Back to Silversnowball     About .999 4 Bit Silver Divisibles     Earnings And Income Disclaimer

These are some articles I've received that relate to precious metals and the state of the financial world and economy. Keep in mind that they are just other people's opinions so use your own judgement regarding the merits of each article. And keep in mind these predictions were made several years ago so with the benefit of hindsight you can judge if the forecasts have, or are still coming true.

 

Can All These People Be Wrong? Not Just My Opinion now !

Gerald Celente is not your garden variety doom-and-gloom crackpot. Celente, director of Trends
Research Institute, forecasted the subprime mortgage financial crisis and the decline of the dollar
a year ago and gold's current rise in May. He also predicted the 1997 Asian Currency Crisis and the
fall of the Soviet Union. We are going to see economic times the likes of which no living person
has seen," he told United Press International. Wait a minute. That includes people who lived through the so-called "Great Depression." Does Celente
think the "Panic of 2008" will be worse than the Depression? It would appear so. The Panic of 2008 will lead to a lower U.S. standard of living, he said." I have no crystal ball, nor do I claim to have well-developed psychic powers, but I'd be willing
to bet almost anything that next Thanksgiving season will be dramatically different from this one,"
writes Carolyn Baker. We are confronting dollar plummeting hysteria, monumental levels of debt, foreclosure, bankruptcy,
unemployment, energy depletion, skyrocketing gas and food prices, illnesses treated without health
insurance coverage or just not treated, unprecedented levels of homelessness, and by all indications,
within a few months into 2008, America will be well on the road to a re-run of 1929-or something
inconceivably worse, Baker frets. These are the good ole days, my friend, and these are also the
dark new days. Happy Thanksgiving; savor every bite. Derivative dealers, hedge funds, buyout firms and other market players will also unravel, Celente
predicts. Massive corporate losses, such as those recently posted by Citigroup Inc. and General Motors Corp.,
will also be fairly common for some time to come, he said. He said he would not be surprised if giants tumble to their deaths Some giants, however, stand to gain, especially when it comes to real estate. There is going to be
a grab on this property by people who have cash, and that's not going to be the middle class. People
will lose their homes if they have large mortgages that they cannot comfortably sustain or pay off,
Jerome Corsi, economic expert and foe to the emerging North American Union told Alex Jones last
August. There's going to be a grab where the institutions and the people already wealthy will only
gain, It's not going to be an opportunity for the average person to gain. Corsi believes the economic crisis now revealing itself is engineered. It is engineered because
again, the move toward globalism, the pumping of this liquidity to stimulate the markets was totally
artificial. The federal reserve is going to get caught right now in a total dilemma, if it raises rates to
protect the dollar, its going to further tank the economy and cause the housing markets to be in
even more of a crisis. We have economic stagnation, the loss of real income, the loss of real wealth
and inflation at the same time. With the dropping of the dollar the crisis is going to be manipulated
to the point where people will take the Amero or any regional solution if it is proposed as the way
you get out of your problem. It's all about wiping the chessboard clean, or rather turning it over and dumping all the pieces: This is the fastest run I've seen ever to get to the goal line of creating a Untied States regional
economy, a North American Union. The elite are running like they'll never have this chance again. It
is the tenth hour, the eleventh hour where this battle will be fought. They believe that they can
win now and they are going for broke to create a North American Union and tank the dollar. Steven Watson, writing for Infowars, summarizes: The decline of the economy in the US is being caused by the very predatory globalist policies that
are still presented to us as the solution for economic turmoil. Globalist vampires such as the IMF
and the World bank, but two of the elite central banks and private interests, have drained the third
world dry, and are now focusing their attention on enslaving the developed world. The single currency and a 'new economic order' is a major step on the road to global governance.
Europe already has its own strong single currency, while the dollar's days seem to be numbered. When
money is being printed and distributed by private corporations is it any surprise to see a push for
a merger with other countries' currencies? Of course, in order to realize this new economic order, a whole lot of people will need suffer and
if we are believe Gerald Celente, worse than their grand and great-grand parents did during the
so-called Great Depression. There's no doubt now, that Fed chairman Alan Greenspan's plan to pump zillions of dollars into the
system via 'low interest rates' has created the biggest monster-bubble of all time and set the stage
for a deep economic retrenchment, writes Mike Whitney. Greenspan's inflationary policies were
designed to expand the 'wealth gap' and create greater economic polarization between the classes.
By the time the housing bubble deflates, millions of working class Americans will be left to pay off
loans that are considerably higher than the current value of their home,This will inevitably create
deeper societal divisions and, very likely, a permanent underclass of mortgage-slaves. Greenspan has successfully piloted the nation into virtual insolvency. In fact, the parallels
between our present situation and the period preceding the Great Depression are striking. Just
as massive debt was accumulating in the market from the purchase of stocks on margin, so too,
mortgage debt between 2000 and 2006 soared from $4.8 trillion to $9.5 trillion. In both cases the
wealth effect spawned a spending spree which looked like growth but was really the steady,
insidious expansion of debt which generated economic activity. In both periods wages were either
flat or declining and the gap between rich and working class was growing more extreme by the year.

