Take a look at this recent editorial from the New York Sun. As per Wikipedia, "The Sun is "known for its pugnacious coverage of Jewish-related issues"; in particular, it is "a strong proponent of Israel's right to defend itself." It has published articles by pro-Israel reporter Aaron Klein."
Looks like Christopher Jon Bjerknes (http://jewishracism.blogspot.com/) is right. I don't know if the Zionists want Ron Paul to actually win. Probably not. But the purpose of Ron Paul's campaign may be to give credibility to the Gold Standard in the Patriot Community.
------------------------------------
RON PAUL'S PRESCIENCE
http://www.nysun.com/article/66303
New York Sun Editorial
November 12, 2007
Congressman Ron Paul: "It just looks like we may well come to a '79, '80. Do you anticipate that there's a possibility that we'll face a crisis of the dollar such as we had in '79 and 1980?"
Chairman Bernanke: "The Federal Reserve is committed to maintaining low and stable inflation, and I'm very confident we'll be able to do that."
Mr. Paul: "You're not answering whether or not you anticipate a problem."
Mr. Bernanke: "I'm not anticipating a problem like '79, '80. No."
* * *
That exchange, between Congressman Ron Paul and the chairman of the Federal Reserve board, Ben Bernanke, took place on July 18 in a hearing of the Joint Economic Committee. It can be viewed on YouTube.com – and has been by tens of thousands. The London fix on gold that day put the value of a dollar a bit less than a 666th of an ounce of gold, according to the Kitco charts. Four months after Mr. Bernanke said he was not anticipating a crisis like that of 1980, when the dollar collapsed to 1/850th of an ounce of gold, the dollar has reached just such a crisis, with the greenback trading Friday at less than 1/837th of an ounce. So much for Mr. Bernanke's anticipatory powers.
Now it will be said that the crises of 1980 and 2007 are not the same. In 1980, the inflation rate calculated from the Consumer Price Index averaged more than 13%, according to a chart at inflationdata.com; the average this year has been but 3.23%. But the dollar crisis comes at a most inconvenient time for the Fed because it comes amid a credit crisis as well. So far, Mr. Paul is looking a lot more prescient in respect of monetary policy than Mr. Bernanke. The Wall Street Journal, in an editorial last week, reached back 30 years to one of its famous editorials from 1978 to warn of a crisis over the dollar. It reckoned another such crisis wasn't inevitable, but that at least we're getting "a reminder of what such a thing looks like, and it isn't pretty."
Our own view is that Mr. Paul's prescience on the dollar is one of the reasons he's showing what the pundits are calling surprising strength on the hustings. The New York Times attributes it to the way the Internet is impacting the campaign. But we're of the view that it relates to the substance. We have a lot of differences with Mr. Paul, but on monetary matters, we've been covering him since his days, in the early 1980s, as a member of the United States Gold Commission, when he coauthored, with New York's own Lewis Lehrman, a minority report favoring a return to a version of the gold standard. What can be said about Mr. Paul is that he's not only ahead of Mr. Bernanke but also of his fellow Republicans, and he will eat into their standing until they address the question of the soundness of our currency.
Submitted by kula.kundalini on Wed, 2008-01-02 10:26
- kula.kundalini's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 97 reads
-
What is the assertion here -- that Zionists want Ron Paul and a return to the gold standard so Zionists can control banking? Do I understand correctly?
Zionists don't need Ron Paul. They have already chosen Hillary, who is openly devoted to Israel, and is employed by New York Jews.
Bjerknes makes a very strange assertion in his blog: “The Jewish bankers want to eliminate the Central Banks which are tied to governments and replace those systems with entirely private banks under their complete control. Private banks which have no ties to any government, or union of governments, cannot make their notes legal tender.”
Wow. Central banks in Europe and North America are already private, unaccountable, and under Jewish control – and have been for a long time. Why would Bjerknes make such a claim? I call bullshit.
As for the New York Sun, yes, it’s as much a Zionist rag as the Rupert Murdoch-owned New York Post.
