March 30, 2010

Obama and the Biometric National ID



This is how the Golden Shield will work: Chinese citizens will be watched around the clock through networked CCTV cameras and remote monitoring of computers. They will be listened to on their phone calls, monitored by digital voice-recognition technologies. Their Internet access will be aggressively limited through the country’s notorious system of online controls known as the "Great Firewall." Their movements will be tracked through national ID cards with scannable computer chips and photos that are instantly uploaded to police databases and linked to their holder’s personal data.This is the most important element of all: linking all these tools together in a massive, searchable database of names, photos, residency information, work history and biometric data. When Golden Shield is finished, there will be a photo in those databases for every person in China: 1.3 billion faces. - Naomi Klein, China’s All-Seeing Eye: Total Surveillance Society Coming to the Whole World, Rolling Stone, May 29, 2008

National Worker ID Proposed in Comprehensive Immigration Bill

By Migration Expert
March 11, 2010

President Obama is scheduled to meet with Senators Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) later this week to discuss a Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) bill. At controversy is a proposed national worker ID which would be at the center of the Senators’ proposed immigration bill currently being worked on in the U.S. Senate.

To combat critics of CIR, who say that once it is passed more illegal immigrants will flood the United States, Senators Schumer and Graham will introduce a national worker ID. The new ID card would be embedded with information, such as fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand, to tie the card to the worker. The ID card would be required for all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants. If implemented all new workers, including teenagers, would be phased in with an initial focus on industries that are known to employ illegal-immigrants.

Critics of the new ID card, like the American Civil Liberties Union, say it would be a massive invasion of privacy. Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union was quoted as saying:

"We're not only talking about fingerprinting every American, treating ordinary Americans like criminals in order to work. We're also talking about a card that would quickly spread from work to voting to travel to pretty much every aspect of American life that requires identification."
However, Senator Graham disagrees with critics comparing the ID cards to an extension of our current system saying:
"We've all got Social Security cards. They're just easily tampered with. Make them tamper-proof. That's all I'm saying."
According to Senator Schumer, employers would be able to buy a scanner to check the IDs for as much as $800; and small employers could take their applicants to a government office such as the Department of Motor Vehicles and have their hands scanned there.

The White House has yet to comment of the proposed National Worker ID.

National ID Card for All Legal Workers is at Center of Immigration Plan

Under a potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information.

By Laura Meckler, The Wall Street Journal
March 9, 2010

Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill have settled on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card which all American workers would eventually be required to obtain.

Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker.

The ID card plan is one of several steps advocates of an immigration overhaul are taking to address concerns that have defeated similar bills in the past.

The uphill effort to pass a bill is being led by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), who plan to meet with President Barack Obama as soon as this week to update him on their work. An administration official said the White House had no position on the biometric card.
"It's the nub of solving the immigration dilemma politically speaking," Mr. Schumer said in an interview.
The card, he said, would directly answer concerns that after legislation is signed, another wave of illegal immigrants would arrive.
"If you say they can't get a job when they come here, you'll stop it."
The biggest objections to the biometric cards may come from privacy advocates, who fear they would become de facto national ID cards that enable the government to track citizens.
"It is fundamentally a massive invasion of people's privacy," said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "We're not only talking about fingerprinting every American, treating ordinary Americans like criminals in order to work. We're also talking about a card that would quickly spread from work to voting to travel to pretty much every aspect of American life that requires identification."
Mr. Graham says he respects those concerns but disagrees.
"We've all got Social Security cards," he said. "They're just easily tampered with. Make them tamper-proof. That's all I'm saying."
U.S. employers now have the option of using an online system called E-Verify to check whether potential employees are in the U.S. legally. Many Republicans have pressed to make the system mandatory. But others, including Mr. Schumer, complain that the existing system is ineffective.

Last year, White House aides said they expected to push immigration legislation in 2010. But with health care and unemployment dominating his attention, the president has given little indication the issue is a priority.

Rather, Mr. Obama has said he wanted to see bipartisan support in Congress first. So far, Mr. Graham is the only Republican to voice interest publicly, and he wants at least one other GOP co-sponsor to launch the effort.

An immigration overhaul has long proven a complicated political task. The Latino community is pressing for action and will be angry if it is put off again. But many Americans oppose any measure that resembles amnesty for people who came here illegally.

Under the legislation envisioned by Messrs. Graham and Schumer, the estimated 10.8 million people living illegally in the U.S. would be offered a path to citizenship, though they would have to register, pay taxes, pay a fine and wait in line. A guest-worker program would let a set number of new foreigners come to the U.S. legally to work.

Most European countries require citizens and foreigners to carry ID cards. The U.K. had been a holdout, but in the early 2000s it considered national cards as a way to stop identify fraud, protect against terrorism and help stop illegal foreign workers. Amid worries about the cost and complaints that the cards infringe on personal privacy, the government said it would make them voluntary for British citizens. They are required for foreign workers and students, and so far about 130,000 cards have been issued.

Mr. Schumer first suggested a biometric-based employer-verification system last summer. Since then, the idea has gained currency and is now a centerpiece of the legislation being developed, aides said.

A person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand. It would be required of all workers, including teenagers, but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs, the person said.

The card requirement also would be phased in among employers, beginning with industries that typically rely on illegal-immigrant labor.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce doesn't have a position on the proposal, but it is concerned that employers would find it expensive and complicated to properly check the biometrics.

National ID Card = A Police State

By J. D. Longstreet
March 11, 2010

The National ID Card will guarantee the federal government's complete control over every man, woman and child in the US, period!

If you want the government to have total control over your life, then do nothing and very soon we will all be carrying that blasted National ID Card.

A National ID Card will grant the federal government the power to reach into the everyday lives of people living in this country on an unprecedented level.

If you are one of the few (rare) Americans, these days, who actually believes in freedom -- actually believes you have a God-given right to privacy, actually believes the you are entitled to the freedoms and liberties outlined in the original Constitution of the United States -- then you had better rise up and fight for them because we are on the extreme edge of losing them and becoming slaves to the all powerful Central Government the "Progressives" such has Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Senator Charles Shumer of New York apparently want for their fellow Americans.

At "crimefilenews.com" we read the following:

"Washington, DC - There may be benefits to this idea. What we really get is a greater Police State. This is about total control over every man, woman and child. The power connected to those with access to the database is absolute ..." [Read the entire story HERE]

I recently saw a reminder on the internet concerning the 2,000-year-old prophecy in The Bible that tells of a time when every living person must have a number, a mark, if you will, in order to buy and sell. The writer went on to say that up to the current time, this prophecy could not be accomplished. But now, with the advent of computers, it can be fulfilled and -- it appears -- our own government will be in the vanguard of the nations ordering its citizens to have such a mark, such a number. Could it be "The National ID Card?"

As a person who values his privacy I must ask: who will have access to my personal information?

[The Verichip Implant] [Also See How RFID Can Track You]

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) refers to technologies that utilize radio waves to automatically identify individual items. When RFID first emerged, it was used in tracking and access applications. Since then, it has developed as a robust technology with ever increasing processing speeds, wider reading ranges, and larger memory capacities....and can track individuals, their behavior, and monitor their lives, at home, at work and while traveling -- it is Big Brother watching.

