"While it is gratifying to see so many formerly uninterested politicians, economists, talk show hosts, and pundits suddenly rally to attack the Fed, one can only wonder whether they truly understand that central banking is inherently incompatible with our Constitution and a free market economy."

Where are Congressmen like Howard Buffet of Nebraska or the blind U.S. Senator form Oklahoma who could explain the monetary situation to their congressional collegues?

Does anyone point the finger at the 17th Amendment? Does anyone hold the U.S. Congress responsible for altering the 1913 Federal Reserve Act to authorize the FED to monetize debt. Worse, why didn't the U.S. Congress chastize the FED when it violated the 1913 FRA by monetizing treasury debt in the 1920s?

After having left the FED without oversight, the FED has now ruined the national currency by failing to pay attention to a simple compound interest function. How can the politicians failing to conduct oversight, or FED bankers ignoring high school mathematics, justify that people all over the world should lose most everything to save these people from monumental embarrassment. It is unbelievable.

On the other hand, I would be careful to short the U.S. Dollar just yet.

Well said!

"In the 35 years I have been studying, speaking, and writing about monetary policy I have never before seen Congress or the financial press pay much attention to the Fed"

That is due in no small part to your efforts, Dr. Paul.God bless you, and keep it up!

Hi, The one thing that seems to be missing is, if pp don't spend what they don't have.....Now maybe get that word out.

If the U.S. Treasury can issue a bound, they can issue a dollar. End the Fed.

If the Fed and our currency are unconstitutional, they are not to be tolerated. Period! We are a Free People, under the rule of law, not man or whim. Our Constitution in not to be changed by ignoring it; change is to made following one of the prescriptions provided in Article V of the Constitution. The Constitution cannot defend itself, and it is not a menu. It will not be defended unless the People, the only sure reliance for the defense of Liberty, defend it.

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, andfix the Standard of Weights and Measures;" Art. I, Sect. 8.
Where does this state that the central government has the right to OWN the gold? If the people insist upon strict constitutionality, THEY would be the owners, and users, of this tool – this medium of exchange – not any government, central or state.

@Bruce:

Posted by Bruce on 11/17/2010 2:58:37 PM
"I just came across this article on the money control of America and the world, and I thought I'd pass it on to the Bell readers. I have friends who can and do corroborate some of the statements."

Wow Bruce! First your first posting, which was unusually cogent. And then the link to Eustace Mullins who I never heard of. Well I've heard of him now! Many, many thanks for giving me someone new to learn about. When people talk as off-handedly and with great confidence as he does, they are either incredibly egotistical blowhards or else they are great men. I count him among the latter. Again thanks, Bruce.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"First your first posting, which was unusually cogent."

This is not true from our point of view. Bruce is often cogent, just a little allusive unfortunately. You have to kinda pin him down ...

Mullin is no blowhard in our opinion. His only flaw is his fixation on Jewishness - which is a matter of expression, unfortunately ...

@ Edward Parise:

"Pray tell, why is this man not President? Could it be he sees things too clearly?". Surely you jest Mr. Parise! (Yours doesn't seem to be a rhetorical question...) There is NO WAY that the ruling class is going to allow someone like Dr. Paul into the Oval Office!! Edgads! he'd ruin the whole game forsooth.

My apologies, It was the 25 anniversary dinner of JBS, circa 1983, and not the 50th. Dan was long deceased 25 years later.

@ DB "Some might say." Perhaps, but in my opinion, the Bell has shed considerable light upon the the methods and the motives of the Power elite. The fact that the Bell has not censored my posts is quite convincing to me regarding DB intent.

JBS focuses on the details, while deliberately quashing inquiry into the heart of the matter.

The reins of leadership has changed, as have the policies somewhat. But, I don't believe it has substantially. At the 50th anniversary dinner of JBS, I approached Dan Smoot, a member of the counsel, suggesting to him that the money system was at the heart of America's problems, and that it was the life blood of communism worldwide. Dan became immediately livid. Livid! I could not believe my eyes that such a reaction would accompany an honest inquiry and suggestion. That told me a lot, and my membership days were numbered.

My experience first hand from earlier years particularly leaves Esra Mullins assertions with a ring of credibility. However, there are a lot of fine people who are members of JBS.

One of the most effective programs of the John Birch Society was its youth camps. Over the years, dedicated people expanded the curriculum into areas which were not officially sanctioned. Two years ago JBS pulled support for the program. Volunteers carried it on privately, much to the dismay of JBS directors, who put pressure to abandon the project on JBS members working with their own money on their own time to continue the work. Today this camp is a beacon of truth and understanding, and one of the finest summer camps anywhere.