Seth Lipsky -- president and editor-in-chief – is former editor of the Zionist Forward. Almost all of the Sun’s writers and contributors (on all topics) are Zionist Jews. Columnists include ultra- zionists such as Daniel Pipes, and Mark Steyn, plus William F. Buckley, who is not Jewish, but is as Zionist as John Bolton. Managing editor (and vice president) Ira Stoll admits that the Sun is sympathetic to the Ziocons.
As the wikipedia Jews point out, The Sun demanded prison for any American citizen that questions the Zionist war against Iraq.
All opinions and “information” from the New York Sun (on any topic) should be summarily dismissed.
the US $ is already on its way down. When it collapses, there will chaos and rioting on the streets. People will demand a credible currency.
The claim will be made that the Gold Standard is what we need. Ron Paul's job is to function as a dummy opposition to the Federal Reserve, and to give credibility to the idea of the Gold Standard. The Zionist elites will try to dump all the blame on the Federal Reserve, while trying to escape accountability for their huge crimes. Ron Paul never admits that the real problem is the Zionist elites, and that Federal Reserve is only their tool.
Once the decision is taken to get onto the Gold Standard, the money supply will have to be contracted, since each note will have to be backed by gold. The contraction will lead to widespread bankruptcy. Then the Zionist elites, with their huge gold reserves, will swoop in and buy everything that they don't already own.
I'm not sure if Ron Paul is actually a shill or merely a useful idiot. But in either case the end result is the same.
I think it is simply not possible, in 2008, for any sane and reasonably literate person, to truly believe that 9/11 was not a Zionist job. So Ron Paul loses a lot a credibility right there. I don't buy the argument that Ron Paul is forced to keep quiet about 9/11 for now but that he actually wants to expose the criminals later.
They could constrict the money supply tomorrow, they don't need the gold standard for that. And they've already bought up everything they need, which is why we don't have an honest media. Who needs gold-backed currency when you can buy the world with paper?
It doesn't make sense to me that the bankers would want to change tactics now. They're on a winner right now, today - and it works precisely because they keep attention away from the money conspiracy.
The problem is that the Zionist elites have printed too much money. The US is deeply in debt. There are foreigners holding a lot of American paper.
Yes, the Fed could contract the money supply right now and thereby save the dollar. That option would preserve the wealth of the people who have invested in US paper. But the Zionist elites might prefer to allow the dollar to collapse completely, which frees them from the obligation of having to repay the investors.
Once the dollar is completely done for, there would be a gold standard and the Zionist elites would again be super-rich.
Moreover, if they could get a gold standard world-wide, they would be able to buy up everything in the world. The existence of National Fiat currencies is not to their liking.
Once the gold standard has served its purpose, i.e. concentrating the wealth of the World in the hands of the Zionist elites, they would likely switch back to a fiat currency.
May I quibble a bit?
”The problem is that the Zionist elites have printed too much money. The US is deeply in debt. There are foreigners holding a lot of American paper.”
Only about 3 percent of the total U.S. money supply is in the form of printed currency. The remaining 97 percent exists as credit, or loans between various banks and various businesses. This 97 percent only exists as ledger entries, yet it functions inour system as "money" or "currency." The USA has not used real currency since the Fed was established in 1914. Instead, the USA uses debt notes. Every dollar of currency is an IOU to the Fed. We do not trade value. We do not trade currency. We do not even trade tender notes any more. We trade debt, which inevitably snowballs, since it all has compound interest. Since we owe the Fed $9 trillion directly, and $ 45 trillion indirectly, we cannot pay it back, so we pay by sacrificing our standard of living.
When the Fed issues, say $20 billion, it’s not $20 billion worth of currency. It is $20 billion worth of credit (i.e., debt). This debt only exists in computers, yet it has physical effects, since the USA is governed by the banking and currency system.
The problem is not a surfeit of currency, but an excess of debt. When confidence ebbs in the financial sector (i.e., in the game of debt) the house of cards verges on collapse. The Fed’s solution is to pump more debt into the system – i.e., expand the house of cards a little more, in order to buy a little more time. Eventually the cards must collapse. This is a mathematical inevitability.