A National ID Card could hold huge troves of information. It could include information such as: where you live, where you have lived in the past, information on your family, information on your religion and information on your ObamaCare "Public Option" Government-run Insurance policy, plus more information on your education, and even the registration of your guns!

Think about it. A National ID Card will, most likely, contain your fingerprints, a scan of your iris, or even your DNA profile on it.

Of a necessity there must be a National Database containing continually updated personal information. We already know that once that database is created by the government, it will grow larger and larger and more encompassing.

How are we going to know who would seek access to our information and how can we be sure that permission won't be granted?

A few months back I wrote the following:

"I have to ask: what is wrong with Americans? Are we sheep to be herded by a National Shepherd? Where is the individualism that won this country from the British and then stretched it across the entire continent to the shores of the Pacific? Even the oceans could not hold back our burning desire for FREEDOM! Yet, today, we are begging the federal government to take our freedoms away! This is scandalous! This borders on cowardice of the highest magnitude!

Are we so quick to give back the liberties bought with the precious blood of our forefathers, our ancestors, and in many cases our immediate relatives? In cemeteries all over the globe lie the bodies of American men and women who put their lives on the line and shed their blood up to the "last full measure" to ensure you and I the freedoms we are now begging the Federal Government to take away!

Our national motto is: "In God We Trust." Apparently it's a lie! If we truly placed our trust in God, we would not be so hasty to misplace it in a government, which is already too big and intrusive."

We are told the National ID Card will help in the fight against illegal immigration. How exactly? Illegal aliens will continue to slip across an unsecured border and they will continue to work for cash under the table -- as has been noted by others.

No, a National ID Card is just another way for the federal government to gain control over the masses. That's you and me.

I don't know. Maybe it's just me. I am proud of my ancestors some of whom were bootleggers and smugglers. They left me more than fond memories. They left me with a strong distrust of government. I think that distrust is healthy. They left me something else as well. They made me understand that the government is not responsible for me. They taught me that a man is always responsible for himself. They taught me the more I depended on government, the more dependence government would require until I had nothing left to give -- and then I would find that I was a slave to that government.

The National ID Card must be stopped. Contact your congressperson and your senators and let them know how you feel about the government having complete control over you. Remind them that the Mid-Term Election is coming up in November and you intend to vote.

In this Constitutional Republic we call America; it is up to us, the citizens, to keep our government on a short rein. Indeed, it is our duty, as citizens, to keep the tentacles of government out of our every day existence. They have no business there. We must be wary of "Knee-Jerk" responses to danger, real or imagined, such as I believe the National ID Card to be. If the government wants to "Card" somebody, why not make everyone who is not a citizen of this country carry one (an ID card) while inside our borders?

As I look about me today, at modern day America, I have to conclude we have failed at the single most important task we have as adult Americans. That task is to preserve freedom in this country... to guarantee a future for our children in a free nation.

A National ID card is much the same as a tattooed number on your forearm. It is proof of ownership... by someone other than you.

If natural progression holds true, next will come the National RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) chip implanted at birth. It will broadcast a radio signal all the days of your life, telling the government who you are, and where you are, at all times. National ID, of any kind, takes away one of your basic rights, the right to privacy.

It is time to get a grip, America! Our National Anthem says: "...The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave." Well, don't you think it is about time we began to act like it? A National ID card would say to the world just the opposite.

Social Control in China Includes a National ID Card

A web of social controls insures order in China. Elements include the personal identity card that each citizen must carry, the residence permit that determines in what city a person can live, and the "work unit" that provides lifetime employment, housing, political study and permission to have a child.

By Nicholas D. Kristof, Beijing Journal
Originally Published on March 16, 1992

Behind a locked metal grill door on the second floor of the Beijing Engineering Design Institute is a small room stacked with files from floor to ceiling. There is a file here on each of the institute's 600 employees, and although they are never allowed to peek inside, they live all their lives with their file looming over them.

As part of China's complex system of social control and surveillance, the authorities keep a dangan, or file, on virtually everyone except peasants. Indeed, most Chinese have two dangan: one at their workplace and another in their local police station.

"Here's one, a man called Ji," Zhang Yuhong, a 34-year-old Communist Party member and dangan clerk at the design institute, said as she skimmed through the loose-leaf binder that served as Mr. Ji's dangan, pronounced dahng-ahn.

"School records and grade transcripts," she began, offering a foreigner a rare look into the dangan system. "Entry into the Communist Youth League and the Communist Party. Family members and photo. Promotions and level of work. Performance evaluations. That kind of thing. About 10 items."
A file is opened on each urban citizen when he or she enters elementary school, and it shadows the person throughout life, moving on to high school, college and employer. Particularly for officials, students, professors and Communist Party members, the dangan contain political evaluations that affect career prospects and permission to leave the country.

The file system in China is fundamentally different from any in the West, not only because the Chinese system encompasses all urban citizens, but because the file is kept by one's employer. The dangan affects promotions and job opportunities, and it is difficult to escape from because any prospective employer is supposed to examine an applicant's dangan before making a hiring decision. And there is no Freedom of Information Act to allow access to material in one's file.

The dangan is part of a web of social controls that insure order in China. Other elements of the web include the personal identity card that each citizen must carry, the residence permit that determines in what city a person can live, and the "work unit" that provides lifetime employment, housing, political study and permission to have a child.

It is a remarkable achievement for a poor developing country that it can maintain hundreds of millions of secret files on its urban population. From an American perspective, the extensive dangan system is one way in which China distinguishes itself as an aspiring totalitarian regime rather than a mere dictatorship.

Yet from a Chinese perspective, the absence of a comprehensive system of national files is one of the most perplexing lapses of American society, like the inability of New York to curb graffiti or narcotics. In China, which has a 3,000-year history of bureaucratic controls and no tradition of privacy -- not even a good way of expressing the idea in the Chinese language -- virtually nobody seems upset about the presence of the dangan system ...

Fall of America and Rise of a New World Order By 2010? (Excerpt)

According to Nick Sandberg ("Blueprint for Total Control," 2001):

The master plan of the global elite is to get all humanity microchipped; however, despite the progress our planet has made along the road to becoming a world consumerist superstate, most people are still highly resistant to the idea of having a chip implanted under their skin. Therefore, there is a progressive strategy that will be gradually implemented to lead us, step by step, into permitting this nightmare future to come about.

It may unfold in three concurrent stages:
  1. Firstly, cash will be gradually eliminated.
  2. Secondly, all personal and financial data will be placed on individual "smartcards" or national ID cards.
  3. And, thirdly, smartcards or national ID cards will be themselves gradually eliminated to be replaced by microchip implants.
For the past fifteen years we have been slowly led towards giving up cash in favor of electronic money, and in the last five years, the heat has been turned up. The increased promotion of credit cards, debit cards, mail order, phone and Internet banking, and Internet shopping have all helped to bring about a society where the need for cash transactions is greatly reduced. Yet many people still like carrying cash, meaning more will have to be done if it is to be eliminated completely.
National ID Cards and REAL ID Act of 2005 - The Real ID Act of 2005 was approved by both the House and Senate (the bill passed unanimously, 100-0, in the Senate on May 10, 2005) as part of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief (H.R.1268) and signed into law on May 11, 2005 by President George W. Bush. On March 1, 2007, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff extended the deadline for state compliance with the REAL ID Act from May 11, 2008 to the end of 2009. On January 11, 2008, it was announced the deadline has been extended again, until 2011, in hopes of gaining more support from states.

