some of us on this forum have been railing against the federal reserve monetary system of this country....since we have all been brainwashed in the US to accept this con game as legitimate maybe this story will help explain..and surprizingly it happened in the 60's...
wake up...wake up...wake up....
____________________________

DOLLAR DECEPTION:
HOW BANKS SECRETLY CREATE MONEY

Ellen Brown, July 3rd, 2007

It has been called "the most astounding piece of sleight of hand ever invented." The creation of money has been privatized, usurped from Congress by a private banking cartel. Most people think money is issued by fiat by the government, but that is not the case. Except for coins, which compose only about one one-thousandth of the total U.S. money supply, all of our money is now created by banks. Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) are issued by the Federal Reserve, a private banking corporation, and lent to the government.1 Moreover, Federal Reserve Notes and coins together compose less than 3 percent of the money supply. The other 97 percent is created by commercial banks as loans.2

Don't believe banks create the money they lend? Neither did the jury in a landmark Minnesota case, until they heard the evidence. First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969) was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script.3 Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan. The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn't given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.
The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. To Daly, the implications were enormous. If bankers were indeed extending credit without consideration – without backing their loans with money they actually had in their vaults and were entitled to lend – a decision declaring their loans void could topple the power base of the world. He wrote in a local news article:

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.
Needless to say, however, the decision failed to change prevailing practice, although it was never overruled....... (more)

the complete article here:. http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php

This is nothing new, and dates back to about the 1940s when we left the gold standard. Read up on Greenberg, he is a firm Objectivist. He wanted to bring us back to the gold standard, however the false economic growth of the 90s made it impossible.

I would venture to say the case cited in the article is missing a few facts and giving a false pretense that it is simply nullifying all bank loans. I am sure there is more to that story otherwise every would have already gotten their homes free.

Yes, the (not) federal (no) reserves (non) bank is the BIGGEST FRAUD against MANKIND in the HISTORY of this PLANET.!!!!!! I heard that the best way to stop this monster is for everyone to Quit paying: JUST WHO would put the citizenry in jail?? The citizens are not doing the frauding,,they are being frauded. davinci is right on target, others on here have been laughing at him, but ,I would suggest you wake up before it is too late, your house could be gone next. This is not a joking matter. They are stealing your kids inheritance with monopoly money. They admitted on one of the non-news shows that there is no backing for your money , just your trust in the system. I sure do not trust the system.

I heard that the federal reserve is between a rock and a hard place , owe a large debt payable in gold , but do not have the gold to pay it with, and it is PAST DUE??? ASK old George Bush if he knows anything about that?? I heard our problem could have been settled already, but some one said: NOT AT THIS TIME!!! WHY NOT???GEORGE???

sounds almost like unsocial insecurity

I hear this money thing is solvable real quick, but first a group, of people have to be put on trial. Let's arrest them and get the real trials started. It maybe that this whole Congress has to resign, and go on trials, too. But the gold is available.

thanks for your support SMO ..maybe in our lifetime....

The reserve is not the fraud, the people that do not understand how it works are the fraud. Misinformation is the key to the fraud.
SMO you provide a prime example with your gold example. If you knew anything of how it worked you would never make such an uninformed statement. Read what I wrote in my first post. We started leaving the gold standard in the forties, we were completely out of it by the end of the sixties. Thus the fed cannot owe anything based on gold since it is no longer our standard. The Fiat standard is the problem, money supported by investor value not backed value. Unfortunately most of the world has moved to the Fiat standard and abandoned the gold standard. Until we go back to the gold standard the problem cannot be solved. Not paying will not work, they will put you in jail one at a time. Additionally as I stated before, I am sure key information is missing from article. That key information is the real reason the bank lost, not the fact that the guy just did not feel he should have to pay.
Wake up and get a clue, the system is the one we live in and is far fairer than most systems in the world. How about a system where you own nothing, have no inheritance for your kids etc...
There are many of those out there.

Davinci, If money was not created by some means we would still have the same amount of money as in 1950, just as an example.

If money were based on the gold standard how would you compensate when someone made a breakthrough invention that eased the labor necessary for certain jobs. The person builds one of his inventions, just that act made the world's net worth increase, but there was no more gold found to pay for the invention. Therefore, everything on earth had to come down in price to make room for the new manufactured item, otherwise nobody could every buy one and the invention would not benefit society, unless of course people gave up something else in order to buy the new thing. Money, wealth has to be based on a larger measure of goods, services and commodities than simply gold.