Back to Silversnowball

The Silver Lining: Part I

By Howard Ruff
The Ruff Times

The following is edited from Chapter 10 of my new book How to Prosper during the Coming Bad Years in the 21st Century.

The Silver Lining in every cloud is the symbol of optimism. It is right up there along with gold and platinum for jewelry or wedding rings. Silver has been by far the most commonly-used monetary metal; silver coins are far more common than gold in much smaller denominations. It is the most common coinage used as money (the British pound sterling?); Silver coins have been standard currency in many nations in all ages of time, much more even than gold. It has been used more often than gold for coins because many silver deposits are much shallower than gold, so they have been easier and cheaper to mine, even by primitive methods.

But never before have government silver coffers been so bare.

Silver is used in more applications than any other commodity (aside from petroleum).

Those are the words of a well-known independent silver analyst. I agree with him that, despite the insanely profitable gold bull market, silver may not be just twice as profitable as gold in the next few years, but even more than that. Why?

He also says, silver is in huge short supply, and the shortage is getting worse by the day; the silver inventories which depressed the price for more than sixty years are gone! He's certainly right if you are talking about silver at today's price!

Unlike gold in the 70's when Jimmy Carter decided that rising gold was an embarrassment to the dollar and announced gold sales from Fort Knox to depress the price, government can't decide to dump their silver onto the market to artificially suppress the price because they no longer have any! Silver is still the poor-man's gold, and the time is not far away when the investment world finally wakes up to the shortages, and soaring demand will make it difficult to find any investment silver at any price this side of $100 an ounce.

In the inexorable law of supply/demand, price is the great equalizer. There is plenty of silver available "at the right price" and $14 to $17 is not the right price. At increasingly higher prices, silver jewelry and sterling silver will come out of the wood work. I remember back in the 80s when I put out my famous silver sell signal, my only recommended bullion dealer, made millions buying down and melting and salvaging all kinds of silver "sterling silver and bags of coins" as investors who believed me that the silver bull market was over, were melting down even heirloom sterling silver. The same thing will happen again, but at much higher prices. And silver will come out of India and China in the form of jewelry to be melted down, but again, at much higher prices. At these prices, with their economic boom over the last decade, the newly created middle-class Indians and Chinese are buying gold and silver jewelry.

Says the same analyst, If you could find a commodity which was considered a precious metal and was far more rare than gold, wouldn't today's crazy price discrepancy ($12.50 silver and $700 gold at the time he said it seem utterly ridiculous? I agree, but not necessarily for the same reasons.

When the world discovers the supply-and-demand fundamentals, silver will be the star for investors. The safest money will be made in physical silver held in your possession. Someday soon, the users who need it may not be able to buy physical silver at anywhere near today's price because there won't be any available in the empty warehouses. If they need or want some, they may have to buy yours or metals from India or China at a much higher price!

Where Did The Silver Go?

A lot of the world's underground silver deposits were laid down very shallow when God created the Earth, so it has been easily mined over the years, even by primitive methods, and most of the world's easy, cheap silver has been dug up. The world is now dependant on increasingly hard-to-find-and-mine deposits. There is continuing production of by-product silver found along with copper, lead and other minerals. The old, shallow pure silver mines have been depleted or are getting harder and more expensive to mine. Much of the cheap, easy, underground silver is exhausted.

The world's biggest supply of above-ground silver is in India, but it's not in ware-houses owned by the government. It is in the form of jewelry. It is a form of wealth worn by millions of Indians. No one person or government can decide to sell some reserves for any reason. It will take mass psychology, and that will take a lot higher prices.