Already, we are being conditioned to accept the loss of our civil liberties with the passing of the Patriot Act, as well as the loss of our privacy with warrantless wiretapping and tracking systems such as GPS technology in our cars, cameras, wristwatches, and cell phones.

Talk radio host Alex Jones interviewed Hollywood producer and documentary filmmaker Aaron Russo on January 29, 2007. Aaron explained that, through his growing popularity, he met Nick Rockefeller and became friends. Aaron described the astounding admissions of Nick Rockefeller, who told him that the global elite's ultimate goal was to get everyone microchipped so that they could have total control. Nick explained the New World Order agenda for absolute power, which includes a total cashless society and an "RFID chip" to control peoples' money and to track them. Nick told Aaron that "if someone got out of line, they would just turn off their chip."



Aaron Russo met Nick Rockefeller in 1998. He and Rockefeller's friendship ended before September 11, 2001. He was diagnosed with bladder cancer in 2002 and died on August 24, 2007. The following are videos of the interview Alex Jones conducted of Aaron Russo on January 29, 2007, seven months before his death.

Aaron Russo on Nick Rockefeller and a Microchipped Population


Full Interview of Aaron Russo by Alex Jones (Video)

Applied Digital, Verichip, RFID Implantable Microchip


According to Nick Sandberg ("Blueprint for Total Control," 2001) and Serge Monast ("NASA's" Project Blue Beam," 1994):
By first removing cash and then by introducing problems into electronic money systems while simultaneously promoting microchip implants as a safe and acceptable alternative, the global elite will lead us slowly into accepting personal implant technology.

The phasing out of cash most likely will begin with some kind of worldwide economic disaster—not a complete crash, but enough to allow the New World Order to introduce some kind of in-between currency before they introduce their electronic cash to replace all paper money. The in-between currency will be used to force anyone with savings to spend or turn in their cash, because the global elite understand that people who have money are not dependent upon them and might be the very ones who will mount an insurrection against them. If everyone is broke, no one can fund a war of any kind; paper currency will cease to exist; this will be one of the first signs.
NSA to Build $1.5 Billion Cybersecurity Data Center
Ultrasecret NSA Has Conspicuous Role in New Federal Cybersecurity Center
NSA’s $1.9 billion cyber spy center a power grab
The CIA and NSA Want You to Be Their Friend on Facebook
Google Asks NSA to Help Secure Its Network
Google to enlist NSA to help it ward off cyberattacks
NSA and Google Form Alliance
The government has your baby's DNA
Newborn babies in the United States are routinely screened for a panel of genetic diseases. Since the testing is mandated by the government, it's often done without the parents' consent. In many states babies' DNA is stored indefinitely in a government lab.
Obama backs national DNA database, tests
President Barack Obama’s embrace of a national database to store the DNA of people arrested but not necessarily convicted of a crime is heartening to backers of the policy but disappointing to criminal-justice reformers, who view it as an invasion of privacy.
Obama Supports a National DNA Database
Obama tells John Walsh he supports a national DNA database of all arrested Americans.
TIME pushes biometric ID card in the name of immigration reform
A bipartisan pair of Senators, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), recently presented an immigration-bill blueprint to President Obama that includes a proposal to issue a biometric ID card to all working Americans.
There is Now a U.S. Biometrics Agency Fully Integrated into DoD Activities
Where Are Your Papers? Judge Napolitano Covers the Biometric ID Scheme
Immigration Bill Requires All Citizens and Immigrants to Obtain Biometric Social Security Cards
National ID Card for All Legal Workers Is at Center of Immigration Plan
Creating a Success of Biometrics in Government
Lawmakers Eyeing National ID Card
Biometric ID Proposed for All or Face Unemployment
The Proposed National ID Card - Your Passport to a Police State
Dems spark alarm with call for national ID card
Is a biometric, national ID card an immigration game changer?
National ID and the REAL ID Act
The National ID Card That Isn't, Yet
U.S. Government Launches Official Agency to Manage Biometric Database
White House Cybersecurity Plan Will Aim to Protect Health Data
House votes to expand national DNA arrest database
India Building the World's Largest Biometric Database
Biometric scans of skaters' thumbprints planned for California skate park
Deadlines, risks and the future of electronic, chip-based biometric e-passports
Australia's e-Health Bill Paves the Way for PositiveID Human Implantable RFID Microchips



Updated 8/23/10 (Newest Additions at End of List)

March 28, 2010

Truth Has Fallen and Taken Liberty With It


Paul Craig Roberts on The Alex Jones Show, November 2009

Good-Bye: Truth Has Fallen and Taken Liberty With It

By Paul Craig Roberts, Infowars.com
March 24, 2010

Editor: When Paul Craig Roberts gave us permission to post this article, he indicated to Alex Jones that it would probably be his last. Regular readers of PCR’s outstanding columns will be disappointed to hear that he is bowing out for the time being. Alex will discuss the reasons behind this on tomorrow’s show. Roberts has also told us that he will probably appear as a guest on The Alex Jones Show later next week to expand on why he has decided to “sign off,” as he puts it in the following article.

There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword. That was a time when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal, or financial interest.

Today Americans are ruled by propaganda. Americans have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it.

Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded “anti-American,” “anti-semite” or “conspiracy theorist.”

Truth is an inconvenience for government and for the interest groups whose campaign contributions control government.

Truth is an inconvenience for prosecutors who want convictions, not the discovery of innocence or guilt.

Truth is inconvenient for ideologues.

Today many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it. “Free market economists” are paid to sell offshoring to the American people. High-productivity, high value-added American jobs are denigrated as dirty, old industrial jobs. Relicts from long ago, we are best shed of them. Their place has been taken by “the New Economy,” a mythical economy that allegedly consists of high-tech white collar jobs in which Americans innovate and finance activities that occur offshore. All Americans need in order to participate in this “new economy” are finance degrees from Ivy League universities, and then they will work on Wall Street at million dollar jobs.

Economists who were once respectable took money to contribute to this myth of “the New Economy.”

And not only economists sell their souls for filthy lucre. Recently we have had reports of medical doctors who, for money, have published in peer-reviewed journals concocted “studies” that hype this or that new medicine produced by pharmaceutical companies that paid for the “studies.”

The Council of Europe is investigating the drug companies’ role in hyping a false swine flu pandemic in order to gain billions of dollars in sales of the vaccine.

The media helped the US military hype its recent Marja offensive in Afghanistan, describing Marja as a city of 80,000 under Taliban control. It turns out that Marja is not urban but a collection of village farms.