I own no gold. If I want to buy something I do not have to go to the local smelter and melt out some ingots from a ton of dirt. Therefore I do not need gold. If however, I want to own gold I can sell something of mine to get money and buy gold with the money. That works pretty well, if I were of a mind to have gold, which I prefer not to do.

If your money is based on gold then that is what you carry around in your pocket in the form of bills. What I carry in my pocket now is an item which represents a portion of the GDP of our nation. I think that is a more practical measure of my wealth.

The Fed sells bonds to support its lending but the Fed is not in the business of printing money for the enrichment of the Fed itself. It seems to work pretty well. What is wrong with that scenario in your opinion?

all good points philosopher...but right now we have a money system owned by private interests...they have never been audited by the federal government to see what the accounting looks like...they stopped reporting (last year) how much money they are even printing...
outrageous...

if you really want to understand my point of view (and some others here) then check this out

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936

sorry, have not viewed the link yet davinci, but wanted to put this in as I'm in a hurry tonight.

As was mentioned, the Federal Reserve system is in private hands, and not all Americans, I might add. They 'loan' money to the government, to the banking industry, meaning every dollar created and in circulation has debt attached to it. So the dollar is not really worth a dollar to the general population or to the government. It is, however, worth more than a dollar to the Federal reserve system. That is how they make a profit.

In the case of a bank, there are strict regulations that must be followed as in the case of mortgages. The bank, not unlike the Fed, includes in it's asset base, funds they "expect" to receive from loans outstanding. They can then, make more loans, based on those, not yet existing, funds.

On the outside this seemed to work well for advancing "the American dream". The hype or propaganda we have been bottle fed since the advent of the Federal Reserve (the American dream. Their form of marketing for acceptance from a public all to ready to have MORE.

Banks are accountable to the Fed (not the government)through a complex set of regulations. These regulations hinder the general population from controlling their own liquid assets, their money. Why? We have been told that it is to protect the foundations of the banks (& savings banks), to protect them from losses that COULD affect the people who bank at their particular name bank. Even the insurance set up FLIC, FSLIC, was fed to us as so much propaganda to protect OUR investments.

However, ALL of the regulations and the "Federal" Insurance corporations, (federal = Federal Reserve not to be equated with government)have been set up specifically to support, protect and allow the Federal Reserve System (it's private owners and investors) to create wealth by controlling "the market". The population being the market.

Now, if the Fed wanted to get rid of or change the way or who is running a particular banking corp., all they need do is call in their loans from that bank. NO BANK has the ability to pay this debt, as their assets are largely based on intangibles, loans to the general population.

To take this further, Imagine a group of bankers from many large banking corporations, who support a particular government plan or party. Say that the Fed wants to support another plan or party or candidate because that party would create more wealth for them. All they need do is call in their loans, but what if the banks involved had loans that affected millions? DEPRESSION! Of course those who run or have investments in the Fed, become even richer.

Next to depression, the largest gain the Fed can achieve, is through WAR. In war the government borrows billions - imagine billions of dollars and each dollar with debt attached even before interest is accumulated.

NOW THE BIG ONE - the Bush family has a vested interest in the Federal Reserve.

Consider the way Bush won the election, consider the 9/11 controversy, consider that "Terrorist" "Terror organization" the the word Terror is suddenly the word of the decade. Consider how we entered the war we are in, consider it all.

ANY QUESTIONS?

More to consider - American, Canada and Mexico, the North American Commitment that Bush has fielded and plans to push through, will create the Amero. The Amero to become the currency used by all three countries & who will control it, create it? Let there be no doubt. And we wonder why all the Mexicans? And the snafu that was a 1500 page immigration document - was it meant to hinder? Was it meant to be extended, beyond the point that it is even valit? For what validity can be had from such a legislature if our borders and even our monetary system are open to Mexico and Canada?

There are also other major countries considering the same thing with their bordering countries. The reduction of currently, or rather a broader standardization away from exchange rates, creates an environment more easily globalized. Enter the Euro Dollar. And who will control that? NO NOT THE FEDERAL RESERVE - it gets better.

There are currently plans underway for the creation of a 'Central World Bank'. Who is pushing for this - the Federal Reserve, who is backing it? Bush. In fact, backed by this government is committee created to outline the "regulations" for this World Bank and they plan on setting it up, by using the Federal Reserve as it's basis.

So who will own, run and have a vested interest in this world bank. All those who currently have same in the Fed, as well as those in other countries who, like Bush, have followed the path, that will lead to the creation of this World conglomeration.

