G. Edward Griffin on Inflation, Politics and the Power Elite
The Daily Bell is pleased to publish an exclusive interview with G. Edward Griffin (left).
Introduction: G Edward Griffin is a film producer, author and political lecturer. He is the founder of Freedom Force International, a libertarian-oriented activist network focused on advancing individual freedom. First released in 1994, Mr. Griffin's best-selling financial book, The Creature from Jekyll Island, is a no-holds-barred look into the inner workings of the Federal Reserve banking system, or cartel if you will. Mr. Griffin's literary contributions are especially noteworthy given the validity of his vision and the exciting and troublesome nature of the times in which we live.
Daily Bell: Thanks for sitting down with us again. It's been a while. We'll ask some follow-ups to previous questions. Where do we stand with the US stimulus? Will we see QE3? Will it work any better than the last ones?
G. Edward Griffin: Well, it's always a little dangerous to make predictions about what's going to happen, but I think in this case the risk factor is pretty low, because that's all these fellows know how to do ... what is called QE1, QE2. Quantitative easing is merely a more sophisticated phrase for creating money out of nothing and pumping it into the economic sectors, wherever they have friends, wherever they have places they need to re-enforce, to their own economic benefit.
They always make it sound like it is for the purpose of improving the economy, but make no mistake about it, we are dealing with a pretty corrupt system and there are a lot of people in that system that need to be taken care of. The larger banks, the larger financial institutions are always at the top of the list. If you follow the money, you will find that the lion's share of it always goes to the banks. And if it doesn't go to directly to banks, the next share goes directly to those corporations and institutions that owe money to the banks and are having trouble making their payments.
So, by sending money to these corporations and institutions, like General Motors for example, then they are always able to continue sending money to the banks. So, it always ends up at the banks. And that should be no surprise because the engine for all this is the Federal Reserve System, and if people don't know it by now, they should know very quickly that the Federal Reserve System is a banking cartel. It's no different than a banana cartel or oil cartel, shipping cartel, and it happens to be a banking cartel and like all cartels the purpose of its existence is not to help the public, not to benefit the economy, not to help America, it's to benefit the members of the cartel, period.
That's what's going on in the process. Its all they know how to do; that's what they are created to do as long as they are able to exist and given the power, that is what they will continue to do. And the second part of the question is, will it work any better than it did previously, the answer is that it worked very well but the problem is most people thought it was supposed to help the economy but that was never it's purpose, it was to help the banks.
Remember this is a cartel and so the purpose of all this easing and stimulus is to help the banks and the political structures support the banks; that was its purpose. It was a very great success. So, it will work just as well next time around, aiding those hidden agendas. In terms of the economy and the people, it was never designed to help them.
Daily Bell: Are we seeing significant price inflation now?
G. Edward Griffin: We're not seeing it at the retail level yet, although I guess it's how you define the word significant. If your food bill goes up 5% and you are barely able to make ends meet, that is significant price inflation. However, if you're living a nice comfortable life, and you have a little margin, 5% is not significant.
I have to say, that I don't believe for a minute the official figures that come out of Washington that describe our inflationary trends. They are talking about 3, 4 or 5% kind of thing; I don't know many that really believe that. All you have to do is go to the store and look at food prices, go to the gas pump and take a look at gas prices, go to the colleges and take a look at education prices and so forth. With the exception of housing and the stock market, the two big bubbles that had to collapse, all of those prices are much higher than what the government is saying, they are going up at a rate higher than that.
I believe that the true rate would be about 18-21%, if we had any way to really measure it. Now that is significant by any person's measurement and I think we've just begun to see the trend develop. I think we are at the beginning of what will become an almost vertical climb, parabolic in nature. We are at the base of a parabola right now and as you know they get steep pretty fast. I think that within the next 18 months we are going to see triple digit inflation. We have seen it in other countries and we are seeing it at work here.
Daily Bell: You've predicted hyperinflation? Is it closer now?
G. Edward Griffin: Oh, yes, in fact it's already here. But there again we need to define words like hyperinflation. I guess most people define hyperinflation as 2 digit and/or 3 digit inflation, but hyper simply means very, very, very high and different people have different definitions of what that would be. In the eyes of the people who are already struggling to survive, we are already there.
Daily Bell: Queen Elizabeth II is worried about her empire breaking up. Should she be? Is the Internet having anything to do with this?
G. Edward Griffin: I am going to pause on that one. They are very alert to what's happening and border-line nervous to see how it's going to play out. They have been beefing up their security forces, their homeland security forces, their police forces; trained their military forces to be capable of combat on their own native soils. They've built internment camps, they have developed weapons for crowd control and they have been working on this for decades. So, what's happening is that we are coming closer to that point.