And there is the global warming scandal, in which NGOs, the UN, and the nuclear industry colluded in concocting a doomsday scenario in order to create profit in pollution.

Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money.

Wherever money is insufficient to bury the truth, ignorance, propaganda, and short memories finish the job.

I remember when, following CIA director William Colby’s testimony before the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders preventing the CIA and U.S. black-op groups from assassinating foreign leaders. In 2010 the US Congress was told by Dennis Blair, head of national intelligence, that the US now assassinates its own citizens in addition to foreign leaders.

When Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that U.S. citizens no longer needed to be arrested, charged, tried, and convicted of a capital crime, just murdered on suspicion alone of being a “threat,” he wasn’t impeached. No investigation pursued. Nothing happened. There was no Church Committee. In the mid-1970s the CIA got into trouble for plots to kill Castro. Today it is American citizens who are on the hit list. Whatever objections there might be don’t carry any weight. No one in government is in any trouble over the assassination of U.S. citizens by the U.S. government.

As an economist, I am astonished that the American economics profession has no awareness whatsoever that the U.S. economy has been destroyed by the offshoring of U.S. GDP to overseas countries. U.S. corporations, in pursuit of absolute advantage or lowest labor costs and maximum CEO “performance bonuses,” have moved the production of goods and services marketed to Americans to China, India, and elsewhere abroad. When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession.

Intelligence and integrity have been purchased by money. The transnational or global U.S. corporations pay multi-million dollar compensation packages to top managers, who achieve these “performance awards” by replacing U.S. labor with foreign labor. While Washington worries about “the Muslim threat,” Wall Street, U.S. corporations and “free market” shills destroy the U.S. economy and the prospects of tens of millions of Americans.

Americans, or most of them, have proved to be putty in the hands of the police state.

Americans have bought into the government’s claim that security requires the suspension of civil liberties and accountable government. Astonishingly, Americans, or most of them, believe that civil liberties, such as habeas corpus and due process, protect “terrorists,” and not themselves. Many also believe that the Constitution is a tired old document that prevents government from exercising the kind of police state powers necessary to keep Americans safe and free.

Most Americans are unlikely to hear from anyone who would tell them any different.

I was associate editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal. I was Business Week’s first outside columnist, a position I held for 15 years. I was columnist for a decade for Scripps Howard News Service, carried in 300 newspapers. I was a columnist for the Washington Times and for newspapers in France and Italy and for a magazine in Germany. I was a contributor to the New York Times and a regular feature in the Los Angeles Times. Today I cannot publish in, or appear on, the American “mainstream media.”

For the last six years I have been banned from the “mainstream media.” My last column in the New York Times appeared in January, 2004, coauthored with Democratic U.S. Senator Charles Schumer representing New York. We addressed the offshoring of U.S. jobs. Our op-ed article produced a conference at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. and live coverage by C-Span. A debate was launched. No such thing could happen today.

For years I was a mainstay at the Washington Times, producing credibility for the Moony newspaper as a Business Week columnist, former Wall Street Journal editor, and former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. But when I began criticizing Bush’s wars of aggression, the order came down to Mary Lou Forbes to cancel my column.

The American corporate media does not serve the truth. It serves the government and the interest groups that empower the government.

America’s fate was sealed when the public and the anti-war movement bought the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory. The government’s account of 9/11 is contradicted by much evidence. Nevertheless, this defining event of our time, which has launched the U.S. on interminable wars of aggression and a domestic police state, is a taboo topic for investigation in the media. It is pointless to complain of war and a police state when one accepts the premise upon which they are based.

These trillion dollar wars have created financing problems for Washington’s deficits and threaten the U.S. dollar’s role as world reserve currency. The wars and the pressure that the budget deficits put on the dollar’s value have put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block. Former Goldman Sachs chairman and U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson is after these protections for the elderly. Fed chairman Bernanke is also after them. The Republicans are after them as well. These protections are called “entitlements,” as if they are some sort of welfare that people have not paid for in payroll taxes all their working lives.

With over 21 per cent unemployment as measured by the methodology of 1980, with American jobs, GDP, and technology having been given to China and India, with war being Washington’s greatest commitment, with the dollar over-burdened with debt, with civil liberty sacrificed to the “war on terror,” the liberty and prosperity of the American people have been thrown into the trash bin of history.

The militarism of the U.S. and Israeli states, and Wall Street and corporate greed, will now run their course. As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off.



Past Articles by Paul Craig Roberts on LewRockwell.com
Past Articles by Paul Craig Roberts on AntiWar.com
Past Articles by Paul Craig Roberts on VDARE.com

Alex Jones’ Farewell Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

March 27, 2010

The Terrifying Future Facing America

The Gang of 20 and the New World Order

By Bill Wilson, Bible Prophecy Today
April 3, 2009

The mouthpiece of the new world order -- the mainstream news media -- is falling all over itself to show the images and symbols of how leaders of the 20 most powerful nations on earth came together to "save the world."

Their tinny reporting has all the makings of a corny B movie about a bunch of inexperienced, yet cunning crooks, plotting to close down or control all the places where people keep their money, steal the world's wealth, redistribute it among their buddies, and deceive the masses while appearing to be a frat house of raucous superheroes. Unfortunately, the world stage is little different than Hollywood and the myth of the movie is, in truth, a reality show.

Great Britain's Prime Minister Harold Brown whipped the media into a frenzy by declaring:

"I think a new world order is emerging and with it the foundations of a new and progressive era of international cooperation."
Brown underscored a global communist theme in saying:
"We have resolved from today, we will together manage the process of globalization to secure responsibility from all and fairness to all."
Brown summarized the accomplishments of the G20 summit saying world leaders embarked on the largest redistribution of wealth in history by agreeing to reform banks, restructure the global financial system, give money to the poor and ensure "a green recovery."

The man who now occupies the Oval Office threw America's sovereignty under the bus, joined up with the gang of 20, and agreed to an international heist of a trillion dollars as the first installment of redistributing America's wealth to the rest of the world in support of programs that will make his socialist and communist buddies richer and more powerful. He explained his strategy of compromise to adoring reporters:
"Each country has its own quirks and own particular issues that a leader may decide is really, really important, something that is non-negotiable for them. And what we tried to do as much as possible was to accommodate those issues in a way that did not hamper the effectiveness of the overall document."
Even Russian President Dmitry Medvedev hailed the US President as "my new comrade." The Russians are ecstatic over the possibility of the US now reversing all previous policies that protected America and her allies from Russian-inspired attacks.

2 Timothy 3:13 warned of the type of leaders that would emerge in the latter days:

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived."
The world has witnessed the very foundational cornerstone being laid of a one world order. And those who do not know better are embracing this deadly plague dressed like a virgin bride -- just like in the movies. This script, however, was not written in Hollywood.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Harry Markopolos
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Reform

Lost Vegas: Vanguard

By Eric deCarbonnel, Market Skeptics
Originally Published on May 23, 2009

During the boom years, no place in America boomed more than Las Vegas. But when the economy collapsed, Vegas fell hard.


