Bank run in Greece

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

Legion, I don't think you quite understand that allowing competition in currencies is just one way of trying to legalize gold and silver as legal tender. So Ron Paul introducing legislature to allow gold and silver as legal tender is a step back to our Constitution. What's so bad about that? The $1 USD and the $50 USD legal tender of the silver and gold ounce isn't a fair market value. If an employer pays his employee a gold ounce per week and the employee claims to have made $50 a week the government prosecutes them. How is that fair?

If Ron Paul is so bad and he is an insider why did he warn people about the housing boom? Wouldn't an insider and a liar want you to lose your ass on the housing mess? Why would he care about peons such as you and I? Why would Ron Paul advocate sound money for 30+ years? Long term metals holders are winning.

You know that Ron Paul is the ONLY one vocally calling for us to honor and obey the Constitution.

Legion, if you followed Ron Paul's advice it only would have benefited you. Sure gold dropped from 1980 and didn't reach a low until roughly 2000 but you still maintained purchasing power. Now your purchasing power has exploded!

"Why would Ron Paul resort to government force in order to reign in manipulation of gold prices in the market?"

He was trying to restore the authority to where the Constitution originally granted it. Do you read the articles before posting them?

http://www.rense.com/general20/ron.htm

"The "Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act" restores proper congressional authority over gold policy by requiring that body to vote its approval before the president or secretary buys or sells gold.

"The Constitution grants authority over monetary policy specifically to Congress alone, not to the executive or the administration," Paul stated. "Yet Congress has neglected its duty for decades, and now our foolish fiat money system is run without challenge exclusively by unelected Treasury and Fed bureaucrats."

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Legion, I don't think you quite understand that allowing competition in currencies is just one way of trying to legalize gold and silver as legal tender. So Ron Paul introducing legislature to allow gold and silver as legal tender is a step back to our Constitution. What's so bad about that? The $1 USD and the $50 USD legal tender of the silver and gold ounce isn't a fair market value. If an employer pays his employee a gold ounce per week and the employee claims to have made $50 a week the government prosecutes them. How is that fair?

If Ron Paul is so bad and he is an insider why did he warn people about the housing boom? Wouldn't an insider and a liar want you to lose your ass on the housing mess? Why would he care about peons such as you and I? Why would Ron Paul advocate sound money for 30+ years? Long term metals holders are winning.

You know that Ron Paul is the ONLY one vocally calling for us to honor and obey the Constitution.

Legion, if you followed Ron Paul's advice it only would have benefited you. Sure gold dropped from 1980 and didn't reach a low until roughly 2000 but you still maintained purchasing power. Now your purchasing power has exploded!

"Why would Ron Paul resort to government force in order to reign in manipulation of gold prices in the market?"

He was trying to restore the authority to where the Constitution originally granted it. Do you read the articles before posting them?

http://www.rense.com/general20/ron.htm

"The "Monetary Freedom and Accountability Act" restores proper congressional authority over gold policy by requiring that body to vote its approval before the president or secretary buys or sells gold.

"The Constitution grants authority over monetary policy specifically to Congress alone, not to the executive or the administration," Paul stated. "Yet Congress has neglected its duty for decades, and now our foolish fiat money system is run without challenge exclusively by unelected Treasury and Fed bureaucrats."

Satan sells 5% lies with 95% truth. The easiest way to disenchant someone with the church or the gospel is to give them a little bit of truth they aren't ready for.

If Ron Paul is so smart and has it all figured out (which I don't doubt) then why is he hanging out with the bad guys and pushing their agenda (like more private banking control over money)? If Congress has neglected its duty for decades then hasn't that ultimately been the fault of the people who elected those representatives for decades? Does that justify taking the power to create money away from the people (via their representatives in Congress) and giving it solely to private banks? Do you plan to be a slave to private banking for the rest of your life?

Is Hugh Nibley telling the truth here or lying?

To be Number One is to be beyond politics. It is his command of the ultimate weapon that places Satan—like God—beyond politics.