Daily Bell: We've started to use the term Internet Reformation – as the Gutenberg Press was partially responsible for the Renaissance, Reformation, etc. Too pat? Any truth to the nomenclature in your opinion?
G. Edward Griffin: I think that's a very good nomenclature for it, I think that's exactly what's happening and that's one of the reasons that the elites, (and that is your word) are nervous about the Internet and are working very diligently at putting in mechanisms that are controlling and censuring the internet.
They are making good progress on that by the way. All they have to do is convince the American people is to say it's a good idea, supposedly because it will help fight terrorism or pornography or crime or drugs or something. They are always being sold some fear-based reason that control over the Internet is good for the people and so far, unfortunately, the average person has bought into that.
They are saying, oh, yeah, I'm so glad they are putting that control on the Internet and now another one and that's good, because now we're more secure, all of this propaganda is conditioning people to accept control of the Internet. So in answer to your question, I think that is has been a great revolutionary step forward but it's also under attack and we need to be very energetic in defending it or we are going to lose it within the next generation for certain.
Daily Bell: Are events spinning out of control? We think that's what happened with the Gutenberg Press. The elites thought they could control the new enlightenment but in the end they couldn't, at least not for generations.
G. Edward Griffin: I would like to believe that but I think the show is far from over and the answer is far from determined. I am not so certain it is as cut and dried as that and leads to such a happy ending as you have just described. I think the elites are working very hard to capture control of it. If they were just sitting idly by, and if they didn't have the power of governments behind them, then I think we'd have cause to rejoice. However, they are not just sitting idly by. They are passing laws at an international level all the time, so I am not so sure as to say they have lost control of it. I think they are working hard and we have to work equally hard or we will lose control of it.
Daily Bell: Are you more or less optimistic about efforts to control the Internet. Will the elites succeed in their evermore-frantic efforts? You mentioned the United Nations last time.
G. Edward Griffin: I think the answer to that is based on how much resistance they meet. Right now, with the current level of resistance, I think they will succeed in controlling it. But the encouraging thing is that the level of resistance seems to be increasing, so if we can sustain that and actually capture control of some of the power centers that are passing these laws, if we can get new people into office and start to have some of the power to do things and start to have the power in our own hands, then I think we could turn this around.
But right now all the power to pass laws, the power to send out the police and the army to enforce those laws, all of that power rests in the hands of the people who want to control the Internet. So unless that situation changes, they are going to succeed.
Daily Bell: We've noticed the United Nations has gotten suddenly far more militaristic and unafraid to try to impose "hard power." What are your thoughts on that?
G. Edward Griffin: My first book was about the United Nations – The Fearful Master ... A second look at the United Nations. The first portion of the book is devoted to the United Nations, so called, peacekeeping effort in Katanga, in the Congo. You talk about a militaristic, aggressive force – there was an attack against an innocent, peaceful population, which put the region under the control of totalitarians, right off the bat. That was the start of the UN's peacekeeping efforts, back in 1960 thereabouts, and my book was published in 1964.
So the United Nations started off with its very first peacekeeping operation as a totally aggressive and militaristic one. The United Nations was designed to be, from the very beginning, what is becoming very obvious and visible now – for those who wish to see. That is an organization to implement and provide world government, based on the model of collectivism, which means all the power will be concentrated at the top with individuals serving at the bottom, serving the state if you will. The UN is designed to control from the top down.
Daily Bell: Does fiat money itself continue to break down? Is the entire worldwide central banking economy being challenged?
G. Edward Griffin: I think that's wishful thinking. The international, financial, fraternity, I guess I will call it that ... industry, is in control; they're not being challenged. They control the governments. I hope people get that in their brains. The governments are parading around saying, we've got to control the banks, we've got to do this to control banks, or help the banks, but look behind the scenes and you'll find that it's the banks that are controlling the governments.
The international bankers have decided it's time for an international currency. So, all of the nations are starting to clamor for a new IMF managed currency. In this part of the world, it would be called the Amero after the North American union, consisting of Mexico, Canada and the US. Even that would only be a transition stage to an international currency. That's what the banks want – the bankers have always wanted that.
This goes all the way back to Bretton Woods. There they talked about the advantages of an international currency, even then, but felt it was not possible and too early to implement it. They knew they would have to wait a little longer and allow world events to be played out. Well, they have played out and now they are beginning to clamor for a UN managed currency, but the same financial forces will ultimatey control it from behind the scenes. They are the power pushing for it and they are the power that will control it once it is created. So when somebody says, hey look the banks are loosing control, they better go back and look at who is controlling the governments.