The debt system is a gigantic pyramid scheme that (like all pyramid schemes) can only exist as long as it is expanding. This means it must perpetually get more people into debt. No such system can last forever.
To repeat, the problem is not too much currency, since we do not deal in currency. The problem is too much debt.
“Yes, the Fed could contract the money supply right now and thereby save the dollar. That option would preserve the wealth of the people who have invested in US paper. But the Zionist elites might prefer to allow the dollar to collapse completely, which frees them from the obligation of having to repay the investors.”
If the Fed contracts the money supply (i.e., stops issuing debt), the dollar will collapse, destroying the USA. This will not be allowed to happen. Instead the USA is being brought down in stages.
There are two reasons why the central banks have devalued the dollar.
First, it compensates for the catastrophic trade imbalance between the USA and the rest of the world. A devalued dollar makes American goods cheaper, which encourages foreigners to buy them. It also makes European goods more expensive by comparison, which is why Europeans are screaming about the devalued dollar. Europeans are also screaming because they invested in dollars through mutual funds, CIDs, and myriad other ways. A devalued dollar wipes out their wealth. Rather than pay back the Europeans, the USA has simply devalued its currency.
Second, a devalued dollar brings the currencies of the USA, Mexico, and Canada closer to par. The three nations’ currencies and money systems are being leveled toward a de facto North American Union. Canada’s dollar and the U.S. dollar have already been leveled, and the Mexican peso will gradually be re-monetarized. Americans will live under a North American Union whether they want to or not. Hence there will be no problem dumping the U.S. Constitution and replacing it with a new NAU constitution. This is all part of the plan.
“Once the dollar is completely done for, there would be a gold standard and the Zionist elites would again be super-rich.”
There is no need for a gold standard. The banksters’ power comes from cooperation, and from controlling the game. If they went to an international gold standard, they would cause so much poverty that the masses would be forced to dump all currencies (including gold) and resort to various barter systems. This would cut the banksters out of the picture entirely, and cannot be allowed.
Therefore gold is a factor, but I don’t see it being the cornerstone of the bankster’s game. China accrues a billion dollars in reserves every day. China could buy all the gold.
“Moreover, if they could get a gold standard world-wide, they would be able to buy up everything in the world. The existence of National Fiat currencies is not to their liking. Once the gold standard has served its purpose, i.e. concentrating the wealth of the World in the hands of the Zionist elites, they would likely switch back to a fiat currency.”
I disagree. I think fiat currency is where the bankster’s power lies. With fiat currency, banksters can print as much or as little funny money as they like.
The central problem is not fiat currency, but who controls it – i.e., who controls the banking and money system.
Currently the system is under private, secret control. The solution is to (1) put it under public control, and (2) stop using debt as currency.
It does not matter what kind of currency we use. It can be gold, salt, cattle, seashells, or bits of paper. What matters is who controls it.
It all comes down to one fundamental issue: public control versus a private monopoly.
Yes, it really is as simple as that.
All talk of a "gold standard" is designed to distract people from this simple fact.
May I quibble a bit?
Most welcome to quibble :-)
Only about 3 percent of the total U.S. money supply is in the form of printed currency. The remaining 97 percent exists as credit, or loans between various banks and various businesses.
Well, by "printed", I meant "issued". It could be in paper or electronic form. You are right. In fact, ALL money issued by the Fed is in the form of debt. Typically the Fed injects money by buying US Treasury bonds. So that's a loan to the Government.
Whether that's justified or not is a question that's separate from the gold standard question.
If the Fed contracts the money supply (i.e., stops issuing debt), the dollar will collapse, destroying the USA. This will not be allowed to happen. Instead the USA is being brought down in stages.
Actually, by contracting the money supply the dollar will RISE in value. But that will most likely lead to a painful recession.
There are two reasons why the central banks have devalued the dollar.
First, it compensates for the catastrophic trade imbalance between the USA and the rest of the world. A devalued dollar makes American goods cheaper, which encourages foreigners to buy them. It also makes European goods more expensive by comparison, which is why Europeans are screaming about the devalued dollar. Europeans are also screaming because they invested in dollars through mutual funds, CIDs, and myriad other ways. A devalued dollar wipes out their wealth. Rather than pay back the Europeans, the USA has simply devalued its currency.
