Saturday, 29 May 2010

Ron Paul: Inside Sources Told Me Fed Is Panicking At Mass Awakening

Appearing on The Alex Jones Show yesterday, Congressman Ron Paul revealed that through his inside sources he had learned that the people who control the Federal Reserve are panicking about the fact that Americans are waking up to the fact that the U.S. is controlled by the central bank.

“I had some information passed on to me, sort of inside information, somebody who knew somebody who was well tuned to the people at the Federal Reserve – and they said they are really really concerned about our movement to expose the Fed for what they’re doing,” said Paul, adding, “What they’re upset or worried about is the fact that more and more people are aware of the Federal Reserve now like never before,” explaining that exposure will lead to change and a reform of the Federal Reserve.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul-inside-sources-told-me-fed-is-panicking-at-mass-awakening.html

Because people KNOW about the Fed, things will change.
Things have changed in the past. Why not in the future ?

And given half a chance Congressman Paul, after auditing the Fed, will abolish it. Why keep a private institution that has control over the country's money supply ? The US Treasury should be in control of the dollar, not the Fed.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 29th, 2010.]

2 comments:

steven andresen said...

spook,

It's my understanding that there are two, at least, arguments for a central bank.

One is that with a central bank there is some rhyme and reason in the country's money supply, where one central bank helps other smaller banks in the country pull together in creating some mutually advantageous economic environment. (I'm not an economist or student thereof so I make this up.)

The other argument is that with a central bank the rich people in charge would be able to scam the system more efficiently thereby making more money for them, despite the fact it would be a system that makes things worse for the country. This is sort of the central bank as parasite position.

I take it the first argument is what they make in order to maintain the status quo, whereas the second argument describes the banks on the ground, unfortunately.

Does this sum it up?

SpookyPunkos said...

Steven,

The country needs to be able to issue money to the people, I agree with that, but at present the Federal reserve is not issuing money it is lending it at interest. You probably know that more money is owed to the Fed than they hand out. It's a debt tap.

I have read that the US Treasury should be issuing money - (perhaps backed by gold and silver as some commentators maintain).

I'm not sure how things might go without a central bank of some sort. Before 1913 there was no Federal Reserve.

At the very least the secretive and private Federal Reserve needs to be audited and radically altered.