Daily Bell: We just wanted to acknowledge that you virtually led the charge when it came to modern-day challenges to the current, horrible central banking system. Do you see the elites as losing moral authority regarding such memes? Do more people disbelieve?
G. Edward Griffin: Again, I am going to pause because that's a tough one. The elite have never had moral authority in my view. But, unfortunately, the average person, in fact the majority of the population, doesn't know what is going on. All they do is believe what they read in their newspapers or what they see on television, or what they hear from the lips of their politicians ... So, yes, they have had moral authority in the minds of the masses.
They are losing that to some extent because more and more people are realizing that the banks are major players in this rotten system. Prior to a few years ago, people never thought about banks as being major players in anything except clearing your checking account or your savings account. But now more and more people – likely by the millions – are waking up to the fact that banks and bankers are major, political powers.
With this happening, I think they are losing moral authority because banks are gaining incredible wealth while the average person is losing what little he had. So I am glad you mentioned the issue of moral authority, I really hadn't thought too much about that, but I think you are right. If there is any place on this spectrum where the elites and the financial institutions are losing, it's probably in that psychological area of moral authority and being on the high ground.
Daily Bell: Max Keiser estimated there are some 600 rebellions and regime changes going on in the world. These can't all be CIA sponsored can they? Or perhaps they are the result of food insecurity. Do the elites intend to plunge the world into utter chaos? Why?
G. Edward Griffin: Well, I guess this is my day to say whatever just comes to my mind. (Laughing.) Yes, all 600 rebellions and regime changes could be the result of the CIA. I don't think people realize how powerful and all invasive the CIA is in this world.
You know, the CIA is actively involved in all of those countries and are very influential in picking opposition candidates. Most of the leaders of the third world countries are there because the CIA supported them at one time, and those that go into office in that way can also be deposed that way. You don't have to dig too deep to know that. They are involved in regime changes all over the world.
Daily Bell: You make an issue of being optimistic or pessimistic in your answers. But what is your overall sentiment?
G. Edward Griffin: I want to emphasize that I am probably the most optimistic person you will ever meet regarding the future of freedom. But I have a longer view of history than most and because I take a long view, it may seem as if I am pessimistic in the short term because real change takes time. Many people don't look much further into the future, than the next election.
The forces that must be overcome have taken many years to grow to the present state of strength that they have. In the United States for example, the forces of collectivism have been growing and coalescing for decades. It took a hundred years, in fact, to capture the influence of the universities, the government, the media, the major corporations, the think tanks, etc. It took a long time.
It also resulted in conditioning the minds of the American people to accept certain presets – to accept the principles of collectivism. Americans have bought into collectivism. They think social security is a good thing. They think that governments should provide health care benefits; they think that government should provide everything as a matter of fact. They've been brainwashed into believing that.
In fact, it took a hundred years to bring that about. And you can't reverse that by November. You CAN reverse it if you take a long view of history. That's why we created an organization called Freedom Force International, because we have a longer view of history than next November. We have a view that encompasses a generation, possibly two generations and we know if we lay down the corner stones now, for certain principles and strategies, that there is no stopping them, even if the world turned to another "dark age" in the meantime.
We are laying the seeds for something that will grow and overcome the forces of tyranny in the next generation or two. And even though I may not live to see that, it's a very comforting and optimistic thought that I am doing something that in the long run will bring the world back to the principles of freedom once again.
Daily Bell: What about Ron Paul and his freedom message?
G. Edward Griffin: I think Ron Paul is doing an excellent job given the constraints under which he must operate. Ron is not able to say anything and everything that comes to his mind, like I am here, and possibly say the things that people don't want to hear ... but fortunately I am not running for office.
Ron, poor chap, he has to worry about not saying too much for fear he may go beyond the understanding or educational level of the people he wants to vote for him. So, that's a terrible constraint to live under. He is doing the most amazing job I have ever seen and I can't imagine anyone doing any better under that constraint.
Daily Bell: We discussed the way the conservative movement is desperate to co-opt the libertarian message and that it has launched a number of artificial candidates to do so – including notably Sarah Palin. What do you think?
G. Edward Griffin: It's becoming more and more obvious. I guess if people don't fall for it any more, then I guess you could say it's failing. With each turn of the wheel, with each election, people should learn that they fell for the same old trick, one more time. Every election people fall for the same trick. And that trick is, they believe the campaign speeches of the candidates. They don't realize that the candidates, for the most part, spend a lot of time and money either conducting polls or studying polls very carefully. They do it to find out what people want to hear. And then they hire campaign managers and speechwriters to enable them to deliver to the population what they want to hear.