Yes, I agree with you here. The Chinese and the Arabs probably have more to lose than the Europeans.
There is no need for a gold standard. The banksters’ power comes from cooperation, and from controlling the game. If they went to an international gold standard, they would cause so much poverty that the masses would be forced to dump all currencies (including gold) and resort to various barter systems. This would cut the banksters out of the picture entirely, and cannot be allowed.
Hmm... its not so easy to get alternative currencies started. Barter is terribly inefficient.
The central problem is not fiat currency, but who controls it – i.e., who controls the banking and money system.
Currently the system is under private, secret control. The solution is to (1) put it under public control, and (2) stop using debt as currency.
I agree with (1). (2) is a separate question ... maybe another day. Cheers.
See my comment at: http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5177#comment-22214
This gold argument is 100 years old. The Constitution, (which the British burned the ratification records of in 1813) says "gold and Silver".
There is nothing inherently wrong with a fiat money system so long as that system is controlled by the people, not a private entity for profit. A Government by the People controlling it's own money would break the perpetual cycle of debt.
The Colonies issued their own money without interest and that was the biggest reason for the American Revolution.
Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Private Pirate Bank known as The FED. He is also a strict Constitutionalist.
Changing the Constitution to create a government tightly controlled interest free money system or a money system backed by a combination of Specie would be a matter of Amendment.
More on Ron Paul and the Gold Standard
It is good that people are becoming more aware of the "Federal" "Reserve" racket and that there is a movement forming around the idea of abolishing it. But the timing is conspicuous. The "Fed" racket, which cannot be sustained forever, may very well be near collapse anyway. What I am attempting to do is anticipate the revolution-makers' next move. These are people who use the Kabbalistic/Hegelian dialectic against opponents who never seem to identify it, much less understand it. It's as if a child was playing chess against a master. The chess master has a large bag of gambits to draw from, the best of which feign a weak move which entices an anticipated reaction from the child opponent which results in disaster a few exchanges later. The child opponent is not only tricked into loosing the game, he is tricked into participating in his own defeat.
We are fighting an enemy that thinks and we don't think. This is the "horrible anti-semitic canard" stated so well by the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in 2003. This is great wisdom that he tried to impart to others which was drowned out by the screeching and howling of the Zionists of the U.S. media as is so often the case.
The bankers are not just watching the collapse of the "Fed" racket figuring they had a good thing going for a while and that the party will soon be over. They intend to maintain control and further consolidate it. They have contingency plans. The debt-based "Fed" central banking racket is not the only system in their bag of tricks. The gold standard is another system that they have mastered and thrived under in the past. Supporters of Ron Paul must take note of this fact.
St. Thomas explained the role of money for Christians: it is an exchange medium for the good of the people which should serve the people, not bankers. As an exchange medium, money should not fluctuate in value as we are so accustomed. St. Thomas wrote that: "Money must keep the same value, since the value of all things must be expressed in terms of money."
Gold is a commodity with an arbitrary value which is subject to manipulation as is any commodity. The price of gold rises and falls as it becomes dear or common; as it is hoarded or circulated. Chaining a nation's money to gold is to chain it also to the fluctuations in volume and price of gold. This is a poor means of reaching the ideal objective of an exchange medium which has a stable value. Look at a price chart for gold over the past 2 years if you need confirmation of this fact.
Ideally, the exchange medium would be issued by the nation's government, as the U.S. founders provided, but it is not possible for a government to completely control all gold. If the exchange medium was backed by gold it would be subject to manipulation by forces outside the body issuing it. The economy of the nation could be manipulated by manipulating the gold market.
The problem also arises: if specie currency is redeemable in gold, it would be possible for the gold to be drained from reserve by demanding exchange of currency for gold as the Rothschilds did in England. If the currency is not redeemable for gold, then the system is a farce. Why bring gold into the equation at all?