A piece appeared in the press noting that businessmen are insisting with increasing zeal on searching the minds and the hearts of their employees by means of polygraph tests. If any arm of government30 were to go so far, they would be met by horrified protests at this vicious attack on individual freedom, and rightly so. What is it that gives ordinary businessmen a power greater than that of the government? It is the capacity for giving or withholding money—nothing else in the world. This is the weapon that Satan chose from the beginning to place him and his plans beyond politics, and it has worked with deadly effect. There is only one thing in man's world that can offer any check on the unlimited power of money—and that is government. That is why money always accuses government of trying to destroy free agency, when the great enslaver has always been money itself.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... ts/?id=162

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

The problem with your quote, Legion, is that in our current system the government IS money. As you are well aware.

I find it funny that Nibley acknowledges the UNLIMITED power of money and then suggests that government acts as a check on it. Well, a righteous government maybe, but it seems that Nibley is almost posing an answer to the question Can God create a rock so heavy that He can't lift it.

Unlimited power of money and checked by government are mutually exclusive...money and government both only have the power we (collectively) give them...

You equate Ron Paul to Satan for having 95% truth - I'd love to see another politician that is any better than 80% truth. Ron Paul isn't perfect, but he is the best. Of course you can hang your hope on the priesthood holder that is 50% truth AT BEST, wow that priesthood must be quite the cleansing agent if it can make you hold your nose and vote for that turd sandwich.

[moonwhimcaptain of 1,000]

Is Hugh Nibley telling the truth here or lying?

To be Number One is to be beyond politics. It is his command of the ultimate weapon that places Satan—like God—beyond politics.

A piece appeared in the press noting that businessmen are insisting with increasing zeal on searching the minds and the hearts of their employees by means of polygraph tests. If any arm of government30 were to go so far, they would be met by horrified protests at this vicious attack on individual freedom, and rightly so. What is it that gives ordinary businessmen a power greater than that of the government? It is the capacity for giving or withholding money—nothing else in the world. This is the weapon that Satan chose from the beginning to place him and his plans beyond politics, and it has worked with deadly effect. There is only one thing in man's world that can offer any check on the unlimited power of money—and that is government. That is why money always accuses government of trying to destroy free agency, when the great enslaver has always been money itself.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... ts/?id=162

Do you actually believe that our current government will offer that check like Nibley recommends?

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

The problem with your quote, Legion, is that in our current system the government IS money. As you are well aware.

I find it funny that Nibley acknowledges the UNLIMITED power of money and then suggests that government acts as a check on it. Well, a righteous government maybe, but it seems that Nibley is almost posing an answer to the question Can God create a rock so heavy that He can't lift it.

Unlimited power of money and checked by government are mutually exclusive...money and government both only have the power we (collectively) give them...

You equate Ron Paul to Satan for having 95% truth - I'd love to see another politician that is any better than 80% truth. Ron Paul isn't perfect, but he is the best. Of course you can hang your hope on the priesthood holder that is 50% truth AT BEST, wow that priesthood must be quite the cleansing agent if it can make you hold your nose and vote for that turd sandwich.

I don't follow you. How is the government money in our current system?

Don't follow you on all the rest either.....perhaps best to let you get control of your emotions and finger prior to proceeding.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Is Hugh Nibley telling the truth here or lying?

To be Number One is to be beyond politics. It is his command of the ultimate weapon that places Satan—like God—beyond politics.

A piece appeared in the press noting that businessmen are insisting with increasing zeal on searching the minds and the hearts of their employees by means of polygraph tests. If any arm of government30 were to go so far, they would be met by horrified protests at this vicious attack on individual freedom, and rightly so. What is it that gives ordinary businessmen a power greater than that of the government? It is the capacity for giving or withholding money—nothing else in the world. This is the weapon that Satan chose from the beginning to place him and his plans beyond politics, and it has worked with deadly effect. There is only one thing in man's world that can offer any check on the unlimited power of money—and that is government. That is why money always accuses government of trying to destroy free agency, when the great enslaver has always been money itself.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... ts/?id=162

Do you actually believe that our current government will offer that check like Nibley recommends?