In many cases, politicians are just little recording devices. They have no feelings for what they are saying, they have no connections, they have only one goal and that is to get elected. And it is hard to find a person who you can say does not fit into that category. The only way that you can tell if a candidate is a real genuine person is by looking at their career. See what they have done in the past. Voters, unfortunately, are not too good at that. They just seem to want to hear what the candidate says, does he or she sound sincere and so on. The candidates are basically performers, like actors. But when you take what you call, the conservative movement, and that's a good word, because that's exactly what they call themselves, many of these people have been in office for a long time and all you have to do is look at their voting record and you can see what they believe, or at least what they vote for. And then when they come along and say they are going to restore the constitution and restore this country to constitutional principals and you see their voting records, you find out that 99% of the time when they voted, they violated the constitution. That ought to be a clue of what they are really all about.
So as each election goes by, and this trick is played on the voters again and again and again, I think there are a few more people that wake up to that trick. Eventually, and I don't know how long it will take, I think more people will wake up. Let's hope we have enough time.
Daily Bell: We think Ron Paul has a reasonable chance to become president. Optimistic? Loony?
G. Edward Griffin: As one man, he is kind of limited. He could say all the truths in the world and nobody would ever hear him because the mainstream media would block him. They would never alow him to make those statements – or the people to hear them. If they did, his statements would be twisted and accompanied by commentary, which would make him seem like he was some kind of ogre.
I don't think Ron Paul, as one man, can overcome that. However, an army of supporters, millions of supporters, can. So then you come to the next question, well what if he did get elected? Does anybody really think that one man in the White House even with his high principles can change anything? When he is surrounded by a congress, senate, media and educational system that are all working against him, including the military, it can't be done. We are back to one of my favorite themes, which is that in order to bring about real positive change in America, our movement has to be broader than just winning the election in November. We could put a man in the White House in November but lose everything.
Daily Bell: Your sentiments remind us of something former presidential candidate and a departed friend of ours, Harry Browne, once said when asked what would be the first thing he would do should he be elected president. His reply – "I'd quit." I guess that summarized how he felt about the constraints. Anyway, back to Ron Paul … Dr. paul is anti-war, overseas anyway. We think the Pentagon is beginning to lose badly in Afghanistan. Your thoughts?
G. Edward Griffin: I think he is anti-aggressive-war. Is the Pentagon loosing badly in Afghanistan? What is the military presence in Afghanistan? Is it really to root out all the insurgents or is it to encourage the insurgents and keep them active, so we have an excuse to be there? I think the Pentagon is winning or achieving its goal in Middle East. Its goal is to be there and to have a reason to be there forever.
Daily Bell: We think Osama bin Laden died ten years ago and that the SEALS "tapping" of bin Laden was phony. Your thoughts?
G. Edward Griffin: I agree.
Daily Bell: How about 9/11. We've asked this before. Will the American establishment media ever get to the bottom of 9/11? Are you more hopeful? Last time you were not.
G. Edward Griffin: Well, I don't think the major media will ever get to the bottom of it because they are not motivated to. They are controlled by the investment and political powers-that-be that don't want the media to get to the bottom of 9/11. Like we were saying, it has to be a grass roots movement. Millions of people are acting in addition – or around major media – and I see that movement growing all the time.
I haven't seen figures lately, but I remember maybe 6 or 7 months ago, that about 48% of the people thought that the official government story of 9/11 was not true. They didn't know what it was but they had a strong feeling it was not true, that there was something being covered up. Well that progressed quite rapidly. A few years prior to that only 5% of the people believed that was true. Now, I don't know what it would be, but I bet it's closer to 60%.
That is not because of the major media. That is simply because people like us have been out there talking about this and presenting evidence. We are circulating CD's and independent productions that bypass the major media. I think that is where our hope lies.
Daily Bell: Let's sum up. You indicated in the last interview that you were more optimistic in the longer term. Ideas about freedom cannot be stopped, you said. Once people understand the truth, they are not ever going to easily forget it. Are you still of this opinion?
G. Edward Griffin: Times two.
Daily Bell: Is the US and the world possibly headed for a global depression? Are we in one already?
G. Edward Griffin: I would say we are in a far developed recession, but that's only my own feeling and my own words. A depression to me implies, people starving, begging and generally walking around aimlessly looking for a place to sleep. I know we have this in the United States, but it's still a relatively small percentage of the people as a whole. But it's going to keep affecting more and more people and I fear that we are going to see a global depression develop in time.