Laura Ling tours the wreckage of Sin City, from unemployed strippers and half-built, abandoned casino projects, to hospitals turning away cancer patients and ambulances, to one of the few remaining boom industries--evicting people.

“Lost Vegas” (video above) previews the terrifying future facing America. We are looking at a disaster unprecedented in recent history.

America's flawed "pro-growth" economy

In the 1980s, the US adopted economic policies that favored cost cutting and global trade. And where the US used to be the manufacturing sector of the world, it stopped making goods, and instead started buying goods from Asia, where products were cheaper because people were paid less to make them. The US was flooded with cheap goods, and Americans were encouraged to spend more money. And eventually consumer spending, which used to account for 60% of the US economy, had jumped to 70%. Factory workers in the midwest lost their jobs and many of them ended up leaving for growing places like Las Vegas. - Quote from "Lost Vegas"

In the last twenty five years, the US has outsourced virtually its entire manufacturing sector. We as a nation have allowed ourselves to become totally dependent on foreign oil (those 11mph SUVs), and we have outsourced the productions of our most basic necessities to places like China. This means that a devaluation of the dollar will instantly wipe out America’s standard of living, leaving us as third world citizens. This dollar devaluation is now underway.

(See The US Import Bubble or The Death of American Manufacturing for more info on America’s flawed "pro-growth" economy)

The ‘bad’ phase of this financial crisis is only beginning

Up until now, while things may have been bad on an individual level (job loss, foreclosures, etc.), the financial crisis hasn’t impacted the way America works.People may have cut back on spending, but the basics of American life haven’t been drastically altered. However, that is about to change as the dollar collapses over the coming months.

(See Loud Paradigm Shift Rumblings or Fed Planning 15-Fold Increase In US Monetary Base for more on the information on what is happening to the dollar.)

No Savings

Savings are going to be wiped out by the dollar’s collapse. Oh, there will be plenty of $100 bills floating around the economy, but these bills won’t buy anything of value.

No Credit

Although the financial crisis has greatly impacted the ability to borrow, right now it is still possible for American consumers to borrow money. As proof, I just got another 0% credit card last month (which I used to buy gold on ebay).

However, credit card limits aren’t going to be increased to keep up with inflation, which means a year from now nearly all credit cards will be useless (credit cards of foreign banks denominated in foreign currencies might still work). Additionally, hyperinflation has the impact of vaporizing the financial sector of the country where it occurs, which means it will be soon next to impossible to borrow money in the US.

No Jobs

The dollar has begun to fall, and over the next year it will lose most of its value. As it does, most of America’s service economy, like Las Vegas, will disintegrate as consumer spending in real terms (i.e.: gold or other stable currencies) will drop like a rock. The US service sector will evaporate, bringing unemployment to levels exceeding the great depression.

People will die

When people go broke, so do their governments. - Quote from "Lost Vegas"

As the US service economy disintegrates, public health services/programs will be cut back, and individuals will have no savings/credit/income to pay for medical care. The “Lost Vegas” video should give an idea what this will look like: patients will be turned away from hospital; pharmacies will also close because no one will have any means of paying for medication. It will be a disaster…

Crime will rise

“This economy is so stupid, man. People are going to start going to jail eventually… because, you know, they’re worried about their kids, the health of their kids, feeding their kids… they're going to do whatever it takes to feed their kids, man… I got kids, man… I gotta feed, man.” -Quote from "Lost Vegas"

We are heading towards a future with millions of desperate people at a time when critical services, including law enforcement, will be cutting back. To make matters worse, oil prices will soar in dollars, leading to possible shortages and supply disruptions. Because of rising fuel costs and budget constraints, police forces will have to cut back on their fuel use, which means less patrolling

This is what really scares me. You can stockpile all the food and gold in the world, but it is useless if it gets stolen from you.

How will your community do?

Look around you. Do you see any farmland, mines, oil wells/refining, factories, or unique landmarks able to attract foreign tourist? If you do, then you are luck, as these places will bring in income which will help sustain your local economy (Alaska will probably be the state best able to weather the crisis).

However, if all you see is retailers, hotels, casinos, houses, skyscrapers, restaurants, bars, clubs, etc, then your community is in trouble. "Lost Vegas" offers a preview of what faces a local economy concentrated entirely in the service sector.

Longer term, the US will recover

In the longer term, the manufacturing in the United States will recover. Companies will start outsourcing jobs here, as we will be the new China (weak currency with millions of people desperate for work). The US is also blessed with some of the best agricultural land on Earth. The people responsible for this economic/financial mess will go to jail, and the US economy will experience real grow based on the production real goods (and not over-consumption and foreign debt).

It is the next two years which terrify me. I plan to move to Russia later this year and am moving forwards with setting up a fund to invest in Russian agriculture.

Underemployment at Record 20% According to Gallup
New underground economy
Obama signs jobs bill into law, says more must be done
More Retirement Disasters
Social Security to See Payout Exceed Pay – In This Year
End of Empire – Waking Zombie Nations
EU draws up plans for single ‘economic government’ to ‘prevent crisis’
Congressional Budget Office estimates $9.8 trillion in deficits over next 10 years
Health Care Dictatorship: A Crime Against America

March 25, 2010

The Collapse of Industrialized Civilizations

Maurice Strong and the Collapse of Industrialized Civilizations


In 1990, a small, round faced Canadian described a scenario to a reporter. He envisioned a small group of world leaders concluding that the rich countries were the “principle risk to the Earth.” This group then created a plan to get the rich countries to “sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment.” When the rich countries refused, the group decided “the only hope for the planet” was for the industrialized civilizations to collapse. He pondered, “Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Two years later, he helped lay the foundation for the Kyoto Protocol at the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. His name is Maurice Strong, and he would love to see America collapse.

Who is Maurice Strong?

Billionaire Canadian Maurice Strong is a man of profound influence. He’s the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and described as “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli.”

Life and Times: Maurice Strong

He is known as the “Godfather of the international environmental movement” and the “architect of the Kyoto Protocol.” Both of those are ironic titles for a man who started out in the oil business.

Strong traveled Africa in the 1950s, creating a network of service stations for Dome Petroleum and recruiting locals to man them. In the 60s, he took Ajax Petroleum, renamed it Canadian Industrial Gas & Oil Co., and turned it from almost busted into an oil giant. In 1975, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau started a state-owned gas company. Strong accepted the position as president of Petro-Canada.

While his private sector resume is impressive, it is his public sector experience that is shaping environmental policy today. While he was dabbling in oil, he was also starting his political career. In 1966, Strong led the Canadian International Development Agency. After four years of that, he went to the United Nations.

In 1972, Strong was the secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden. Later, he was executive director of the UN Environmental Program.

He has had other positions of influence at the United Nations, including “commissioners of the World Commission on Environment and Development, set up as an independent body by the United Nations in 1983″ and senior adviser to secretary-general Kofi Annan [see Men Who Run the World].

Journalist Elaine Dewar interviewed Strong and wrote about him in her book Cloak of Green. She writes:
“He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda.”
“He told me he had more unfettered power than a cabinet minister in Ottawa. He was right: He didn’t have to run for re-election, yet he could profoundly affect lives.”
That “unfettered power” led to his role in creating the Kyoto Protocol.