I think that the people still have the power to vote. That we still have a representative government. The potential is certainly there. Whether the people grasp the power they have and utilize it to that end though is another story time will tell. The odds certainly seem against it at this point I think. Especially with the mass confusion over what's right and what's wrong with many calling good evil and evil good.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

You disagree that money is in virtually complete control of our current system (government)?

You believe that black box voting actually counts the people's votes (funny, because I was sure previously you have posted that votes are not counted and the results of elections were predetermined by the vote counting companies to deliver the results that TPTB want - now I see you saying people still have the power to vote and our government is representative.

Maybe I need to give YOU a moment to get your ducks lined up.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

You disagree that money is in virtually complete control of our current system (government)?

You believe that black box voting actually counts the people's votes (funny, because I was sure previously you have posted that votes are not counted and the results of elections were predetermined by the vote counting companies to deliver the results that TPTB want - now I see you saying people still have the power to vote and our government is representative.

Maybe I need to give YOU a moment to get your ducks lined up.

Ahh I see what you are aiming at. Yes I agree with you that money is in virtually complete control of our current system (government).

No I've stated there wasn't much left of that thread. And lately I've pointed out that the thread remains and pointed to some political experiences that emphasized that.

I certainly seemed to have pushed your buttons today....so yes lets take a break and I'll line my ducks up for you to shoot. Let me know when you're locked and loaded to send rounds down range.

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

The central bank is in control of the money. The Federal Reserve! The unconstitutional bank, at his time they only had a 20 year charter and a different name, that only was defeated by Andrew Jackson! They tried to kill him over that!

The point is the central bank is evil BUT, this is a big but, it is only through the peoples' sins are the powers of the Fed exposed. What sins? Greed and wanton eyes.

See if the government officials didn't spend so much money we wouldn't have this problem. The Federal Reserve essentially hijacked a sound currency, backed by silver and gold, and through that act now yield unlimited power. The Achilles heal would be no debt. The Federal Reserve makes a living by lending monopoly money in turn for interest. That is why it is absolutely impossible to pay off the national debt.

It is like a young child (the people or government) who is given a credit card from the parent (central bank). Technically you can't really blame the central bank for the kid racking up thousands of dollars in debt but they were the enabler. (what would a kid need to spend thousands of dollars on that he already has i.e. food, water, clothes and shelter)

So no, the government doesn't control the money. The Fed does. They control the spending. Even if the Congress "controlled" it like they should it really would be very limited control. Making gold and silver legal tender is pretty much the extent of it. They would have to accept gold and silver for payment. The people can use whatever they want. No man would be forced to accept it in a free society but as a standard they'd establish gold and silver.

[awar_ecaptain of 100]

Some may not recall who debased our currency. It was a three step process done slowly so most would not recognize what was happening. Wilson, gave us direct election of senators, the Fed Reserve, Income tax and whatever else he managed to slip in.
FDR gave us massive socialism while stealing the gold from citizens and devaluing their savings as he got the nation focused on the war of his dreams..
Tricky Dick Nixon took away our silver while he cozied up to China.
Congress has enriched themselves to incredible wealth while all of this took place.
We continue to get the govt we deserve.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

The central bank is in control of the money. The Federal Reserve! The unconstitutional bank, at his time they only had a 20 year charter and a different name, that only was defeated by Andrew Jackson! They tried to kill him over that!

The point is the central bank is evil BUT, this is a big but, it is only through the peoples' sins are the powers of the Fed exposed. What sins? Greed and wanton eyes.

See if the government officials didn't spend so much money we wouldn't have this problem. The Federal Reserve essentially hijacked a sound currency, backed by silver and gold, and through that act now yield unlimited power. The Achilles heal would be no debt. The Federal Reserve makes a living by lending monopoly money in turn for interest. That is why it is absolutely impossible to pay off the national debt.