To purview and perhaps support this renegade summer youth and family camp, here is the web address: Click to view link Perhaps it should now be called the Daily Bell Camp.

Referring back to the article I posted a link to, I believe Robert Welch's brother was named James, though, and not John.

Reply from The Daily Bell

We were disappointed when we discovered the antecedents of JBS, or at least as they have been alleged. But then we could say the same of Buckley, et. al. In fact we are constantly surprised. And not in a good way.

Dr. Paul is correct...fiat currency is an evil that must be destroyed!

M

I just came across this article on the money control of America and the world, and I thought I'd pass it on to the Bell readers. I have friends who can and do corroborate some of the statements.

Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

Some might say "the Bell in a nutshell," eh? 'Course they could be wrong.

Possession is nine-tenths the law. The other tenth is the right of possession. When the central government has the money in possession, that is, the substance of money, it holds 9/10 the law. If the people hold the other tenth in terms of bonds drawn upon the substance, they have a certain amount of control, but without the power of government to compel performance on the bonds, they don't have anything.

If a foreign corporation holds the bonds, and the people merely hold the evidence of their own indebtedness in terms of federal reserve notes, then the people are reduced to slavery, the government is the prison keeper, and the foreign bond holders are the masters. If a foreign jurisdiction (or an organized crime syndicate) controls the power of government the people have worse than nothing. They have assured indebtedness, and a police state to enforce payment on the debt.

A bank is the repository of the sovereign. Every king has his court en banc. A bank/banc is a court.

There will be no free society until each man holds his own money and maintains his own court. Allowing money to be consolidated in one place held by a fiction of law is to surrender sovereignty.

To surrender money power to another is to surrender every power! Sovereignty cannot be maintained if any one of the sovereign powers are surrendered: among them are the power to maintain and defend life; to contract or not to contract; to procreate, recreate, discriminate, and incriminate; to own property in allodium, and specie money in hand.

Whenever one surrenders his power to contract to an entity which enforces legal tender dictates (a declaration of what he must accept upon someone else's offer to pay or discharge a debt) he is no longer free.

The issues we are addressing are not a matter of what works or doesn't work; all forms of money work. The question is, "For whose benefit does the money work?" The answer is always, for the benefit of the sovereign, the one who exercises the power of money. Then, is not the solution to our money problems found in clearing up the matter of sovereignty?

We are all told certain things about government that are not necessarily true. We are told things about court and judges that are not necessarily true. Often private courts are offered as if they were public courts. Process is served with intent for people to rely upon the form in good faith and thus surrender valuable legal rights to their legal detriment. This is the definition of fraud. See the following as an illustration:

Judges SLUSH Funds Illegal ? part 1

Click to view link


Judges SLUSH Funds Illegal ? part 2

Click to view link


See: Click to view link

For proposed solutions, see: Click to view link

yes-why is this man not president? lets pray that with the current worldwide communication system the citizenry are awakening and are yet civilized enough to "throw the bums out" without mob violence.

Mr. Paul " thanks for the article!

Do you realize DB paints you in a new TPTB duality with you as the "good Paul" and your son as the "bad Paul"? So you appear to be the good guy who can further the rights of liberty seekers, when you have actually been put in place to take over the right-wing of the two-party duality that our Founders so ingeniously created to keep us trapped in servantude.

(Obama/Rove/Bush having accidentally fused the parties in many American's views, the DB might suggest a new duality is required by TPTB) I'm paraphrasing here, and I don't agree.

I'm just going to cross my fingers and hope that they haven't co-opted you " haha, I am just kidding.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"Do you realize DB paints you ..."

More disinformation. We merely respond to what Rand Paul has placed on the record. He is far more of an interventionist than his father. Your comment is disingenous.

Question: Isn't there far too much money around globally to switch back to a gold standard ? Given the limited amount of gold, wouldn't this translate into something like 100,000 USD per ounce of gold ?

Reply from The Daily Bell

Who says there needs to be a formal transition? Maybe there is chaos, induced or not, and people simply begin to use metals again. it has happened before.

PROBLEM: IF WE GO ON A GOLD STANDARD WILL THE GOVERNMENT TAKE ALL THE GOLD FROM ITS CITIZENS AGAIN?

Reply from The Daily Bell

Depends on whether the "standard" is market-driven or not. And please don't shout.

Yes, he sees things clearly! Gold and silver and metal became money because it is difficult to duplicate, unlike paper. Is it not very clear and simple that govts with paper money are nothing but a corrupt gang?

As per usual, Dr. Paul zeros in on the problem and exposes the convoluted stupid management of the country's finances with the resultant financial calamity we now enjoy. Pray tell, why is this man not President? Could it be he sees things too clearly?