A world wide class system. Those connected with the World Bank and those living life according to the whims of those in control of the money.

We need to take the money that is the power that controls, out of the hands of those who want more. There are none so powerful as those who, together, have a vested interest in the Federal Reserve System.

We need to break the Fed, and thereby, breaking all those stand to loose through such a fiasco. We need to prove to the world that a Central World Bank, in the hands of a few, can not be created.

We should be fighting for the discontinuance of the Federal Reserve System as it now stands.

Davinci, do you have any proof that the fed is owned by private people or is this another spin of yours?

xootbx....Spin of mine?...this debate has been going on in earnest since the theft of our rights in 1913....and even before that...my proof is the many scholars, investigators, and historical revisionists that have written about this subject...yeah..the proof is there if you wish to look...What proof do you have for anything you spin here either?...I've posted many links to help clarify my position on these things...I'm assuming that you may have looked at a couple...or maybe I assume too much...

I took off my blinders years ago...you should try it...


Redy thanks for your info....

Davinci,
Just because people write about things does not make them fact.
I ask for simple proof, not opinion.
The Fed is not privately owned as it is part of the government with congressional oversight. I have yet to see any evidence proving that it is privately owned.
There is inferences being drawn, that becuase there is a BoD and "stocks" issued for the 12 reserve banks that it is privately owned.
The BoD is there to perform the running of the Fed and was designed so that there is overlap of several administrations to prevent a single administration of changing the system.
To draw those inferences are nothing more than opinion.
The "stocks" are not a tradeable comodity, a requirement of membership. They hold no cash value.
You bring speculation and opinion and try to pass it off as fact. You hope the uneducated buy into your "facts". That is spinning.
All I ask for, just like any other post on here, is for evidence of peoples assertations. Oddly enough I do not get much.
You ask me for evidence, I am not the one trying to purport assertations, accusations and opinion off as fact, I am questioning those that do.
Continue with the liberal spin and stop paying your mortgage and get back to me in a year when the goverment has forgiven all your debt and given you your house for free.

do you have proof of the fed not being privatly owned

the trucking company that deliverers to your local store is privatly owned

but also is overseen by the govt

this kind of handles the debt statement

-------

4. Definition of “Bonds and Notes of the United States”

The terms “bonds and notes of the United States,” “bonds and notes of the Government of the United States,” and “bonds or notes of the United States” used in this Act shall be held to include certificates of indebtedness and Treasury bills issued under section 3104 of title 31.

-----

What is the Federal Reserve and what does it do?

Periodically, I hear about the Federal Reserve raising interest rates or lowering interest rates. But what is the Federal Reserve? Is it a governmental body or a private one? Does it just set interest rates or does do other things?

The Federal Reserve is considered an independent central bank. It is independent since its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or Congress. The Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 "to provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States, and for other purposes."

While the Federal Reserve is an independent institution, it is still accountable to Congress. The Constitution gives Congress the power to coin money and set its value. Congress delegated this power to the Federal Reserve in the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, but still maintains oversight authority. Under the Humphrey-Hawkins Act of 1978, the Federal Reserve must submit a report on the economy to Congress by February 20 and July 20 of each year. Alan Greenspan, the current Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, is called to testify on the report before Senate and House Committees.

excerpt from
http://www.thisnation.com/question/033.html

adj4u you analogy with the trucks is incorrect. The truck is privately owned. The use of must meet certain guildlines, both federal and state, that control usages and safetly. The truck owner does not directly answer to the government.
Where as the Fed answers directly to Congress and is regulated through the Federal Reserve Act, which Congress can amend as needed to control the Fed.

Who Owns the Federal Reserve Bank of New York?

Each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks is organized into a corporation whose shares are sold to the commercial banks and thrifts operating within the Bank's district. Shareholders elect six of the nine the board of directors for their regional Federal Reserve Bank as well as its president. Mullins reported that the top eight stockholders of the New York Fed were, in order from largest to smallest as of 1983, Citibank, Chase Manhatten, Morgan Guaranty Trust, Chemical Bank, Manufacturers Hanover Trust, Bankers Trust Company, National Bank of North America, and the Bank of New York (Mullins, p. 179). Together, these banks owned about 63 percent of the New York Fed's outstanding stock. Mullins then showed that many of these banks are owned by about a dozen European banking organizations, mostly British, and most notably the Rothschild banking dynasty. Through their American agents they are able to select the board of directors for the New York Fed and to direct U.S. monetary policy. Mullins explained,

excerpt from
http://www.usagold.com/federalreserve.html