It is like a young child (the people or government) who is given a credit card from the parent (central bank). Technically you can't really blame the central bank for the kid racking up thousands of dollars in debt but they were the enabler. (what would a kid need to spend thousands of dollars on that he already has i.e. food, water, clothes and shelter)

So no, the government doesn't control the money. The Fed does. They control the spending. Even if the Congress "controlled" it like they should it really would be very limited control. Making gold and silver legal tender is pretty much the extent of it. They would have to accept gold and silver for payment. The people can use whatever they want. No man would be forced to accept it in a free society but as a standard they'd establish gold and silver.

If the people voted out anyone who spent so much money you wouldn't have the problem. That's the source of your problem as long as representation remains.

Yeah and instead of Ron Paul recommending government take back the control of money.....he's instead recommending more private banking.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Some may not recall who debased our currency. It was a three step process done slowly so most would not recognize what was happening. Wilson, gave us direct election of senators, the Fed Reserve, Income tax and whatever else he managed to slip in.
FDR gave us massive socialism while stealing the gold from citizens and devaluing their savings as he got the nation focused on the war of his dreams..
Tricky Dick Nixon took away our silver while he cozied up to China.
Congress has enriched themselves to incredible wealth while all of this took place.
We continue to get the govt we deserve.

The ones we voted in....and FDR against prophetic counsel.

Meanwhile China and Russia are buying up gold like no tomorrow preparing for that global currency based on gold....that Ron Paul is paving the road for here in the US.

Bank Of Russia To Buy “Considerable Figure" Of Gold Tonnage In 2012
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bank-russ ... nnage-2012

"Uncivilized" China Quietly Building Gold Reserves As Gold Imports From HK Soar By 587% In First Quarter
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/unciviliz ... st-quarter

So we go back again to "The Case for Gold" by Ron Paul and Lewis Lehrman which is their viewpoint after participating in Ronald Reagan's Gold Commission which Ron Paul spearheaded.

Then we explore Lewis Lehrman's derivative works -
http://www.thegoldstandardnow.org/image ... -Order.pdf
http://www.nysun.com/national/plan-to-r ... set/87495/

...and compare them to Ron Paul's current comments/agenda/economic plan captured here -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

....and see if there is any substantial deviations between the earlier work with Lewis, his derivative works, and Ron Paul's current agenda.

"I [Ron Paul] wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender, which would restrain the Federal Government from spending and then turning that over to the Federal Reserve and letting the Federal Reserve print the money."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

....which would undermine what's left of the dollar??? while leaving the door wide open for the use of single global currency backed by gold/silver???

The ultimate solution will only come with the rejection of fiat money worldwide, and a restoration of commodity money. Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give us a single world currency requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.

— Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dH3_Lcf ... r_embedded

...haven't the money managers controlled and manipulated gold/silver for over a century now (battle over gold/silver in the late 1800's - The Secret of Oz)??? Hasn't GATA (Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee) been going off about this for years now???

Rep. Ron Paul Introduces Legislation To Stop Gold Manipulation
http://www.rense.com/general20/ron.htm

And even Ron Paul has introduced legislation (resorted to government force) to correct manipulation of commodity prices in the free market. So is gold/silver really an answer to central banking via private banks? Or is it just more private banking control over the world?

"The gold standard is a modern, digital, information-sharing, global operating standard. Moreover, it is a stable, networking, efficient, price transmission system in the form of a stable international monetary standard," says Lewis E. Lehrman.

Big media is paying attention to proposals for a new Gold Commission. This concept first was floated by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and reported by The Weekly Standard.

"A modern, digital, information-sharing, global operating standard," says Lehrman. Let's boot up that commission and take a really close look as to how gold might be the "golden bullet" to get an American economic miracle roaring. Gold: Dignity, Prosperity, and Liberty.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... ssion.html

....Rand Paul and Lewis Lehrman on the same page??? since when has a PNAC steering committee member (signatory to the 9/11 document) really cared about Americans and their wallets???