Daily Bell: What would you advise people to do from an investment and survival standpoint?
G. Edward Griffin: There is no long term survival under conditions of absolute tyranny; there are short term solutions. We are thinking in terms of months or possibly a year. There are things you can do, like getting yourself out of debt, so there is no legal reason for anyone to take your home. If you have any reserves or surplus savings, put it into tangible assets of some kind.
I would say another thing would be to network with people of like minds, because if things get bad, it would help to have like-mined friends. Discuss what to do and know what to do, there will be a lot of desperate people and desperate people tend to get violent. There is nothing sophisticated about any of these answers but I want to come back to a starting point, which is that in the long term there is no survival under tyranny. So people need to be serious about long-term survival. They better get serious too about changing the system and re-capturing control and eliminating the tyranny. That is the reason we formed Freedom Force International.
Daily Bell: Any new projects you want to tell us about?
G. Edward Griffin: I have been working on a book that is taking forever. It covers some of the things we have been talking about; the tentative title is The Future is Calling. It has to do with this long-term view of history and what we can do about it now and how to prepare for it. Lay the foundations. It has a lot of past history in it to. I don't know when I'll have it done. I thought I would have had it done 2 years ago but I am only 60 or 70% through it. It's an important project to me.
The other thing is, accidently, I touched a very high voltage wire called Chemtrails. About a year ago, some fellows came over here that were doing research and preparing a documentary on Chemtrails. I always had an interest in it and had a firm conviction that what we see in the sky is Chemtrails, not just contrails.
So, I said yes, and I raised money and produced a documentary called, "What in the world are they spraying?" and that put me in the crosshairs of all of the establishment forces that insist that there are no Chemtrails, that it is just conspiracy theory. So we are thinking about a follow up film right now.
Daily Bell: Any closing thoughts? Any resource s you want to mention?
G. Edward Griffin: My only closing thought is that I hope people don't become discouraged about what I have said. I believe my role is to say it like it is, or the way I think it is, to the best of my ability. I am not here to pump sunshine into people. I would rather know what the truth is and that makes me a lot happier than having a false sense of security. I believe we have a great chance to make change as long as we hold that long view of history and I urge everyone to take advantage of this information. Don't be depressed get invigorated with this information.
Daily Bell: Thanks again, Ed. We're sure our viewers are as appreciative of your insights as we are.
Ed Griffin has fought for freedom throughout his life and his trenchant criticisms of the increasingly authoritarian nature of the world today are more pertinent than ever. When Ed Griffin published his ground-breaking book The Creature From Jekyll Island, most people had never even heard of the Federal Reserve, much less understood its function. Today, the Internet is filled with questions about a globalist banking facility that operates privately under the color of Congressional law with a mandate to print as much money from nothing as necessary to support the questionable activities of the power elite.
Central banks fix the price of money. It's that simple. Ed Griffin turns out to have been correct. There is no defense for the function they perform. Every price-fix is a marketplace distortion. Every marketplace distortion removes wealth from its rightful owner and places it in less responsible hands. Repeat over enough time and you end up with recessions, depressions and ultimately worldwide economics crises such as the one occurring now.
Better to return to marketplace money – or at least allow such money to circulate within a competitive environment of numerous monetary systems. We are on record as preferring gold and silver, which circulate in a metals-based money economy within parameters of supply and demand.
Too much gold and silver circulate and the value of money begins to decline. As little and the value rises. As the value rises, mines open back up and hoarders dishoard. It is a marketplace phenomenon that allows the market itself to govern the money supply.
In our current central banking based system, there is no governor on how much money central banks can print. The Federal Reserve is the worst offender when it comes to money printing because it can print the most with the least amount of consequences. This is because the US operates the world's currency reserve system.
The currency reserve system is actually called the "dollar reserve system." The system is propped up by Saudi Arabian sheiks that have been instructed that they must only exchange their oil for dollars. This makes the dollar the most important currency on the planet and allows the Fed to print virtually as much currency as the US needs because other countries must hold dollars to buy oil.
Much of the money that the US prints is recycled into weapons systems and bases around the world. This military predominance intimidates other countries and guarantees that the dollar remains the currency of choice for oil purchases. Thus is it that the world's economic system is held hostage to American military might. The world, essentially, is paying for the privilege of being held hostage this way.
Ironically, over the past decade, the Fed in particular has so abused its money printing power (in support of America's questionable wars) that other countries are trying to find a substitute for the dollar. The Internet in particular has contributed to a better understanding of how the world's monetary system really works. As this understanding continues to expand, worldwide, there are numerous alternatives being discussed to the dollar reserve system.
