If the Fed is audited, what might we find that they are doing which would be bad?

[video=youtube;WYCH1Ylncxc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYCH1Ylncxc[/video]

 

[video=youtube;OOQ2jUZKKic]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOQ2jUZKKic[/video]

 

[video=youtube;d0HO5YyIve0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0HO5YyIve0#t=257[/video]

 

Racist flamebait crap.

 

LOL,you can find all kinds of nuts on the internet.

Time to move this thread to the conspiracy forum.

 

I agree it should be moved to the conspiracy forum. The Federal Reserve System was conceived in a conspiracy at Jekyll Island, GA between international bankers (counterfeiters) and government officials in November 1910. It was the second conspiracy to overthrow America. The first was the Knights of the Golden Circle in 1861.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

 

No problem. Their unconstitutional and illegal activities is also why they should be independently audited like Congressman Ron Paul tried to do and Senator Rand Paul is trying to do.

 

They are independently audited of course. Every year by a Big Four public accounting firm, the GAO, and the OIG. The Fed is probably the most heavily audited entity in the world.

The anti-Fed conspiracy internet videos you get your information from just don't tell you the truth.

 

Actually I got my information from The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
Paul Warburg's Crusade to Establish a Central Bank in the United States

International banker Paul Warburg immigrated to America in 1902. In November 1910, Paul Warburg conspired at Jekyll Island, GA with Senator Nelson Aldrich, et al, to gain control of America's money supply. The accomplished that task on December 23, 1913 with 1/3 of the members of Congress gone for Christmas break. The Fed admits it was a conspiracy on their own website.

 

They admit no such thing.

The "Aldrich plan" the Jeckyll Island group came up with was rejected by Congress, and a modified system was eventually enacted.

Since the Aldrich Plan essentially gave full control of this system to private bankers, there was strong opposition to it from rural and western states because of fears that it would become a tool of certain rich and powerful financiers in New York City, referred to as the "Money Trust".[4] Indeed, from May 1912 through January 1913 the Pujo Committee, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, held investigative hearings on the alleged Money Trust and its interlocking directorates. These hearings were chaired by Rep. Arsene Pujo, a Democratic representative from Louisiana.[5]

In the election of 1912, the Democratic Party won control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. The party's platform stated strong opposition "to the so called Aldrich bill for the establishment of a central bank." However, the platform also called for a systematic revision of banking laws in ways that would provide relief from financial panics, unemployment and business depression, and would protect the public from the "domination by what is known as the Money Trust."[6]

... According to the House committee report accompanying the Currency bill (H.R. 7837) or the Glass-Owen bill, as it was often called during the time, the legislation was drafted from ideas taken from various proposals, including the Aldrich bill.[6] However, unlike the Aldrich plan, which gave controlling interest to private bankers with only a small public presence, the new plan gave an important role to a public entity, the Federal Reserve Board, while establishing a substantial measure of autonomy for the (regional) Reserve Banks which, at that time, were allowed to set their own discount rates. Also, instead of the proposed currency being an obligation of the private banks, the new Federal Reserve note was to be an obligation of the U.S. Treasury. In addition, unlike the Aldrich plan, membership by nationally chartered banks was mandatory, not optional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Act

The plan they came up with at the Jeckyll Island conference was not the plan that was voted into law in the Federal Reserve Act.

 

At least you ADMIT that the banksters were TRYING to get FULL CONTROL at the start.

They realized they couldn't just asked Congress to give up total control without offering them a share of the booty.

Did anyone really think that the public would want to relinquish control of the money supply to a bunch of private bankers even if the bankers were telling them it was for their own good?

OBVIOUSLY, that's what the bankers wanted. Right? Right!
So what dummy would think that they'd settle for less if they didn't have to?
And what kind of fool wouldn't suspect that the bankers wouldn't try to sneak enough provisions into the "modified" bill in order to leave things wide open for seizing total control down the road?
And what kind of fools would these banksters have to be to let that be known?





So they devised an end run play which was mostly designed to fool the public into thinking the act was somehow substantively different than originally planned.

You don't suppose they managed to find a way to get the right kind of front men to help push their legislation through by helping to convince the public that all was well with it?

You don't suppose these high powered financiers could find a way to get the right people in the key places to go along with them, do you?