 

 

Back to Silversnowball

 

The Case for $2,000 Gold
Why the Quiet Bull Market of the 21st Century is About to Roar!

 By Craig R. Smith & David M. Bradshaw
Nov. 7, 2007 

Moving little faster than a 19th century stagecoach, this "secular" (long-term) bull market in
tangible assets has managed to escape the notice of mainstream America or media fanfare so far
in the 21st century. That is about to change. Now that gold prices have risen near $850/oz., a new public phase of the gold rush is set to begin.
Strong physical demand, a falling dollar, central bank buying, geopolitical risks and concerns about
inflation are only a few of the major forces driving this gold bull. "Gold is not a mainstream investment yet, because it's seen as difficult to understand," financial
gurus tell Reuters. Yet every day it becomes easier for the man on the street to understand that his paper dollars are
becoming worth less ¦ and his food, health care, gas, oil, gold, silver and most other tangible
assets are all costing him more. "The relatively subdued interest of the investing public, if not the investment newsletters and
columnists, is in fact good news for those long the metal. It means there are a lot of people left
to buy the stuff, which is not the case at bull market peaks. So even at about $800 the ounce, the
real gold bull market has not begun," reports London Financial Times. Media headlines report: "Gold at 28-year high", yet fail to mention, that after discounting prices
for inflation, gold must rise above $2,150/oz., three times the current price, to reach the previous
1980 price peak. In reality, gold is about one third of the way toward reaching a true new high. Using the official
government CPI inflation adjuster, $800/oz. gold today equates to $316/oz. gold back in 1980. Rather
than being near a market top, gold still remains the buy of a generation. Economists finally agree on gold's future Gold prices have grown about $100/oz. per year since 2003. Gold was $300 in '03, $400 in '04, $500
in '05, $600 in '06 and now $850 in '07. Savvy investors and gold experts see $900+ gold in 2008! Recently many analysts have jumped onto the $1,000+/oz. gold bandwagon; most of whom were not
considered "gold bugs" in the past, like Citibank and JP Morgan & Co. Forty-five prominent analysts, authors and gold experts already on the record forecasting four-digit
gold prices to arrive in the years ahead. Their combined gold price expectation is $2,090/oz. gold! Here are just five sample quotes from our 2007 "Future of Gold" financial journal. These
professionals offer dozens of good reasons for owning gold today, which experts agree will
drive gold prices sky high over the next 5-10 years. "We would be very surprised if the gold price did not blast right through the old highs, and we
reaffirm our old targets for gold of $3,000 to $5,000 an ounce (Plus silver over $100 an ounce)
... gold is not merely a colorful trinket but a monetary asset, and when mass fear strikes at the
heart of paper money, the stampede to gold will be awesome." -JAMES DINES, Editor, The Dines Letter,
MW, 11-5-07 "Gold will hit $850-$870 by the end of 2007 and $2,000 gold is achievable in this move, given the
huge demand from ETFs and soon pensions and insurance companies will be buying gold as a new
alternative asset class." ROB LUTTS, President, Cabot Money Management -CNBC, 11-2-07 "When FEAR combines with full blown Greed, there is no longer any more talk of correction as prices
begin to jump 5% to 10% in one day and people line up to buy bullion as signs pop up everywhere,
WE buy and sell gold. Once both fear and greed take over the market and the short squeezes begin
in earnest, there is no way of predicting how high the high. $2,200 gold and $100 silver seems the
barest minimum targets, maybe $5,000 or even $10,000." AUBIE BALTIN, CFA, CTA, CFP, PhD -FiendBear,
9-24-07 "Market ructions, the sub-prime conflagration and a collapse of the dollar could send gold prices
to more than $3,400 an ounce within the next three years. This is not a sub-prime crisis. Sub-prime
has merely exposed the bigger scam of structured finance; a scam that is about pretending that bad
credit is good credit." CHRISTOPHER WOOD, Chief strategist, CLSA -London Times, 9-19-07 "I've written in this column about inflation often over the last three years. I've said gold was
going to $1,000. If the Fed cuts rates, then I'm going to have to admit I was wrong. Then gold isn't
going to $1,000. It's going to $2,000." DONALD LUSKIN, Chief investment officer, Trend Macrolytics
-Smart Money, 9-7-07
It's time for a personal gold standard Money is either the builder or destroyer of society. An honest money system brings prosperity to all
citizens willing to work. A dishonest money system enriches a few at the expense of everyone else.
Hidden monetary inflation often distorts financial headlines. At Swiss American we help our readers debunk today's confusing financial world. Here are a few
recent quotes from reliable sources confirming $800 gold is still a good buy: "Gold is starting into the most exciting part of its long-term bull market, the so-called second
(and monetary) phase. Herein we normally see the biggest percentage gains, matched by biggest
corrections. My tentative targets (by end of 2008): $1,600 gold and $45 silver," HARRY SCHULTZ
told Marketwatch. "This 'stealth' gold bull market is the best of all worlds. We continue to move up in stages and go
through some healthy corrections and long periods of sideways base-building," writes PETER GRANDICH
of The Grandich Letter. "If deciding to buy gold feels at all hard today, it might suggest the top of this market remains a
long way off yet. As long as Bloomberg columnists argue that buying gold is like 'believing in the
tooth fairy' ¦mainstream consensus is still opposed to gold," reports ADRIAN ASH for The Daily
Reckoning. "We believe this gold rally is still in its infancy with a 'toe in the water' ahead of the upcoming
4Q," according to Raymond James analyst PAUL O'BRIEN," reports the Financial Post.
Smart investors are diversifying out of dollars and into gold; a trend experts expect to continue
for another 8-15 years. The real question is; can you afford NOT to own gold? By converting as little as 5-10% of your assets into gold coins, you're strapping on a golden
parachute against the coming freefall of financial confidence in the dollar. Start putting yourself
on a personal gold standard now... before this quiet bull market roars at Main Street USA. -CRS & DMB Special Offer: "The Future of Gold", New "Rare Opportunity Gold 101" DVD and booklet FREE! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: All of the provided information is believed to be accurate, however errors are possible.
The opinions in the Commentary section do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Swiss America.
Past performance of any investment is no guarantee of future performance. All investments have risk. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to Silversnowball