“An agreement reducing their impact on the environment”
 
In 1990, Maurice Strong gave an interview to WEST magazine, where he described how he envisioned the Earth being saved:
“Each year the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Hundreds of CEO’s, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather each February to attend meetings and set the economic agendas for the year ahead.
“What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment? Will they do it? Will the rich countries agree to reduce their impact on the environment? Will they agree to save the earth?
“The group’s conclusions is ‘no.’ The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilization collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Two years after making that statement, Strong laid the foundation and helped in the creation of the Kyoto Protocol. According to Wikipedia, “The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the international Framework Convention on Climate Change with the objective of reducing greenhouse gases that cause climate change.” Another way of saying that is “an agreement reducing their impact on the environment.” What has been the result of the agreement? “The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change.
Japan, Italy and Spain face payments of as much as $33 billion combined for failing to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions as promised under the Kyoto treaty …
Spain faces a $7.8 billion cost, and Italy and Japan each may owe about $13 billion, based on estimates by their governments and the current price for permits.
It seems the rich countries are up to their necks in fines, while the developing countries don’t have to worry about caps on emissions. Sound familiar?

If the United States were to sign the treaty, it is expected to have disastrous results:
…according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, [ratifying Kyoto] could cost the economy $400 billion per year, raise electric utility rates by 86 per cent, hike the cost of heating oil by 76 per cent, and impose a permanent “Kyoto gasoline tax” of 66 cents per gallon. In total, each U.S. household would have to spend an extra $1,740 per year on energy. WEFA, an economic information and consulting firm, reports that 2.4 million jobs would be lost and manufacturing wages cut by 2.1 per cent.
Kyoto is actually destroying Europe’s economy. Strong, however, is not concerned with the success of the world’s economy. In fact, it seems that is part of the plan. When an economy grows, greenhouse gases tend to grow with it. Strong knows this and says:
“Economic growth is not the cure, it is the disease.” (Unless we are talking about Strong’s economic growth.)
He’s used environmentalism to make a lot of money.

“A socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology”
 
Maurice Strong
In the 1990s, Al Gore heaped praise on a company called Molten Metal Technology, Inc. This company, a hazardous waste management firm, claimed to have a new technology, “a promising adaptation of steelmaking chemistry to create a closed-loop system for turning industrial wastes into chemical feedstocks.”

Gore’s hype helped the company’s stock jump to $35 a share. After receiving over $25 million dollars in federal grant money from the Department of Energy, the DoE figured out that the techonology was a bust. It simply didn’t work.

Maurice Strong ran Molten Metals, and when the federal government decided to stop handing out grants, he and the other corporate officers sold off $15.3 million in personal shares of stock. The stock dropped to $5 soon afterward, but Strong had already made his money.

Today, Strong is on the Chicago Climate Exchange board of directors. The CCX “is North America’s only and the world’s first global marketplace for integrating voluntary legally binding emissions reductions with emissions trading and offsets for all six greenhouse gases.”

The more global warming gets hyped, once again by Al Gore, the more green technology is worth. So while Strong may be “a socialist in ideology,” he is definitely a “capitalist in methodology.”

The architect of Kyoto has made millions off of environmentalism, but still finds himself unable to pull America into the snare. But he has a plan for that also. In 2006, he described what he thought was necessary to keep the green movement alive… fear.

Speaking of the environmental movement post-2012, the year Kyoto expires, Strong laid out a vision for what he thinks it will take to keep the green movement alive in the hearts of world governments:
"What we really need are massive incentives for the right kind of behaviour," Strong explained at one seminar to an audience of roughly 400. "Economic incentives, but also moral incentives, ethical incentives, psychological incentives… fear."
"Political leaders cannot go far beyond what their constituents are prepared to accept, nor can those who are negative be more negative than what their constituents are willing to support," notes Strong, acknowledging that democratic solutions have their limits.
"So, politics really responds to public movements. If you look at the great movements in history, the abolishment of the slave trade and all that, they didn't start with individual policies from governments. They were forced on them by people's movements. And that's the same with the environmental movement. "
Later, he adds: "And remember: the communist revolution was a people's revolution."
Maurice Strong would not shed a tear at the collapse of the American economy or our way of life. He has stated before that “current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”

In other words, the demise of the American way of life is necessary for the survival of the Earth. This perspective poses little threat from a normal environmentalist. In the hands of the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli,” it is an all too real threat to America.

Related:

March 23, 2010

Who Owns The Federal Reserve?

"Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers, foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers, and rich and predatory money lenders." – The Honorable Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1930s

Who Owns the Federal Reserve?

The Rothschilds of London and Berlin
Lazard Brothers of Paris
Israel Moses Seif of Italy
Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany
Lehman Brothers of the U.S.
Goldman Sachs of the U.S.
Rockefeller Families of the U.S.

Interest on the U.S. Debt

The Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding includes the monthly interest for:

  • U.S. Treasury notes and bonds
  • Foreign and domestic series certificates of indebtedness, notes and bonds
  • Savings bonds
  • Government Account Series (GAS)
  • State and Local Government series (SLGs) and other special purpose securities.

Amortized discount or premium on bills, notes and bonds is also included in the monthly interest expense.The fiscal year represents the total interest expense on the Debt Outstanding for a given fiscal year. This includes the months of October through September.

Interest Expense - Available Historical Data Fiscal Year End
2011 $454 billion
2010 $414 billion
2009 $383 billion
2008 $451 billion
2007 $430 billion
2006 $406 billion
2005 $352 billion
2004 $322 billion
2003 $318 billion
2002 $333 billion
2001 $360 billion
2000 $362 billion
1999 $354 billion
1998 $364 billion
1997 $356 billion
1996 $344 billion
1995 $332 billion
1994 $296 billion
1993 $293 billion
1992 $292 billion
1991 $286 billion
1990 $265 billion
1989 $241 billion
1988 $214 billion

The Fed is Privately Owned - Its Shareholders are Private Banks

By Ellen Brown, Web of Debt
Originally Published on October 8, 2008

The Federal Reserve (or Fed) has assumed sweeping new powers in the last year.

In an unprecedented move in March 2008, the New York Fed advanced the funds for JPMorgan Chase bank to buy investment bank Bear Stearns for pennies on the dollar. The deal was particularly controversial because Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, sits on the board of the New York Fed and participated in the secret weekend negotiations.

In September 2008, the Federal Reserve did something even more unprecedented when it bought the world’s largest insurance company. The Fed announced on September 16 that it was giving an $85 billion loan to American International Group (AIG) for a nearly 80% stake in the mega-insurer.