The U.S. Constitution allows the government to issue currency by fiat. This is a sound system as long as the volume of currency issued is carefully controlled to be directly proportionate to the nation's production. The hucksters who attack the "Federal" "Reserve" in favor of the gold standard generally focus their rhetoric on the fact that the "Fed" issues paper money. This itself is not the problem however. The problems with the "Fed" system are that it is a debt-based, fractional reserve racket controlled by private individuals whose interests are their own, not the interests of the nation; that it is unsound and inevitably results in debt that cannot be paid; that it enslaves the people rather than serving them.
The argument generally is, "well I don't want those corrupt politicians in charge of issuing currency." But the fact is that any system no matter how perfectly laid out cannot function well if it is peopled by corrupt individuals. It's the responsibility of the people to monitor the performance of politicians and hold them responsible for their performance. Better to have the issue of currency handled by politicians who the people have recourse to, as the system was intended, than some untouchable private organization.
The answer to the debt-based federal reserve system is not backing the currency with a commodity. This is a non-sequitur. Fiat currency is not debt-based by nature. The government can issue currency without incurring any debt, for no more cost than the price of printing or stamping the currency. This is the answer to the "Fed": U.S. government-issued fiat currency.
If fiat currency is handled correctly it's not subject to the fluctuations of value of any other commodity, it is a stable exchange medium, and there's no debt incurred in issuing it other than the cost of printing/stamping it. Further, the volume of government-issued fiat currency can be increased as productivity of the nation increases thereby maintaining price stability and assuring sufficient currency to facilitate exchange as the economy grows. In the gold standard system the volume of currency is dictated by the amount of gold in reserve. I leave it to the reader to decide which system is more natural to a healthy economy.
Many of you may be aware that the gold that's supposed to be in Fort Knox is not there. You may also be aware that whatever gold the nation does have possession of would only back a tiny fraction of the value of our present economy. Even if it were possible to acquire enough gold to back an economy measured in trillions of dollars, as it is today, where do you think that gold is going to come from? How much debt are you willing to put the nation into in order to "return to the gold standard"?
Talk about a debt-based system! Just obtaining the gold would put the nation into crushing debt. The gold would have to be acquired through loan at interest. If our currency must be backed by gold and the gold must be acquired by loan at interest, there would be no way to pay even the principle of the loan without giving the gold back, but even then there would still be debt left based on the interest. Who would be served by this arrangement? The people?
Ron Paul supporters are on notice. Ron Paul is an energetic promoter of the gold standard. If you're fighting to put Ron Paul in office, you are responsible to understand the effect his policies would have if they're put into practice. If you're not dissuaded by this aspect of Paul's ideology, then I challenge you to make this an issue that Ron Paul and his supporters must address. Let the facts come out in a healthy debate on the matter. When the time comes to deal with the collapse of the Federal Reserve, let people be educated on this issue so they don't play into the Kabbalistic gambit prepared for them.
Posted by Maurice Pinay at 11:45 AM 6 comments
Labels: Federal Reserve, Gold Standard, Ron Paul, Ron Paul Revolution
Is Ron Paul What They Say He Is?
Lately I'm witnessing fanatical support in the patriot movement for Representative Ron Paul and his campaign for U.S. presidency that is practically religious in nature. Ron Paul has many qualities which would seem to make him an attractive candidate, particularly relative to the scoundrels he's running against, but there are clearly some issues with Ron Paul that deserve closer attention, and the sooner the better, as it seems he's becoming godlike in his supporters' eyes.
Ron Paul is a very zealous promoter of the gold standard. In fact, he pimped the gold standard before the House of Representatives as recently as February 15, 2006:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm
Fr. Denis Fahey clearly explained that the gold standard is a trap which inevitably brings ruin to the nations that adopt it in his book, Money Manipulation and Social Order.
http://www.amazon.com/Money-manipulation-social-order-Denis/dp/B00071QXOY
I agree with others who have noted the conspicuous timing of the gold standard supporter, Ron Paul's rise to stardom at the very moment that the U.S. dollar seems near collapse. Is Ron Paul's job to make the gold standard seem like a patriotic thing to support as the Zionist huckster Aaron Russo preached in his movie Freedom to Fascism?