(Theodore Butler is universally recognized as the world's leading authority on silver. The following 
interview took place in late January between Mr. Butler and IRI president, James Cook. This interview
reflects the bullish views of Mr. Butler on the future of silver. Investment Rarities does not
necessarily endorse these views, which may or may not prove to be correct.)

Cook: How will silver do if we have a recession?

Butler: That's the question of the day! I'll write about it soon. Over the past couple of decades,
recessions have coincided with some of the best silver price rallies. A recession shouldn't be a
negative for silver.

Cook: Won't industrial demand for silver fall off in a worldwide recession?

Butler: To some extent. But that's only one factor.

Cook: What are the other factors?

Butler: The supply would also fall. Scrap recovery would be less. Silver is a byproduct of base
metal mining and it would fall. New mines would probably be postponed. Supply would still be tight.

Cook: Anything else?

Butler: Investment demand. If people get nervous and buy assets that can't go broke or are no one
else's liability, silver is on a very short list with gold.

Cook: Gold has always risen when interest rates have fallen. Wouldn't silver follow?

Butler: Gold and silver have certainly been in lockstep for a long time.

Cook: Will that ever change?

Butler: Yes. I think it is inevitable.

Cook: Inflation is on the rise. Isn't that another great argument for precious metals?

Butler: Not so much to me, but I wouldn't argue that it would be a factor if enough people thought
it was and acted on it.

Cook: Won't people choose gold over silver?

Butler: Sure, that's baked into the cake. There is more interest in gold than there is in silver.
That's what creates the opportunity. The average investor talks gold, but buys mostly gold mining
stocks, not metal. In silver, investors buy more actual metal.

Cook: How do you know that?

Butler: The U.S. Mint bullion coin statistics. They show mediocre gold Eagle sales and very strong
silver Eagle sales when compared to earlier time periods. Much more silver is being sold relative to
gold. There's also a wild card here that many overlook.

Cook: What's that?

Butler: There is very little silver that can be bought in dollar terms. More money will flow into
gold because there is more than 250 times as much gold, in dollar terms, as silver. Gold is measured
in the trillions of dollars. While silver is measured in the low billions.

Cook: So what will that do?

Butler: A small amount of money flowing into silver can have a profound impact on the price.

Cook: Speaking of price, are you still wedded to the belief that silver will exceed $100 an ounce?

Butler: "Wedded" isn't the word I would use, but that target seems a lot less far fetched than when
I initially wrote about it.

Cook: What does a volatile stock market or a bear market in equities do to silver?