Paul supports legalization of parallel currencies, such as gold-backed notes issued from private markets and digital gold currencies.[66] He would like gold-backed notes (or other types of hard money) and digital gold currencies[67] to compete on a level playing field with Federal Reserve Notes, allowing individuals a choice whether to use sound money or to continue using fiat money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

...isn't that what Lewis Lehrman was just saying???

Ron Paul worries Fort Knox gold is gone
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/24/news/ec ... /index.htm

Fort Knox U.S. Gold Reserves to be Independently Audited and Assayed? Congressman Ron Paul Pressures U.S. Treasury
http://articles.businessinsider.com/201 ... old-market

...issued by the gadianton controlled market of course....in other words setting the stage for the new world order to establish a global currency based on gold as advocated by his buddy Lewis Lehrman of CFR and PNAC. So we have a shell game where they drop the Federal Reserve Notes and go with a global note "backed by gold"...at least until they say otherwise (think Nixon)....where's the change? Who gets screwed?

Why are China and Russia stockpiling gold all while the US appears to be running on empty? Why would Ron Paul recommend selling whatever we have left to settle our debt with private bankers thus leaving us completely at their mercy economically?

Fast forward almost 70 years. Ron Paul announces at the Heritage Foundation that the government should sell its gold to reduce the national debt.

http://lewrockwell.com/north/north983.html
http://www.garynorth.com/public/8028.cfm

...what I see is the intentional demise of the world's governments via their monetary systems and the rise of gold and silver in a new global monetary system which helps install or actually finalizes a new global government....but maybe my paradigm has some serious flaws????

Paul has long held that land owned by the government should be sold to private developers. In addition to closing the Department of the Interior, his "Restore America" budget plan proposes selling off at least $40 billion worth of public lands such as national parks, and other federal assets, between 2013 and 2016.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

Oh and he intends to sell our land to the highest bidder as well to settle debt with private bankers. Who will set the market price for the land? Private bankers? What happens when we sell off every last single asset at banker stipulated prices and we still come up far short?

Let's look a little closer at Ron Paul's plan -

Revenue Changes

cut the top corporate tax rate to 15% (down from 35%)
allow companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation
permanently extend the Bush administration tax cuts
eliminate capital gains and dividends taxes
eliminate estate and gift taxes
end taxes on personal savings
sell federal lands and other federal assets

Other Economic and Regulatory Measures

repeal the new healthcare law ("Obamacare") as well as the Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley financial services and banking regulations
cancel certain "onerous" regulations instituted under executive order by previous presidents
conduct a full audit of the Federal Reserve
seek competing currency legislation "to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

Notice the removal of controls over banking and corporations as well as the reduction in corporate tax (even further globalization as they can move money where ever they want w/o repatriation taxes)....is that the free market you envisioned??? Wasn't one of the big major milestones of the Constitution over the Articles of Confederation the right to collect taxes and fund government?

Again go back and look at Ron Paul's actual policies or intended policies and compare them with "free market"....is it really "free" or do you end up in California's situation after they "de-regulated" power and their power bills went up 1600% over the course of a year or two??? All because they now were competing on the "national" market for power...who won? who lost? How did that Enron/Bush story go again???

The California electricity crisis, also known as the Western U.S. Energy Crisis of 2000 and 2001 was a situation in which California had a shortage of electricity caused by market manipulations and illegal shutdowns of pipelines by Texas energy consortiums. The state suffered from multiple large-scale blackouts, one of the state's largest energy companies collapsed, and the economic fall-out greatly harmed Governor Gray Davis's standing.

The financial crisis was possible because of partial deregulation legislation instituted in 1996 by Governor Pete Wilson. Enron took advantage of this deregulation and was involved in economic withholding and inflated price bidding in California's spot markets.[9] The crisis cost $40 to $45 billion.[10]

Pro-privatization advocates insist the cause of the problem was that the regulator still held too much control over the market, and true market processes were stymied — whereas opponents of deregulation assert that the fully regulated system had worked for 40 years without blackouts.