Many of the discussions involving a new currency trend toward international currency baskets. There is the suspicion therefore that the Western elites that control the dollar reserve currency have purposefully debased the currency in order to implement a global monetary system. Time will tell whether this suspicion is true or not.
What is certainly true is that central banking and especially the activities of the Federal Reserve are under significant attack on the Internet and even politically by certain segments of political process in America and abroad. This process, abetted by the Internet and the current financial crisis, began nearly 30 years ago with the groundbreaking publication of Ed Griffin's critique of the Fed, "The Creature From Jekyll Island." History will record the growing impact of this book. It already does.
Posted by John Danforth on 06/20/11 11:36 AM
"I also agree with Coulter about Ron Paul's support for Social Security and Medicare. Rep Paul constantly wailes against all kinds of government involvement in the personal and economic life of Americans. He endlessly decries the existence of the FED and fiat money. However, the single reason that we have Social Security in the first place is because of fiat money created by the U.S. Government and the FED central bank. There are some inconsistencies in Rep. Paul's position, are there not...???
I share Coulter's confusion about Ron Paul's advocacy of banning government involvement, while on the other hand promoting the continued existence of Social Security and Medicare. He wants no fiat money, no FED, but Social Security and Medicare...??? If libertarians use Ron Paul as their poster boy, they better square these inconsistencies in his views. (Don't even get me started on Ron Paul's position about "land ownership")"
The post of mine that disappeared that day essentially took you to task for lending credence to and agreeing with the idiotic Ann Coulter's criticism, evidently without taking the trouble to read his actual position on the issue. This despite the man being one of the most prolific writers in congress, always consistent.
"I propose an alternative ...."
Then you wrote,
"I don't think that I proposed anything."
The reason for my comment was to point out that Ron Paul has proposed an opt-out program and a phase-out, based on the premise that the current recipients have had their income taken from them for years, which savings could have gone into a private account for retirement, and it would be wrong to simply deny them at least what they put in. Your characterization of his position on this issue is badly misinformed. While I don't expect Coulter to be able to comprehend anything based on a concept or principle, I was surprised to see you jump on her bandwagon. It should not be necessary to explain to you that Ron Paul has worked out and proposed a transition away from statist control and how that transition could work. The information has been published, it is freely available. If you don't know better, you ought to. You constructed a false position and attributed it to Ron Paul, then demolished it. It was a straw man of your own making.
Usually, those who do this claim "Ron Paul wants to kill grandma." Interesting that you claim the polar opposite, "Ron Paul supports Social Security and Medicare." Haven't you read ANYTHING he wrote himself?
Posted by John Danforth on 06/20/11 11:14 AM
Not to be harsh or anything, but consider this:
Say you fly from point A to point B and back once per hour on a scheduled milk run. Say there is a crosswind of 20 miles per hour. Your movement through the air will leave a pattern of parallel trails, evenly spaced. Now take a bunch of randomly placed airports with varying service to each. The crisscross pattern is easily obtained without dozens of aircraft flying in precise parallel formation. (Got evidence of that happening on a regular basis?)
The winds aloft, and the fact that most contrails are relatively long-lasting ice crystals, make dispersion at flight level altitudes very imprecise for anything that is intended to reach a target on the ground.
Affecting weather patterns, soil conditions ... in secret ... don't know how to address it except to say, if you make the assertion, the burden of proof is on you.
Posted by NWO_FOE on 06/20/11 11:02 AM
From my copy of "The Creature from Jekyll Island":
A writer who steals from the work of another is called a plagiarist. One who takes from the works of many is called a researcher. That is a roundabout way of saying I am deeply indebted to the efforts of so many who have previously grappled with this topic. It is impossible to acknowledge them except in footnote and bibliography. Without the cumulative product of their efforts, it would have taken a lifetime to pull together the material you are about to read...
Mullins appears by name in the bibliography, in the index, and is quoted and footnoted in the text of the book.
Griffin's book covers a lot of the same ground but is definitely not a copy of Mullins' book. I think it is a better book for people who are unfamiliar with the banking system, or money in general for that matter.
Posted by John Danforth on 06/20/11 11:01 AM
Evidence of these chemicals actually put on airplanes, evidence of the dispersing technology, evidence of the amount dispersed, evidence that the amount dispersed corresponds with the concentration discovered on the ground. Evidence of money paid to chemical firms, invoices, shippers. Delivery means to the planes. Evidence of some means of payment to the airlines for the cost of lofting such huge weight to altitude. Etc.