Butler: It makes holding silver seem more comforting.

Cook: What happens to silver if Wall Street leveraged finance continues to fall apart?

Butler: I'm not a gloom-and-doomer, as you know, but flight to quality circumstances should help,
not hurt silver.

Cook: Some naysayers are talking about a general price collapse in commodities. Wouldn't that hurt
silver?

Butler: Not necessarily. Look, no one knows for sure if we will have a commodity price collapse.
These naysayers have predicted a price collapse many times in the recent past and have been wrong.
They could eventually be correct, but it's not certain.

Cook: But let's say they are correct this time. How does silver fare?

Butler: I think better than anyone expects. If supply falls faster than demand, we could be back in
a big silver deficit. If investors get spooked when looking at what the alternatives are for their
money, we could have an investment rush into silver. One thing we know for certain is that the world
has less silver above ground than at any point in hundreds of years. Plus, we have the built-in
buying power of the largest concentrated short position in the history of the world.

Cook: Are you suggesting that silver is the best thing to own in any financial environment?

Butler: Absolutely. If everything, and I do mean everything, goes to hell in a handbasket, the
silver price explosion may be delayed, but I'm convinced it will be the best thing to own on a
relative basis. No matter what the economic conditions in the future, silver should enhance, or at
least preserve your buying power better than anything else.

Cook: That's a pretty strong statement.

Butler: Maybe, but you can't name anything that's been better since I started writing for you.

Cook: You upset some people when you said silver supply and demand have recently come into balance.
Where did you get that fact?

Butler: That's straight from the accepted statistical services.

Cook: You've been talking about a big deficit for years that used up all the above ground silver.
You mean that's over?

Butler: Deficits may re-appear in the future, but for now it's over.

Cook: Isn't that why we bought silver?

Butler: It was one of the biggest reasons, but it wasn't the only reason. Remember, the deficit did
what it was supposed to do, impact the price bullishly. More importantly, the legacy of the 60 year
deficit will be with us forever.

Cook: What do you mean?

Butler: That structural deficit absolutely vaporized 10 billion ounces of world silver inventory
over the past 60 years. Nothing can reverse that depletion, nor its future impact on price. The
deficit may be gone for now, but it will be felt forever.

Cook: How could we have the onset of huge Asian demand and not use up more than we produce the way
we have for twenty years?

Butler: I said the deficit was over for now, not necessarily forever.

Cook: Excuse me, but I don't believe the figures are necessarily correct. Do you believe them
emphatically?

Butler: Well, I'm generally a skeptic about such data, so I believe very little emphatically. But
please remember the data isn't bearish.

Cook: What about investment demand? Will that cause a new deficit?

Butler: I see the problem. We have a semantics misunderstanding.

Cook: In what way?

Butler I say the industrial deficit is over temporarily, and you assume that should cause a price
decline. That's not correct. A commodity deficit can't last forever. The fact that the industrial
consumption deficit is over temporarily should have little impact on price at this point, because
very little inventory remains.

Cook: You haven't answered my question. Won't investment buying cause a deficit?

Butler: You didn't give me a chance to answer. Investment buying won't create a deficit because the
metal won't be destroyed as is the case with an industrial consumption deficit. Investment buying
just moves the metal from one owner to another. The metal still exists, just in someone else's name.
But it would be a mistake to understate the potential impact such investment buying can have on price.

Cook: Why?

Butler: Because such investment buying can escalate much quicker and be much bigger than industrial
consumption. It can, quite literally, explode. Combine that potential with how little silver remains
available and it could be like lighting a match to gasoline.

Cook: Will you admit there's more silver around than you originally thought?

Butler: Sure. Will that make you feel better?

Cook: Just trying to keep you honest.

Butler: I have stated repeatedly that there may be as much as a billion ounces out there, and I
haven't had to retract that. More has flowed into the visible category than I thought would occur at
the price increases we've seen.

Cook: What does that mean?

Butler: We've seen more come into the ETFs or COMEX. That's bullish because it means there is less
available to be shifted in the future.

Cook: You've warned about the huge concentrated short position in silver. Is this the most bullish
factor for the metal?

Butler: It's probably the most bullish factor, along with general investment demand. It's certainly
the most important factor in silver currently.

Cook: Does this also apply to gold?

Butler: Gold is number two. It has a larger concentrated short position than any commodity other
than silver. However, nothing comes close to the concentrated short position in silver.

