thanks adj4u ....

in light of that admission
wouldnt it make more sense that our monetary system was strictly owned,
operated and controlled by the american people / government?...keep
foreign hands out of the pot...

adj4u,
Thanks for leaving out the next line.

"Unfortunately, Mullins' source for the stockholders of the New York Fed could not be verified. He claimed his source was the Federal Reserve Bulletin, although it has never included shareholder information, nor has any other Federal Reserve periodical. It is difficult researching this particular claim because a Federal Reserve Bank is not a publicly traded corporation and is therefore not required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to publish a list of its major shareholders. The question of ownership can still be addressed, however, by examining the legal rules for acquisition of such stock. The Federal Reserve Act requires national banks and participating state banks to purchase shares of their regional Federal Reserve Bank upon joining the System, thereby becoming "member banks" (12 USCA 282). Since the eight banks Mullins named all operate within the New York Federal Reserve district, and are all nationally chartered banks, they are required to be shareholders of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. They are also probably the major shareholders as Mullins claimed."

As for stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks, again they do not have control of anything other than earning dividends and borrowing money.
There seems to be a lack of knowledge on the Fed here.


Davinci, foreign investors are fine because it is more money accessible to loans.

The control of the Fed is still congressionally controlled.

The Federal Reserve Banks are still only a part of the Fed and the article :
"An historical example may make clear that member banks do not control the Federal Reserve's policies. Galbraith (1990) recounted that in the spring of 1929 the New York Stock Exchange was booming. Prices there had been rising considerably, extending the bull market that had begun in 1924. The Federal Reserve Board decided to take steps to arrest the speculative bubble that appeared to have been forming: it raised the cost banks had to pay to borrow from the Federal Reserve and it increased speculators' margin requirements. Charles Mitchell, then the head of National City Bank (today known as Citibank), which was the largest shareholder of the New York Federal Reserve Bank according to Mullins, was so irritated by this decision that in a bank statement he wrote, "We feel that we have an obligation which is paramount to any Federal Reserve warning, or anything else, to avert any dangerous crisis in the money market" (Galbraith, p. 57). National City Bank promised to increase lending to offset any restrictive policies of the Federal Reserve. Wrote Galbraith, "The effect was more than satisfactory: the market took off again. In the three summer months, the increase in prices outran all of the quite impressive increase that had occurred during the entire previous year" (Ibid). If the Fed and its policies were really under the control of its major stockholders, then why did the Federal Reserve Board clearly buck the intent of its single largest shareholder?"

So thanks for praising that article that you obviously did not read Davinci.

The Closing Statement:
"It does not appear that the New York Federal Reserve Bank is owned, either directly or indirectly, by foreigners. Neither Mullins nor Kah provided verifiable sources for their allegations, nor did their mysterious sources agree on exactly who owns the New York Federal Reserve Bank. Moreover, their central assumption that control of the New York Federal Reserve is the same as control of the whole System is wrong and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the System's basic organizational structure. The profits of the Federal Reserve System, again contrary to the assertion of Kah and Schauf, are funneled back to the federal government, not to an "international banking elite." If the U.S. central bank is in the grip of a banking conspiracy, then Mullins and Kah have certainly not uncovered it."

I would venture to say that the Mullins or Kah could easily be replaced with Davinci in the closing statement.

here you go

http://land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/federal_reserve.shtml

family tree of the fed reserve


smile

if deciept was the objective

the site address would not have been there

enjoy that site

and note the source

Source: ** Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence ** - - Published 1976

some times it is just to much fun

I'm curious as to why it's such a mystery in the first place. Shouldn't information be available on who actually owns an institution as large as the Federal Reserve? Why all the secrecy?

http://land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/federal_reserve.shtml

it is here

Again nothing of substantiating proof that the Fed is privately owned. As I said before there are member banks, that does not mean ownership.

And noting the source is not much stock other than to try and draw inference.
"Source: ** Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence ** - - Published 1976"

Do you have a link to a report from the Directors of the Federal Reserve from 1976 that supports the document?
Or is the title source some essay written and titled Federal Reserver Directors...."?

