184. Ratification was completed
on February 3, 1913, when the legislature of the thirty-sixth State
(Delaware, Wyoming, or New Mexico) approved the amendment, there being
then 48 States in the Union. On February 25, 1913, Secretary of State
Knox certified that this amendment had become a part of the
Constitution. 37 Stat. 1785.
The several state legislatures ratified the Sixteenth Amendment
on the following dates: Alabama, August 10, 1909; Kentucky, February 8,
1910; South Carolina, February 19, 1910; Illinois, March 1, 1910;
Mississippi, March 7, 1910; Oklahoma, March 10, 1910; Maryland, April 8,
1910; Georgia, August 3, 1910; Texas, August 16, 1910; Ohio, January 19,
1911; Idaho, January 20, 1911; Oregon, January 23, 1911; Washington,
January 26, 1911; Montana, January 27, 1911; Indiana, January 30, 1911;
California, January 31, 1911; Nevada, January 31, 1911; South Dakota,
February 1, 1911; Nebraska, February 9, 1911; North Carolina, February
11, 1911; Colorado, February 15, 1911; North Dakota, February 17, 1911;
Michigan, February 23, 1911; Iowa, February 24, 1911; Kansas, March 2,
1911; Missouri, March 16, 1911; Maine, March 31, 1911; Tennessee, April
7, 1911; Arkansas, April 22, 1911 (after having rejected the amendment
at the session begun January 9, 1911); Wisconsin, May 16, 1911; New
York, July 12, 1911; Arizona, April 3, 1912; Minnesota, June 11, 1912;
Louisiana, June 28, 1912; West Virginia, January 31, 1913; Delaware,
February 3, 1913; Wyoming, February 3, 1913; New Mexico, February 3,
1913; New Jersey, February 4, 1913; Vermont, February 19, 1913;
Massachusetts, March 4, 1913; New Hampshire, March 7, 1913 (after having
rejected the amendment on March 2, 1911). The amendment was rejected
(and not subsequently ratified) by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Utah.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This video reminds me of the "Loose Change" documentary.. where they twist facts and make the US government look so lucradive and evil.

Seriously, why do people who live in the worlds greatest nation do this by creating these ridiculous conspiracy theories?

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by Day Laborer

The 16th Amendment to the US Constitution:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Therefore, the Federal Income Tax (unapportioned) IS completely constitutional

According to the US Government Printing Office: The 16th Amendment HAD BEEN RATIFIED

Amendment XVI. \8\

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment
...

This video reminds me of the "Loose Change" documentary.. where they twist facts and make the US government look so lucradive and evil.

Seriously, why do people who live in the worlds greatest nation do this by creating these ridiculous conspiracy theories?

Probably everyone understands the government says it was all done legitimately. It's been awhile since I looked at this, but were there different versions in the amendment adopted by the individual states? If so, which one actually amended the Constitution? Why would one of the others with different words not have been used? Who got to decide that? Hmmm?

[pt]

How about a one-stop-shop to debunk a good deal of the horsecrap in the posted vids:

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/fl...l_Reserve.html

Here's a glimpse of the education available from this site:

--
Myth #1: The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was crafted by Wall Street bankers and a few senators in a secret meeting.

Myth #2: The Federal Reserve Act never actually passed Congress. The Senate voted on the bill without a quorum, so the Act is null and void.

Myth# 3: The Federal Reserve Act and paper money are unconstitutional.

Myth# 4: The Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank.

Myth #5: The Federal Reserve is owned and controlled by foreigners.

Myth #6: The Federal Reserve has never been audited.

Myth #7: The Federal Reserve charges interest on the currency we use.

Myth #8: If it were not for the Federal Reserve charging the government interest, the budget would be balanced and we would have no national debt.

Myth #9: President Kennedy was assassinated because he tried to usurp the Federal Reserve's power. Executive Order 11,110 proves it.

Myth #10. The Legendary Tirade of Louis T. McFadden
--

I could waste my time, or I could give a little food for thought. It's not as cool as a melodramatic video on youtube but good education.

[jakesteel1]

Originally Posted by pt

How about a one-stop-shop to debunk a good deal of the horsecrap in the posted vids:

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/fl...l_Reserve.html

Here's a glimpse of the education available from this site:

--
Myth #1: The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was crafted by Wall Street bankers and a few senators in a secret meeting.

Myth #2: The Federal Reserve Act never actually passed Congress. The Senate voted on the bill without a quorum, so the Act is null and void.

Myth# 3: The Federal Reserve Act and paper money are unconstitutional.

Myth# 4: The Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank.

Myth #5: The Federal Reserve is owned and controlled by foreigners.

Myth #6: The Federal Reserve has never been audited.

Myth #7: The Federal Reserve charges interest on the currency we use.

Myth #8: If it were not for the Federal Reserve charging the government interest, the budget would be balanced and we would have no national debt.

Myth #9: President Kennedy was assassinated because he tried to usurp the Federal Reserve's power. Executive Order 11,110 proves it.

Myth #10. The Legendary Tirade of Louis T. McFadden
--

I could waste my time, or I could give a little food for thought. It's not as cool as a melodramatic video on youtube but good education.

I plan to address every one of these points.

Briefly, even your source acknowledges that the "Federal Reserve Bank" is privately owned...contradicting "myth" # 4. From this it is not unreasonable to state that it is a private for profit institution. And its confirmed further down.