The Associated Press called it a "government takeover," but this was no ordinary nationalization. Unlike the U.S. Treasury, which took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the week before, the Fed is not a government-owned agency. Also unprecedented was the way the deal was funded. The Associated Press reported:

"The Treasury Department, for the first time in its history, said it would begin selling bonds for the Federal Reserve in an effort to help the central bank deal with its unprecedented borrowing needs."
This is extraordinary. Why is the Treasury issuing U.S. government bonds (or debt) to fund the Fed, which is itself supposedly "the lender of last resort" created to fund the banks and the federal government? Yahoo Finance reported on September 17:
"The Treasury is setting up a temporary financing program at the Fed’s request. The program will auction Treasury bills to raise cash for the Fed’s use. The initiative aims to help the Fed manage its balance sheet following its efforts to enhance its liquidity facilities over the previous few quarters."
Normally, the Fed swaps green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes for pink pieces of paper called U.S. bonds (the federal government’s I.O.U.s), in order to provide Congress with the dollars it cannot raise through taxes. Now, it seems, the government is issuing bonds, not for its own use, but for the use of the Fed! Perhaps the plan is to swap them with the banks’ dodgy derivatives collateral directly, without actually putting them up for sale to outside buyers.

According to Wikipedia (which translates Fedspeak into somewhat clearer terms than the Fed’s own website):

"The Term Securities Lending Facility is a 28-day facility that will offer Treasury general collateral to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s primary dealers in exchange for other program-eligible collateral. It is intended to promote liquidity in the financing markets for Treasury and other collateral and thus to foster the functioning of financial markets more generally. . . . The resource allows dealers to switch debt that is less liquid for U.S. government securities that are easily tradable."
"To switch debt that is less liquid for U.S. government securities that are easily tradable" means that the government gets the banks’ toxic derivative debt, and the banks get the government’s triple-A securities. Unlike the risky derivative debt, federal securities are considered "risk-free" for purposes of determining capital requirements, allowing the banks to improve their capital position so they can make new loans. (See E. Brown, "Bailout Bedlam," webofdebt.com/articles, October 2, 2008.)

In its latest power play, on October 3, 2008, the Fed acquired the ability to pay interest to its member banks on the reserves the banks maintain at the Fed. Reuters reported on October 3:
"The U.S. Federal Reserve gained a key tactical tool from the $700 billion financial rescue package signed into law on Friday that will help it channel funds into parched credit markets. Tucked into the 451-page bill is a provision that lets the Fed pay interest on the reserves that banks are required to hold at the central bank."
If the Fed’s money comes ultimately from the taxpayers, that means we the taxpayers are paying interest to the banks on the banks’ own reserves — reserves maintained for their own private profit. These increasingly controversial encroachments on the public purse warrant a closer look at the central banking scheme itself. Who owns the Federal Reserve, who actually controls it, where does it get its money, and whose interests is it serving?

Not Private and Not for Profit?

The Fed’s website insists that it is not a private corporation, is not operated for profit, and is not funded by Congress. But is that true?

The Federal Reserve was set up in 1913 as a "lender of last resort" to backstop bank runs, following a particularly bad bank panic in 1907. The Fed’s mandate was then and continues to be to keep the private banking system intact; and that means keeping intact the system’s most valuable asset, a monopoly on creating the national money supply.

Except for coins, every dollar in circulation is now created privately as a debt to the Federal Reserve or the banking system it heads. The Fed’s website attempts to gloss over its role as chief defender and protector of this private banking club, but let’s take a closer look. The website states:

"The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations — possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit; and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

"[The Federal Reserve] is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

"The Federal Reserve’s income is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations. . . . After paying its expenses, the Federal Reserve turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury."
So let’s review:

1. The Fed is privately owned.

Its shareholders are private banks. In fact, 100% of its shareholders are private banks. None of its stock is owned by the government.

2. The fact that the Fed does not get "appropriations" from Congress basically means that it gets its money from Congress without congressional approval, by engaging in "open market operations."

Here is how it works:
When the government is short of funds, the Treasury issues bonds and delivers them to bond dealers, which auction them off. When the Fed wants to "expand the money supply" (create money), it steps in and buys bonds from these dealers with newly-issued dollars acquired by the Fed for the cost of writing them into an account on a computer screen. These maneuvers are called "open market operations" because the Fed buys the bonds on the "open market" from the bond dealers.

Primary Dealers of the Federal Reserve System:
BNP Paribas Securities Corp.
Banc of America Securities LLC
Barclays Capital Inc.
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.
Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
Daiwa Securities America Inc.
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.
Jefferies & Company, Inc.
J. P. Morgan Securities Inc.
Mizuho Securities USA Inc.
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated
Nomura Securities International, Inc.
RBC Capital Markets Corporation
RBS Securities Inc.
UBS Securities LLC.

The bonds then become the "reserves" that the banking establishment uses to back its loans. In another bit of sleight of hand known as "fractional reserve" lending, the same reserves are lent many times over, further expanding the money supply, generating interest for the banks with each loan.
It was this money-creating process that prompted Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee in the 1960s, to call the Federal Reserve "a total money-making machine." He wrote:
"When the Federal Reserve writes a check for a government bond, it does exactly what any bank does, it creates money — it created money purely and simply by writing a check."
The Fed generates profits for its shareholders.

The interest on bonds acquired with its newly-issued Federal Reserve Notes pays the Fed’s operating expenses plus a guaranteed 6% return to its banker shareholders. A mere 6% a year may not be considered a profit in the world of Wall Street high finance, but most businesses that manage to cover all their expenses and give their shareholders a guaranteed 6% return are considered "for profit" corporations.

In addition to this guaranteed 6%, the banks will now be getting interest from the taxpayers on their "reserves." The basic reserve requirement set by the Federal Reserve is 10%. The website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York explains that as money is redeposited and relent throughout the banking system, this 10% held in "reserve" can be fanned into ten times that sum in loans; that is, $10,000 in reserves becomes $100,000 in loans.

Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.8 puts the total "loans and leases in bank credit" as of September 24, 2008, at $7,049 billion. Ten percent of that is $700 billion. That means we the taxpayers will be paying interest to the banks on at least $700 billion annually — this so that the banks can retain the reserves to accumulate interest on ten times that sum in loans.

The banks earn these returns from the taxpayers for the privilege of having the banks’ interests protected by an all-powerful independent private central bank, even when those interests may be opposed to the taxpayers’ — for example, when the banks use their special status as private money creators to fund speculative derivative schemes that threaten to collapse the U.S. economy.

Among other special benefits, banks and other financial institutions (but not other corporations) can borrow at the low Fed funds rate of about 2%. They can then turn around and put this money into 30-year Treasury bonds at 4.5%, earning an immediate 2.5% from the taxpayers, just by virtue of their position as favored banks. A long list of banks (but not other corporations) is also now protected from the short selling that can crash the price of other stocks.

Time to Change the Statute?

According to the Fed’s website, the control that Congress has over the Federal Reserve is limited to this:

"[T]he Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute."
As we know from watching the business news, "oversight" basically means that Congress gets to see the results when it’s over. The Fed periodically reports to Congress, but the Fed doesn’t ask; it tells. The only real leverage Congress has over the Fed is that it "can alter its responsibilities by statute." It is time for Congress to exercise that leverage and make the Federal Reserve a truly federal agency, acting by and for the people through their elected representatives. If the Fed can demand AIG’s stock in return for an $85 billion loan to the mega-insurer, we can demand the Fed’s stock in return for the trillion-or-so dollars we’ll be advancing to bail out the private banking system from its follies.