Posted by clark on 06/20/11 10:58 AM
Then again, who is to say People are not the intended target?
Under the theme, "never let a good crisis go to waste" and along the lines of a military desire/goal of vaccinating troops in the field using aerial delivery, it is possible a segment of chemtrails is vaccination of a population.
They already have the authority to vaccinate People against their will, what's to stop them from doing so? They may even be mandated to do so, a.k.a. they think they are doing something good,... that applies to any reason for applying chemtrails.
The biggest bit of evidence to me is lack of evidence.
For weeks at a time hundreds of jet aircraft leave perfectly evenly spaced lines in the sky, what some People call persistent contrails, then a cloud free Monday rolls around (with a clear national weather map) and there are zero aircraft.
If these persistent contrails are due to normal commercial aircraft, why would there be zero air traffic on a Monday?
Business spontaneously stops and no one else travels?
I've seen this occur several times, the most blatant is the day after a holiday, sometimes there are zero aircraft for several days only to be followed by weeks of dozens of aircraft each day.
The inconsistency makes zero sense - If - chemtrails are nothing more than harmless persistent contrails from commercial aircraft.
It seems to be impossible to produce a "smoking gun" or to convince People. The only option as I see it is to cut off the money which pays for it by ending The Fed and creating transparency in government.
Posted by speedygonzales on 06/20/11 10:04 AM
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month."
- CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories.
Posted by clark on 06/20/11 09:27 AM
Leonardo Pisano said,
"Click to view link seems to me, as an engineer, that the dispersion on 10 km or so will be ineffective as a means to deliver it to people. Moreover, the targets cannot be very precise either..."
Who said it was meant to be delivered to People?
Who said the purpose was singular?
It seems to be more about affecting weather patterns, and perhaps changing soil conditions.
Within the comments section are links to patents for dispersal mechanisms, descriptions of purpose, company profit and operational statements, etc... etc... etc...
Dozens upon dozens of jet aircraft flying in precise parallel formation cover the target completely, often it is exactly like a fleet of tractors spraying a corn field simultaneously.
Posted by speedygonzales on 06/20/11 09:22 AM
"...controlling and censuring the internet."
Is there a free press in the U.S.? Do we have FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, or, as Wilson Bryan Key has argued, do we need FREEDOM FROM THE PRESS, which is biased, manipulative, controlling and controlled by the government and business interests?
What is the nature of "all the news that fits"? U.S. newspapers are comprised of approximately 70 % advertising and 30 % editorial content. Thus, about 70% of any U.S. newspaper consists of strictly commercial propaganda, advertising.
The remaining 30 % of news is imbued with "highly specific motives". In other words, the news is not neutrally selected, but originates from government spokespersons, government agencies, public relations firms, industry, corporate and commercial organizations, and publishers. Moreover, government and business often engage in what is known as planting within media, that is, infiltrating the media with its own personnel.
The term propaganda is derived from the Latin propagare, to propagate, to reproduce, to spread, with the meaning, to transmit, to spread from person to person. Propaganda is short for Congregatio de propaganda fide (Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith), a committee of Roman Catholic cardinals established by Pope Gregory XV in l622 organized as a missionary group which proselytized for conversion to Roman Catholicism.
A modern definition is the systematic, widespread dissemination or promotion of particular ideas, doctrines, or practices, meant to further a particular cause or agenda and weaken that of another; it is a systematic effort to manipulate attitudes, beliefs, or actions by the use of symbols. It is commonly used to describe any deceptive or distorted accounts, usually as a dismissive, disparaging, and pejorative term, which in its broadest sense, can be and is applied to any account one does not agree with.
In its purest and essential form, propaganda consists in the manipulation of symbols----words, pictures, signs, and images. At its most pure level, words and language, and indeed, even thought can be dispensed with. Merely a stimulus or image is all that is required to produce the desired response. Hearst stated: "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Hearst, like his journalist successors of today, understood the methodology and essential principles of propaganda perfectly.
The term 'propaganda' is unpopular as a description in American political and social discourse and analysis. Instead, propaganda and propagandists are known by different terms: public relations (PR), publicity, advertising, information warfare, spin doctors, image brokers, public affairs, promotion, marketing, media relations specialists, lobbyists. Moreover, the term 'propaganda' has been overused so that the term is practically meaningless today. This is so because propaganda has been one of the most prevalent and widespread phenomena of the twentieth century. The dangers of propaganda were first perceived in its first widespread and systematic use during World War I, the Great War.