I am still waiting for evidence...

well i some can not comprehend

what is in front of them

do you have proof lincoln was assasinated or is that fiction to

Kid,
It is not much of a secret. There are those that would try to make it seem as such, but making accussations and false statements...

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#5

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/fract/

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/frseries/frseri.htm

http://www.federalreserve.gov/bios/

first link

as the federal govt established the nuclear regulatory commission

do they own all the nuclear power plants

link 2

Federal Reserve Act
Dispersed throughout 12 USC; ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251 (December 23, 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.

most important line


To provide for the establishment of

does not say to establish

link 3

Contacts within Government
As they carry out their duties, members of the Board routinely confer with officials of other government agencies, representatives of banking industry groups, officials of the central banks of other countries, members of Congress and academicians. For example, they meet frequently with Treasury officials and the Council of Economic Advisers to help evaluate the economic climate and to discuss objectives for the nation's economy. Governors also discuss the international monetary system with central bankers of other countries and are in close contact with the heads of the U.S. agencies that make foreign loans and conduct foreign financial transactions.

-----

if they are the govt why do they need

Contacts within Government

adj4u,
Again, you pose speculation as fact, in which your one link contratdicted your own statements, which you selectively pulled out of context the part that would like like it supported your arguement.
Fact Lincoln was assasinated, I do not need proof of that.
However the claims made about the Fed, are just that claims, backed with no evidence.
Supposision does not make fact.

As for the nuclear regulatory committee questions, the committee is government operated, as I said with the truckers. However ownership of nuclear plants are open.
There is no "owner" of the fed as it is part of the government.
The nuclear regulartor committee sets guidelines on the running of nuclear plants etc. however the the Fed answers to Congress. Nuclear plants do not answer to Congress that have set rules they must meet in order to continue operation.

Either way still does not show whether or not the Fed is privately owned or not. Just inferences.
Some people see what they want even if it does not exist.
This is a hallucination, as is the concept that you and davinci are trying to pass off as fact.

link 4

regulaatory board to assure prober payment to STOCKHOLDERS

and govt fees

------------

FEDERAL RESERVE ACT

SECTION 7—Division of Earnings

Dividends and Surplus Fund of Reserve Banks

(a)(1)(A) After all necessary expenses of a Federal reserve bank have been paid or provided for, the stockholders of the bank shall be entitled to receive an annual dividend of 6 percent on paid-in capital stock.

(B) The entitlement to dividends under subparagraph (A) shall be cumulative.

(2) That portion of net earnings of each Federal reserve bank which remains after dividend claims under subparagraph (1)(A) have been fully met shall be deposited in the surplus fund of the bank.

(b) Transfer for fiscal year 2000.

(1) The Federal reserve banks shall transfer from the surplus funds of such banks to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for transfer to the Secretary of the Treasury for deposit in the general fund of the Treasury, a total amount of $3,752,000,000 in fiscal year 2000.

(2) Of the total amount required to be paid by the Federal reserve banks under paragraph (1) for fiscal year 2000, the Board shall determine the amount each such bank shall pay in such fiscal year.

from your site
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/fract/sect07.htm

--------------------------

goverment owned boards DO NOT HAVE STOCK HOLDERS

those appointed by congress and the prez

are comparable to the irs for the banking world

banks are regulated

but privately owned as well

adj4u nice try again, taking things out of context. The regulator board is one part of the whole system.
Try looking at the whole Fed and not just the parts you want and think support your argument.

Let's pose the opposite question. Are regulated entities government owned?

I heard that the federal reserve headquarters are in London, but I have never been to London, But the Federal reserve headquarters do not seem to be in this country, if anyone has seen them, please inform to me exactly where they are, it seems they should be in this country. I am not even sure if they are incorporated any where on this PLANET????(totally PRIVATE)(PROBABLY NONINCORPORATED???) MORE REASON that the (not)federal (NO ) reserves ( NON) bank is private. Where is the headquarters( some back room in London??)( Queen's Palace??) I am serious as a heart attack, if you know the answer to these questions, I want to KNOW!!! I think guys like Greenspan are just some of the PLANTED FOXES watching the HEN HOUSE!!!