Scanning further down, he states in a very convoluted way that that "Federal Reserve" returns all but 7% of the interest it charges our government. This is their profit. 7% of infinity is a nice little sum for printing and devaluing our currency.

McFadden was one of many politicians who have spoken out against central banks and the "Federal Reserve". President Jacksons whole platform revolved around fighting the central bank scheme. Jefferson, Franklin, Lindbergh. Even Friedman came out against the "Federal Reserve".

Do you really think its a coincidence that Senator Aldrich is the same one who introduced and pushed through both the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment? Let me tell you, its not. This cabal knew full well that the states would reject an income tax to repay interest on deficit spending and therefore pushed through the sixteenth amendment on a federal level, bypassing the states.

And yes controversy still exists to this day regarding the unlawful passage of the sixteenth amendment

And as far as what is "lawful coin". Its actually quite clear. Article 1 Section 8:

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

This function was specifically delegated to our government. It did not give them permission to turn this responsibility over to a private for profit central bank.

[11Series]

Originally Posted by jakesteel1

....And as far as what is "lawful coin". Its actually quite clear. Article 1 Section 8:

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

This function was specifically delegated to our government. It did not give them permission to turn this responsibility over to a private for profit central bank.

Using this logic, it would be unconstitutional to turn over responsibility for security services in Iraq to hired contractors too, since it says in the Constitution that the Gov't fights wars. Sounds like a good argument to ban war contracts. We also turn the responsibility for building our weapons systems over to private for profit companies too. Your argument would ban that practice also.

I don't think you understand how the gov't works. When there is something that the private sector does better than the Gov't, the gov't contracts that work out to the private sector. When the gov't does everything and excludes the private sector, that is called communism.

[pt]

Originally Posted by jakesteel1

I plan to address every one of these points.

Briefly, even your source acknowledges that the "Federal Reserve Bank" is privately owned...contradicting "myth" # 4. From this it is not unreasonable to state that it is a private for profit institution. And its confirmed further down.

Scanning further down, he states in a very convoluted way that that "Federal Reserve" returns all but 7% of the interest it charges our government. This is their profit. 7% of infinity is a nice little sum for printing and devaluing our currency.

McFadden was one of many politicians who have spoken out against central banks and the "Federal Reserve". President Jacksons whole platform revolved around fighting the central bank scheme. Jefferson, Franklin, Lindbergh. Even Friedman came out against the "Federal Reserve".

Do you really think its a coincidence that Senator Aldrich is the same one who introduced and pushed through both the Federal Reserve Act and the sixteenth amendment? Let me tell you, its not. This cabal knew full well that the states would reject an income tax to repay interest on deficit spending and therefore pushed through the sixteenth amendment on a federal level, bypassing the states.

And yes controversy still exists to this day regarding the unlawful passage of the sixteenth amendment

And as far as what is "lawful coin". Its actually quite clear. Article 1 Section 8:

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

This function was specifically delegated to our government. It did not give them permission to turn this responsibility over to a private for profit central bank.

As regards whether / not the federal reserve is a private institution, the contention is clear: there is a small amount of truth to it. In the big picture though, conspiratards omit several inconvenient details and significantly misinterpret reality. The fed's monetary policy decisions are made by the board of governors - a federal agency for all intents and purposes, and whose members are appointed by the POTUS and confirmed by the Congress. The board sets monetary policy and the 12 regional federal reserve banks execute it. I should not have to explain this to you. And with this, your premise that the 'federal reserve is a private for-profit institution' is too narrow in scope and I reject it outright.

I would also contend that hanging on to 7% of income so as to finance its operations is not an unreasonable paradigm. They have to finance their operations and salaries somehow...what else would you propose?

In the big picture, having an entity with the ability (and know-how) to expand and contract the money supply is key to maintaining a stable economy. The problem is that congress goes and spends all kinds of money it doesn't have and leaves the federal reserve holding the bag.

Either way, what would you change?

Would you go back to the gold standard to solve the fiat currency thing? How would you pay to store the gold and enforce security? Would the prospect that we'd have to pay more to store the gold than it's actually worth sway you? And at what pricing point of gold would you re-engage? It's a different example here, but the Iranians started taking payment in Euros for their oil exports. Given that the price of oil is quoted in dollars, the violent depreciation of Euros (dropping from EUR/USD 1.60 to 1.32 can only be described as violent) has lost them a shit-load of money. They must really be feeling like geniuses now. The point is that, with gold trading around $1400 an ounce, it's important to not get in at the top, out of concern to not screw ourselves.

Or, would you really assign the responsibility of central banking to congress? Would you have Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, etc responsible for monetary policy, FX regime, trading operations and VaR tolerance, etc? Since these are amongst the most horrifically irresponsible people out there, and there is no requirement for the appropriate knowledge in order to be elected to those positions, you do see what an absolute disaster this would be, don't you? Not to mention the changes in monetary policy that would occur each time power transferred from one political party to the other? And we haven't even accounted for the constant training needed for congress to do this, and the re-training needed when people get voted out of office and replaced?

In other words, put your money where your mouth is. Don't give me bullshit conspiracy theories that you have to grasp at straws to justify. Instead, let's see some real brain power -tell us what you would change to right the perceived "wrongs" out there...

[radix]

those videos are full of shit