The German philosopher Georg Hegel was one of the first to show that even in democracies, the public is manipulated and persuaded by "hidden persuaders" and "hidden manipulators". The French author Anatole France explained it this way: "Democracy, and, indeed, all society, is run by an unseen engineer."
Edward L. Bernays (1891-1995), a nephew of Sigmund Freud, was a theatrical publicist and propagandist during World War I, working for the Committee on Public Information headed by George Creel, writing propaganda pamphlets. In l928, he published the influential book, Propaganda, in which he argued that propaganda could be a mechanism for engineering consent and popular approval. Bernays virtually invented the public relations business, establishing the theoretical groundwork in Crystallizing Public Opinion (l923). The masses could be controlled without their knowledge through public relations or propaganda. Bernays stated:
"If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it."
Click to view link
Posted by memewatchers.com on 06/20/11 04:53 AM
I see the effects of cloud seeding (Chemtrails) over the skies of Kopenhamn and Malmö on a daily basis. Clear blue skies at 5:00 am and by noon the sky is filled with a grid of trails left behind by the airplanes. By the end of the day the it drifts into a thin wispy cloudy haze. This can be witnessed on any given day and is easy to spot, just sit on the beach relax and watch the sky.
Posted by memewatchers.com on 06/20/11 04:44 AM
It is true that Eustace Mullins proceeded GE Griffin as an investigative author exposing the Federal Reserve and much of the same historical material can be found in their books. However it is also true that Eustace Mullins got most of his material and information from Ezra Pound. Mr Mullins' would regularly visit Ezra while he was locked away in a mental institute as punishment for speaking out on Italian Radio throughout WWII against the growing Anglo-sphere Elite power.
Ezra Reading Cantos XLVI: http://youtu.be/Aba1dVLVSFg
A more complete but less audible recordings including some of his radio Broadcasts in Italy : Click to view link
Anyway one generation builds off the next nothing wrong with that, GE Griffin likely is silent about Ezra and Eustace because of their preoccupation with resting the blame on Zionist push for world power. The DB has a great article in their glossary which covers this adequately, stating that the issue is Merchantilism. Click to view link
Posted by Leonardo Pisano on 06/20/11 04:07 AM
That's the problem I have with chemtrails too. It seems to me, as an engineer, that the dispersion on 10 km or so will be ineffective as a means to deliver it to people. Moreover, the targets cannot be very precise either. And then, what chemicals are in fact dispersed? Delivery through other means, notably the water grid, would be far more effective.
Posted by Bischoff on 06/20/11 02:00 AM
I meant that I proposed something that Coulter had mentioned in the way of criticising Ron Paul.
Posted by Bischoff on 06/20/11 01:56 AM
I don't think that I proposed anything. As to termerity to agree or disagree, you might be guided by popular opinion to express yourself. I am sorry to tell you that I am not.
Posted by clark on 06/20/11 12:55 AM
John Danforth asked, "Where's the evidence?"
Evidence of what?
Or, how much do you require?
Also, did you see the film?
Posted by bionic mosquito on 06/20/11 12:16 AM
"Didn't you read the book?"
Here is the Reader's Digest version, for those still trying to catch up:
Click to view link
"Geithner and Goldman, Thick as Thieves"
By Robert Scheer
"What was Timothy Geithner thinking back in 2008 when, as president of the New York Fed, he decided to give Goldman Sachs a $30 billion interest-free loan as part of an $80 billion secret float to favored banks? The sordid details of that program were finally made public this week in response to a court order for a Freedom of Information Act release, thanks to a Bloomberg News lawsuit. Sorry, my bad: It wasn't an interest-free loan; make that .01 percent that Goldman paid to borrow taxpayer money when ordinary folks who missed a few credit card payments in order to finance their mortgages were being slapped with interest rates of more than 25 percent."
Posted by peri1224 on 06/20/11 12:09 AM
Banana cartel, oil cartel, banking cartel, what's the difference? Nothing.
It appears that the Amerikan Soviet has imposed rules (Dodd-Frank law) prohibiting gold and silver futures trading, possibly also spot, to non-eligible Americans, effective July 15. Land of the free, home of the brave?
Posted by bionic mosquito on 06/19/11 11:46 PM
"Do you have references?"
I thought not.
Posted by John Danforth on 06/19/11 11:08 PM
Since this is almost exactly what Ron Paul proposed, I am surprised you had the temerity to echo the what the empty-skulled Ann Coulter said about him.
Posted by John Danforth on 06/19/11 11:02 PM
Where's the evidence?
Posted by John Danforth on 06/19/11 09:51 PM
Didn't you read the book?