Cook: Why are they doing this?

Butler: I think the big silver shorts got used to dominating the market and thought they could
always control it.

Cook: Is this lucrative for them?

Butler: It was, but not lately.

Cook: How do they make money going short in a rising market?

Butler: They don't.

Cook: How did they?

Butler: They'd make money when the market dropped, especially the steep drops.

Cook: Are they trapped now?

Butler: They could be. The concentrated short position is so large and extreme that the big shorts
almost have to knock the price way down and force the tech funds and others to liquidate or they
will be up a creek.

Cook: What are the odds they could be overrun here?

Butler: I can't give you the exact odds, but those odds are greater than ever before.

Cook: What happens to the price if they get overrun?

Butler: I think you live to ask me that question. We will go up in a very disorderly manner.

Cook: What would cause the shorts to buy back and cover in a more orderly fashion?

Butler: Many things could cause the shorts to buy back as prices rise, but none of them suggest an
orderly move. One or more of the big shorts could run out of money and fail to meet margin calls.
Or the order to cover may come from regulators or even higher ups in the clearing firm holding the
shorts. As you know, the big banks and brokerages have taken terrible losses in the credit markets
and they are urgently raising capital and the order may come down to the traders to close out these
costly and dangerous shorts.

Cook: Do you know how much they're out in silver?

Butler: Since the first of the year the big concentrated shorts are out more than $3 billion.

Cook: Who are these big shorts?

Butler: Banks, unfortunately, have turned into the biggest speculators of our day. They are
responsible for the short position, either directly if they are short in their name or as guarantors
to whatever clients are holding the short positions. As I wrote recently, even innocent and
uninvolved clearing members of the NYMEX will be responsible if other clearing members go belly-up
because of silver.

Cook: What would happen to the price in that case?

Butler: If the former big sellers turn buyers to limit their loss exposure, then it's Katie, bar
the door. We race to the true free market price quickly and probably overshoot it by a wide margin.
The price action will look crazy to everyone.

Cook: Is this inevitable?

Butler: Absolutely. I can't tell you the exact timetable or the precise sequence of events, but I
can tell you we must get to a true free market price for silver at some point. Maybe the shorts buy
back at much higher prices with great loss and honor their contractual obligations to the long
contract holders, or maybe the COMEX defaults and shuts down, but this enormous and obscene short
position will be resolved, one way or another.

Cook: What do you think of this big new loss of $7 billion by a rogue trader at the big French Bank,
Societe Generale?

Butler: It just confirms that the big banks speculate too much. If they win, they pay themselves big
bonuses. If they lose, they ask for bailouts, and still pay themselves big bonuses.

Cook: Do you see any connection to silver?

Butler: Aside from SocGen being a non-clearing member on the COMEX, a connection could be my
speculation that the big concentrated short silver position could be held by a rogue trader, or
that the bank or brokerage guaranteeing the trade is not fully aware of the negative potential of
the position. Let's face it, it's not a trade that's well thought out or is profitable. In fact, it
looks like a dumb trade. Who would want to hold such a large concentrated short position in silver
at this time? It certainly feels like a rogue trade, because it's so irrational. The bet increases
as it's going against them and that could end in disaster.

Cook: Anything else?

Butler: Yes, the most important connection. This SocGen loss should drive home the issue of
concentration like a Mack Truck. The losses were allegedly caused by one trader. By definition, a
very large position held by one trader is as concentrated as you can get. The odds that a large
concentrated position will cause problems in any market are astronomically high. That's why I make
such a big deal out of it. I've come to believe that concentration is the root of all evil in
leveraged markets.

Cook: What can be done about it?

Butler: I wrote about it in the last newsletter. Adopt my solution of applying larger margins on
extremely large and concentrated positions. This will protect the market.

Cook: Let's change the subject. Are we going to run out of available silver soon?

Butler: I think so. The temporary end to the industrial consumption deficit doesn't mean the day of
reckoning has been eliminated.

Cook: It hasn't?

Butler: Absolutely not. That's what I was trying to convey earlier. The damage to inventories has
been so great and has left the world with so little silver above ground, that it doesn't matter if
there's a current deficit.

Cook: Why not?

Butler: Because, when investment demand hits in earnest, as appears to be developing, this
investment demand will gobble up silver intended for industrial consumption, forcing the big
users to scramble for supplies. It's an inevitable free for all, and this is separate and distinct
from the obscene short position.