One of the energy wholesalers that became notorious for "gaming the market" and reaping huge speculative profits was Enron Corporation. Enron CEO Kenneth Lay mocked the efforts by the California State government to thwart the practices of the energy wholesalers, saying, "In the final analysis, it doesn't matter what you crazy people in California do, because I got smart guys who can always figure out how to make money." The original statement was made in a phone conversation between David Freeman (Chairman of the California Power Authority) and Kenneth Lay (CEO of Enron) in 2000, according to the statements made by Freeman to the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Foreign Commerce and Tourism in April[20] and May 2002.[21]

There is one fundamental lesson we must learn from this experience: electricity is really different from everything else. It cannot be stored, it cannot be seen, and we cannot do without it, which makes opportunities to take advantage of a deregulated market endless. It is a public good that must be protected from private abuse. If Murphy’s Law were written for a market approach to electricity, then the law would state 'any system that can be gamed, will be gamed, and at the worst possible time.' And a market approach for electricity is inherently gameable. Never again can we allow private interests to create artificial or even real shortages and to be in control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California ... ity_crisis

However, Mr. Chairman, I hope we will not allow criminal fraud in one company, which constitutionally is a matter for state law, to justify the imposition of burdensome new accounting and stock regulations. Instead, we should focus on repealing those monetary and fiscal policies that distort the market and allow the politically powerful to enrich themselves at the expense of the American taxpayer.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul499.html

The status quo summary of pushing it back to the states thus dividing the issue 50 ways and making the opponents to big industry 50 times smaller. Is my paradigm flawed???

Paul has long held that land owned by the government should be sold to private developers.[193][194][195] In addition to closing the Department of the Interior, his "Restore America" budget plan proposes selling off at least $40 billion worth of public lands such as national parks, and other federal assets, between 2013 and 2016.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

....isn't that land owned currently by the people via government...that will now go to who??? for what???

... how does turning the money over to the "market" and out of the hands of the government (Congress - i.e. the people...as long as the franchise to vote remains) fit in with these statements -

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.

- Thomas Jefferson

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

- Thomas Jefferson

I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.

- Remarks at dinner honoring Nobel Prize winners of the Western Hemisphere on 4/29/62 by JFK
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Read ... tions.aspx

Then with that enmity I will take the treasure of the earth, and with gold and silver I will buy up armies and navies, Popes and false priests who oppress, and tyrants who destroy, and reign with blood and horror on the earth!

- adversary

?????

To be Number One is to be beyond politics. It is his command of the ultimate weapon that places Satan—like God—beyond politics.

A piece appeared in the press noting that businessmen are insisting with increasing zeal on searching the minds and the hearts of their employees by means of polygraph tests. If any arm of government30 were to go so far, they would be met by horrified protests at this vicious attack on individual freedom, and rightly so. What is it that gives ordinary businessmen a power greater than that of the government? It is the capacity for giving or withholding money—nothing else in the world. This is the weapon that Satan chose from the beginning to place him and his plans beyond politics, and it has worked with deadly effect. There is only one thing in man's world that can offer any check on the unlimited power of money—and that is government. That is why money always accuses government of trying to destroy free agency, when the great enslaver has always been money itself.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publica ... ts/?id=162

Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws.

- Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws.

- Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild

The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.

- The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863

Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of a pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain slaves of the Bankers and pay for the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.

- Sir Josiah Stamp, President of the Bank of England in the 1920s, the second richest man in Britain

I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can and do create money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hand the destiny of the people.

- Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924

The banks do create money. They have been doing it for a long time, but they didn't realise it, and they did not admit it. Very few did. You will find it in all sorts of documents, financial textbooks, etc. But in the intervening years, and we must be perfectly frank about these things, there has been a development of thought, until today I doubt very much whether you would get many prominent bankers to attempt to deny that banks create it.

- H W White, Chairman of the Associated Banks of New Zealand, to the New Zealand Monetary Commission, 1955

The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.

- William Paterson, founder of the Bank of England in 1694, then a privately owned bank

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.

- Carroll Quigley

History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance.