I guess that never entered your mind, did it?

And if they lied about it once, you don't suppose they'd continue to lie about it do you?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System

And who do you suppose select the presidential candidates?

Does the Bilderbergers or the Council on Foreign Relations ring a bell?

You don't really believe that the American people (except for the racist blacks) actually CHOSE Yomammi do you?

That word "elastic" is the key word to appreciate here. What it means is that that the Fed can have money printed or withdraw it from the system when they get ready.

That's that giant sucking sound we keep hearing about in media news about the economy.

No dummies, Bernanke and company don't actually run the presses. They would never get ink under their pristine fingernails. They have slaves that do that sort of thing for them. What the Fed does is authorize it.
They call Congress in and tell them what they need to do. "Fed knows best".

And NO, the Fed doesn't tell these busy body Congressmen like Ron Paul everything they do.
That would spoil everything. That's what they say isn't it?

Like they keep telling us as they turn the US into a police state, "If you're not doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide".
Right?

So what's up with the secrecy thingy?
Won't that sort of tend to make people suspicious that they're up to something?

I mean, it isn't as though anyone has ever conspired to rip people off.

And not that any "Americans" would ever want appoint themselves the tin horn dictators of the world, even if they wouldn't like to be filthy rich and have people kissing their priestly behinds everywhere they go.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_L._Kohn

In other words, the Fed poses as the government when it tells the banks what they can and cannot do.

And the Fed is composed of the people who represent the banks!

Yes, yes, we've seen how this "government oversight" works.

[video=youtube;rIcQLLYhNZ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIcQLLYhNZ4[/video]

 

Let me guess, the evil Jews who secretly run a massive conspiracy to enslave the word to do their wicked bidding and who were behind WWI and WWII and secretly control the world.

 

Massive shipments of gold and cash to Israel.

 

You are describing the The Pilgrim Society I don't think they are all Jews.

Some of their members: Pilgrim Society Members

Institute for the study of globalization and covert politics.

 

I have know idea what those groups are, just going by Holston's posts.

 

That is why I linked to them. They tell you who they are. They were a secret society until the Internet came along.

 

Well, let's see.

How about here for starters.

Bernanke- Jew?..................check

Janet Yellen- Jew?..............check

Terullo- Jew? Can't tell. However...........

Sounds like PNAC doesn't it?

That's a euphemism for Zionist disguised as a Marxist.

Neera Tanden is it's president.

Looks Jewy to me.

So far, so good.

Isn't that the bunch that wants to carbon tax you every time you exhale?

Looks Jewy to me!

Sarah BLOOM Raskin- Jew? Doesn't say. HOWEVER, look who she's married to:


Looks Jewy to me.

Isn't that the religious bunch who believe that someday the Jews will rule the world?

Powell and Stein- Jews?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/business/economy/obama-to-nominate-economics-professor-and-ex-treasury-official-to-fed-board.html?_r=0


Yup

Might as well be. It does the same thing.

Hey well. Four out of six ain't a bad guess. We can pretty much say we know who's chiefly responsible for the monetary policies.
If it ain't Jews it's their lackies.

They couldn't well run the show without some assistance from the majority now could they?
It was the same deal with Aldrich. Besides the gentiles who also stand to enrich themselves, they need front men. Otherwise it would just be toooo plain to see.

Give me a break. If I pointed out all the ZIO connections to the Fed, it would go on for another 50 pages at least. It would be hard to know when to break off. Just let the doubters ferret the info out for themselves. The rest are going to deny it anyway.

 

I pegged it.

I'll just let you wallow in your own racism and hatred.

 

Of course they aren't. Bill Clinton isn't, the Bushes weren't, and neither is Yomammi.

What's important is who they work for and what they working to accomplish.

Race is not the issue beyond the point that those involved operate according to their own ethnic identity. Jews call themselves "white". They also call themselves "Jewish". What's important about this is the kind of political ideology, social philosophy, and religious beliefs that they adhere to.
If a person's identity as "Jewish" is important to THEMSELVES, then their own ethnic pride AND possible racial prejudices COULD play an important role in the decisions they make and the actions they take.