If the Fed were actually a federal agency, the government could issue U.S. legal tender directly, avoiding an unnecessary interest-bearing debt to private middlemen who create the money out of thin air themselves. Among other benefits to the taxpayers, a truly "federal" Federal Reserve could lend the full faith and credit of the United States to state and local governments interest-free, cutting the cost of infrastructure in half, restoring the thriving local economies of earlier decades.

Ellen Brown, J.D., developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust." She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her eleven books include the bestselling Nature’s Pharmacy, co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker, and Forbidden Medicine. Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and http://www.ellenbrown.com/.

After Paying $79 Billion to the U.S. Government, the Federal Reserve Still 'Earned' $82 Billion in 2010

Good to know someone is profiteering from the misery of the American people.

The Associated Press
March 22, 2011

The Federal Reserve is paying a record $79.3 billion to the U.S. government after the central bank earned a record $81.7 billion last year from its massive holdings of securities, which were purchased to help stabilize the financial system and pull the economy out of the recession.

A portion of those earnings go toward funding the Fed, which receives no appropriations from Congress. Any money left over is turned over to the Treasury Department.


The Fed says its payment to the Treasury Department for 2010 is 67 percent higher than $47.4 billion it paid in 2009, the previous record.

Fed Earnings Jump 50 Percent in 2010 to a Record $80.9 Billion



Reuters
January 10, 2011

The Federal Reserve reported Monday its earnings jumped by more than 50 percent in 2010 to a record $80.9 billion on its massive holdings of securities, and it is turning the bulk of it over to the U.S. Treasury Department.

The $78.4 billion that the Fed is remitting to Treasury is also a record and is $31 billion more than a year earlier. In 2009 the Fed had net income of $53.4 billion.

The Fed's portfolio has ballooned to $2.16 trillion, roughly triple its size before the financial crisis, as it purchased securities including U.S. government debt and mortgage-linked bonds in a move to drive down borrowing costs and stimulate the economy.
"The increase was due primarily to increased interest income earned on securities holdings during 2010," the U.S. central bank said in releasing preliminary unaudited results.
Audited results will be issued in the spring and may show some changes, Fed officials indicated.

After driving overnight interest rates close to zero percent in December 2008, the Fed bought $1.7 trillion of longer-term Treasury and mortgage-related bonds as a supplement to its pledge to keep overnight rates near zero for a long time.

It followed that up late last year with a new $600 billion bond-buying program — again intended to spur growth by pumping liquidity into the economy. That program ends at mid-year.

The Fed turns over profits to the Treasury annually and has never posted a loss. But the central bank took a number of extraordinary actions during and after the 2007-2009 financial crisis that critics say may have left it with some poor-quality holdings.

Doubts on All Sides

Critics fault the Fed on several scores, with some claiming its actions have sown the seeds for a potential flare-up in inflation and others saying it has put the central bank at risk of destabilizing losses when it sells down its holdings.

If credit losses were to pile up, those criticisms could mount.

In addition, some foreign governments have charged that the Fed's easy money policies could weaken the dollar and spark a round of competitive currency devaluations.

Fed officials who briefed reporters said asset sales would be part of a so-called "exit strategy" from loose monetary policy, but only once the economy was on a sound footing. That means sales of the securities may be some way down the road, they added.

A Fed official said that if the central bank had to make sales and take some losses, it could always scale back the amount it remits to the Treasury. But there is no mechanism in place for it to get past remittances returned by the Treasury.

In testimony to Congress on Friday, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke gave no sign the Fed was ready start scaling back its bond purchase program. Nor did the Fed chief give any hints about further buying beyond the June deadline for the $600 billion program.

The Fed said its 2010 income included $76.2 billion in income on securities bought through open market operations, including Treasury and mortgage-linked debt, $7.1 billion from limited liability companies created in response to the financial crisis, $2.1 billion in interest income from credit extended to American International Group and $1.3 billion of dividends on preferred interests in AIA Aurora and ALICO Holdings.

The U.S. Total Debt

DollarDaze

The Federal Reserve's publications, Flow of Funds Accounts of the United States (also known as the Z.1 Releases) contain a great amount of data regarding money-flows between various sectors. Missing from this data set is the portion of debt owed by the federal government to the Federal Reserve. To retrieve that data, one must subtract the Gross Federal Debt held by the Public from Gross National Debt published by the St. Louis Federal Reserve. This data should be added to the Federal Government Debt figures in table D.3 of the Z.1 Release to account for the complete national debt.

Debt Owed by the Federal Government to the Federal Reserve

Composition of the National Debt

U.S. Treasury Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

Available Historical Data Fiscal Year End
2010 $413,954,825,362.17
2009 $383,071,060,815.42
2008 $451,154,049,950.63
2007 $429,977,998,108.20
2006 $405,872,109,315.83
2005 $352,350,252,507.90
2004 $321,566,323,971.29
2003 $318,148,529,151.51
2002 $332,536,958,599.42
2001 $359,507,635,242.41
2000 $361,997,734,302.36

If 45% of the interest on U.S. debt goes to the Federal Reserve, then U.S. taxpayers paid the Federal Reserve $186.3 billion in 2010. So even though the Fed is remitting $78.4 billion to the U.S. Treasury, they took $107.4 from U.S. taxpayers for the privilege of printing money out of thin air and then loaning it the the U.S. government with interest.

Flashback: Federal Reserve Makes $14 Billion Profit Off Financial Crisis So Far

Financial Times
August 30, 2009

The Federal Reserve has made a $14 billion profit on loan programmes that have provided hundreds of billions of dollars in liquidity to the financial system since the start of the crisis two years ago, according to Fed officials.

The internal estimate is based on the difference between the fees and interest on the lending facilities and the interest the Fed would have earned had it invested the funds in three-month Treasury bills.

The central bank earned about $19 billion in income from charging interest and fees to financial institutions and investors that tapped the new facilities to obtain much-needed funds during the turmoil. The interest the Fed would have earned by investing the same amount in T-bills was an estimated $5 billion, leaving a $14 billion gain since August 2007.

The Fed assessment underlines the possibility that other central banks could make a profit on their crisis-fighting measures – at least before adjusting for the risk they assumed...

The Fed declined to comment.

Critics have warned the central bank might lose money on its vast efforts to avoid financial collapse and ease financing conditions for the economy as a whole.

But the internal estimates suggest that the Fed might well make a cash profit on the crisis. They show that the fees earned on the loans were high enough to more than cover defaults to date – leaving a sizeable cushion against future losses on these loans and other parts of the Fed portfolio.

Some politicians have criticised the Fed for using billions of dollars of public funds to support the market and stricken groups such as AIG and Bear Stearns. The Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned from $800 billion in 2007 to about $2,000 billion. A recent Gallup Poll found the Fed had the worst public approval rating of nine government agencies, even lower than the tax authorities.

Go to The Lamb Slain Home Page