Supporters of Ron Paul need to take responsibility and understand the pitfalls of the gold standard because it has been a core principle of his for many years.
Posted by Maurice Pinay at 12:28 AM 6 comments
Labels: Aaron Russo, Freedom to Fascism, Gold Standard, Ron Paul
www.mauricepinay.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------
To Jesus Through Mary
I don’t recall Aaron Russo championing a “return to the gold standard” in his Freedom to Fascism. Did I miss something? I’ll watch the film again. I thought the film was centered on the fact that there is no law requiring Americans to pay an income tax.
Yes it’s hard to know what to make of Ron Paul’s talk of a “gold standard.” Logically there are only two possibilities. Either Paul is uninformed, or else he is an agent of the banksters. Either way, Paul’s followers are so devoted that they don’t think clearly about this matter.
Pinay seems to think Paul is a Fed agent whose talk of doing away with the Fed is merely a cover for the Fed’s next move. If that’s true, then why don’t the banksters put Paul in power? Why does the media marginalize Paul?
The way I see it, Hillary has already been chosen by the Chosen. If Hillary becomes President, then Paul will be just another Congressman in the House.
Pinay seems to think Paul is a Fed agent whose talk of doing away with the Fed is merely a cover for the Fed’s next move. If that’s true, then why don’t the banksters put Paul in power? Why does the media marginalize Paul?
The way I see it, Hillary has already been chosen by the Chosen. If Hillary becomes President, then Paul will be just another Congressman in the House.
One possibility is that its all a charade to convince people that Ron Paul is on their side. I don't know if they want to make him President - maybe not. Maybe his role is just to give credibility to the gold standard, at exactly the moment that they are causing the dollar to collapse.
I'm no longer willing, in 2008, to suffer any one who plays dumb regarding 9/11. Ron Paul is openly contemptuous of 9/11 truth movement (see his interview with Glenn Beck). He needs to shape up or get lost.
International impact
Its nice and all to have a fiat (USA) currency to replace the dollar which is for "the people".
However how does this relate to the new fiat currency being held by non-US owners?
Having foreign fiat currency seems rather risky. Look at all the countries and people holding dollars now. This isn't just about the US.
One of the most important weapons (after massive loan-sharking) the West has to enslave non-Western countries is by fiat currency inflation.
You might say to other countries "We will keep the value of our currency stable, honest!". But that is just like putting a torch at their savings and promising not to light it.
Its just like contingency planners do for a country. They don't look at other peoples intentions, they look at capabilities!
As for the fiat-debt/gold-repayment bait and switch, couldn't the US just crash the dollar along with the debt and just start with a new intrinsic of fiat currency? Or is this not possible? Of course this would have very bad big consequences but it would get rid of the debt.
Commodity based
A 100% gold-silver not just based currency but actual gold-silver coins system is likely too difficult to implement. However the only money which value doesn't rely on the whim of a few bankers is money with intrinsic value.
This of course also has its own big drawbacks. Price fluctuations are one of them as already mentioned.
The big advantage of price fluctuations of actual assets compared to devaluation of US fiat currency, is that these fluctuations of real assets are a lot harder to manipulate for the bankers.
Money is about trust and right now I don't really trust many people with it. Especially not some politicians "promising" stable fiat living on the other side of the ocean having trouble keeping their own people happy or some bankers, although sadly at least for now we don't really have much choice.
Clear
Every money system has its own big draw backs. One thing however is very clear and essential for any system, without leadership with good skills, intentions and actions a country will suffer.
As for the fiat-debt/gold-repayment bait and switch, couldn't the US just crash the dollar along with the debt and just start with a new intrinsic of fiat currency? Or is this not possible? Of course this would have very bad big consequences but it would get rid of the debt.
The goal for the Zionist elites is to have a GLOBAL currency. A new American fiat currency would not serve this purpose. America will have lost too much credibility with the collapse of the dollar. On the other hand, if they can fool the world into accepting the gold standard, they will "inherit the earth"!
With the US crashing the dollar I meant a hypothetical "good" US government.