THEY always make a "racial" issue out of things because to do so provides a convenient shield against any criticism leveled at their activities.
For example, if you are critical of Jewish eschatology or Marxist philosophy, they may evade having to defend the logic or practicality of either one by simply accusing their critics of being "anti-semitic" or "racially motivated".
This forces the critic into the position of having to defend against those accusations. The only "proof" that is acceptable is one which allows them to have their way about everything!

Neat, huh?!

- - - Updated - - -

Hardly. I pegged THEM!

AND YOU!

 

The House of Rothschild 1934

[video=youtube;MqCTvW5URfY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqCTvW5URfY[/video]

Well worth the time.

 

The movie spins the Rothschilds, [original name was Bauer (as in 'Jack Bauer, one of TVs contemporary 'heros], as being good as gold. What "Jew" isn't?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

For some reason they get their feathers all ruffled when some "gentile" like Henry Ford calls them "international", though they admit it themselves.


http://history.howstuffworks.com/european-history/the-rothschild-family.htm

These Jews now identify themselves as "English" or British, among other things depending on which nationality they are in. They proclaim these labels publicly but privately they retain their Jewish identity. As has been revealed, their fortunes depend upon this form of stealth.
If the Jews were widely recognized, their own brand of discrimination would become immediately apparent to the public at large.
Then they would no longer be able to claim (falsely) the moral high ground when they infiltrate the institutions of white gentiles and open them up to the weakening effects of Balkanization as they have in the US, all in the name of "equal rights", "civil rights", or anti-discrimination (calling everyone else "racist" who doesn't surrender their own heritage to the multi-cultural God they have created).

The Jews pretty much control Britain's financial sector.

You can imagine that the Jews taste in women also pretty much parallels the taste among black men of "upward" mobility, ie their disparaging attitude towards white men and their "Christian" culture does nothing to dampen their appetite for strange flesh (watch TV).

Therefore to look at them now one can scarcely see the remnants of the Ashkenazim Jew in them. For the most part they can easily pass themselves off as "white" while inwardly still retaining the philosophical and religious bent their forefathers held. You have heard them admit how they abhor taking oaths to any other entities. I imagine that would include allegiance to the US.
So you can be certain where the allegiance of the likes of Timothy Geitner, Rahm Emmanuel, and Ben "Shalom" Bernanke lie. Realizing these facts sheds much light on the financial, domestic, and international policies of the US make sense, preceding and post 9/11.



According to Jewish eschatology, the Jews seek a sort of New World Order in which the old religious courts of the Sanhedrin (who arranged the crucifixion of Christ), shall be reestablished as universal law.



You may find nothing particularly objectionable about the physical appearance of these people. I don't either. In fact you can scarcely detect any REAL Jew in them.
But as I've tried to point out, it isn't the racial aspect, or the lack of it, that makes the "Jewish question" an issue. Neither was it great acts of charitable benevolence which incited the Jewish pogroms mentioned in the film. People generally get miffed at anyone who rips them off, Jewish identity notwithstanding.

Indeed, the lackadaisical attitude of most (gentile) Americans about the financial rip offs of the "housing bubble" and the profound ignorance of the Jewish religion is proof enough that there is no "anti-semitism" in the US and never has been. That doesn't prevent the accusatory Jews from calling what instincts that white gentiles do have, "racism".
In other words, if the population of white Anglo Saxon people in the US (or anywhere else) are not perfectly willing to relinquish any control they have over their own property or future, including their racial heritage, then according to the "multiculturalist" Jews and their Marxist followers, we are all Nazis or something of that ilk.

 

I want to ad something here which I believe is extremely important to understand.

I want to make it perfectly understood that I am well aware of all the people who call themselves "Christian", who
masquerade themselves as such, who nevertheless are thieves, cheaters, and liars.

The TRUTH of the matter is that these people are every bit as DAMNABLE as those who call themselves Jews, and possibly WORSE.

Why?

Because the Jews openly denounce and deny the name of Christ whereas these faux Christians USE HIS NAME IN VAIN.

Of the two, the Jews are arguably more honest since they deny having any part in Christ, which is true.

 

[video=youtube;Lu32deAm_n8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu32deAm_n8[/video]

 

[video=youtube;HRduwYgrU7A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRduwYgrU7A[/video]