- James Madison, Father of the Constitution

Paul's nickname "Dr. No" reflects both his medical degree and his assertion that he will "never vote for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution"....seek competing currency legislation "to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation"

Paul supports legalization of parallel currencies, such as gold-backed notes issued from private markets and digital gold currencies. He would like gold-backed notes (or other types of hard money) and digital gold currencies to compete on a level playing field with Federal Reserve Notes, allowing individuals a choice whether to use sound money or to continue using fiat money. Paul believes this would restrain monetary and price inflation, limit government spending, and eventually eliminate the ability of the Federal Reserve to "tax" Americans through monetary inflation (i.e., by reducing the purchasing power of the currency they are holding), which he sees as "the most insidious of all taxes".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ ... f_Ron_Paul

Are parallel competing currencies authorized by the Constitution? How does a "competing" currency strengthen and stabilize the currency its competing with? Competition? Doesn't somebody win? What if its the competing global currency that wins?

Is a "digital" gold currency a "hard" money?

Why would Ron Paul resort to the power of government on manipulation of gold prices in the market (somebody obviously won control) yet recommend turning over the money to private banking?

Why is that in perfect alignment with Lewis Lehrman's report to PNAC? Is it just a coincidence that CIA insider and member of the Bilderberg steering committee, Peter Thiel, is investing in Ron Paul all while being a co-founder of PayPal (the world's leading digital money company)? The other insiders, guys like Doug Wead?

Baker’s chapter titled “The Conversion” features startling revelations that challenge the well-known narratives of the Bush family’s religious history— including the way they crafted a strategy for winning over the religious right, and the creation of a conversion legend for George W. Bush. The purpose of the latter was not only to position him as a religious and political man of his time, but to neutralize the many issues from his past that threatened to undermine his future in politics (and possibly that of his father as well). The plan probably worked far better than anyone could have hoped. “I’m still amazed,” Doug Wead, a key architect of the Bush family’s evangelical outreach strategy told Baker, “how naïve so many journalists are who have covered politics all of their life.”

http://rogerhollander.wordpress.com/200 ... sh-family/

[awar_ecaptain of 100]

It appears to me that the longer a post is and the more links it contains, the less chance there is that anyone will bother to read it.

One key point that I do not see mentioned anywhere, is that under the constitutional money system, individuals were able to mine their own gold and silver and take it to a US mint and were then given the value in US coins, minus 10% for the minting fee.
That not only swelled the supply of gold and silver, it also made it a fair medium of exchange and sans fractional banking we had a stable value of currency.

[Tribunalcaptain of 1,000]

One key point that I do not see mentioned anywhere, is that under the constitutional money system, individuals were able to mine their own gold and silver and take it to a US mint and were then given the value in US coins, minus 10% for the minting fee.
That not only swelled the supply of gold and silver, it also made it a fair medium of exchange and sans fractional banking we had a stable value of currency.

Do you have anything to support this post?

[awar_ecaptain of 100]

True history if you can find it. I lived during the time of metals backed currency when fictionalized banking was recognized as evil.

[Tribunalcaptain of 1,000]

True history if you can find it. I lived during the time of metals backed currency when fictionalized banking was recognized as evil.

That's what I'm looking for. Are there any examples, or studies, that show how a nation became prosperous under the gold and silver standard? What you posted made sense but are there any examples?

[awar_ecaptain of 100]

Check the price of a new Ford in 1926 when gold was $26 an ounce.
Then check the price in 1941 when gold was restricted from US ownership
Look for the price in 1975 when the import tariffs were gone on foreign cars and Silver had been removed from currency backing.
Now that we have debt based currency what is the price of a new car?

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

It appears to me that the longer a post is and the more links it contains, the less chance there is that anyone will bother to read it.

One key point that I do not see mentioned anywhere, is that under the constitutional money system, individuals were able to mine their own gold and silver and take it to a US mint and were then given the value in US coins, minus 10% for the minting fee.
That not only swelled the supply of gold and silver, it also made it a fair medium of exchange and sans fractional banking we had a stable value of currency.

You can lead a horse to water....