Cook: You seem to be the only one writing publicly on the concentrated short position.

Butler: Yes.

Cook: Why do you think that is?

Butler: I'm not sure. Maybe it's a bit too complicated, although I do try to explain it as simply
as possible. But let me confess something.

Cook: What's that?

Butler: It's a dream come true for an analyst to make an extreme interpretation and to be very
alone in his opinion, especially when he has taken much time and effort to explain that
interpretation. It doesn't get any better than to be proven correct in such circumstances.

Cook: The fact that only a fraction of the people in the world read your silver analysis means
that those who act on it could have a huge advantage. Right?

Butler: That's the plan.

Cook: What if you are proven wrong?

Butler: Being wrong is not a sin. It would bother me tremendously if I caused financial damage to
readers. I certainly have not done that, nor do I expect to. I'm very careful about what I write,
especially the extreme things, like my allegations of manipulation and impropriety by the big
shorts. It's a rare day that I don't receive thanks from a reader who has profited from my analysis.

Cook: What have you heard from the CFTC? You complained to them time and again. Is anybody listening?

Butler: I haven't heard anything new as of today, but was told I would be hearing from them. I
don't know if I will. I can explain the manipulation to them, but apparently I can't make them
understand it.

Cook: You once called silver a miracle metal. Why?

Butler: Because it can do more things to make life better than any other metal. The world valued
silver for many centuries before the varied modern uses for this material were discovered. That's
almost miraculous by itself. I know many who took advantage of the low prices of several years ago
probably think it's been a miracle money maker, as will current investors think in the future.

Cook: Why do you like silver more than gold?

Butler: Because there is much less silver available to buy and because silver is only a fraction
of the price of gold. Therefore, you get more bang for the buck. Plus, compared to gold, the silver
story is unknown. All things being equal, I'd rather buy an item, or a stock, that costs $16 than
one costing $900, because you stand to gain more, percentage wise, on the cheaper item. But all
things are not equal in my mind. They are much more positive for silver. Please don't misunderstand
me, I'm rooting for gold to go much higher as that will be great for silver.

Cook: What do you mean when you say silver is held to a different standard than gold?

Butler: As long as there is any silver inventory, some people believe it will depress the price.
That's even with silver inventories down 95% over the past 60 years. It's as if any silver
inventories above zero are an impediment to price. There appears to be a different standard in gold
because inventories do nothing but always rise, yet that is rarely mentioned. Silver inventories
are the lowest in hundreds of years while gold inventories are at the highest level in history.
I'm not complaining. As this fact becomes known it will prove very positive for silver prices in
the future.

Cook: I wonder what the price of gold would be if the above ground supply were all used up as is
the case with silver?

Butler: Good point.

Cook: What do you have to say to people who are planning to sell their silver in the $16 range?

Butler: Not much. Look, I'm an analyst, not a personal financial advisor. I try to be very clear
about what I think the long-term prospects are for the price of silver, but it's not my role to
personally convince anyone to buy or sell.

Cook: You could have just as easily said it's a bad idea. Are you bullish or aren't you?

Butler: Of course I'm bullish. And I think it would be a mistake to sell here. But I want people
to buy or sell based upon their own convictions and the greater weight of the evidence, not because
I say so.

Cook: Good. What do you think of a report that suggests a surplus in the silver market?

Butler: I don't think much of it. It's methodology appears flawed. It makes a claim that a large
amount of silver is coming from recycling. That's not supported by the facts.

Cook: Would you say industrial demand for silver is the steadiest and strongest of any industrial
commodity?

Butler: Yes, in the sense there's growth overall and the applications for silver are worldwide and
more varied than any industrial metal.

Cook: What about new uses?

Butler: There's multiple new uses to go along with hundreds of existing crucially important
applications.

Cook: Would you say industry can't get along without silver?

Butler: So much so that I see the industrial users ultimately panicking.

Cook: What would they do then?

Butler: Attempt to stockpile silver at any price.

Cook: Do you think more people will begin to see the potential of a silver shortage?

Butler: Yes, the people who have studied the facts will hold it more closely and refuse to sell
until prices are much higher.

Cook: Okay. Will you summarize the bullish case for silver and why you think it should be purchased
now?

Butler: It's greatly undervalued compared to its supply and demand fundamentals. It's undervalued
on a relative basis compared to everything else, including gold. There's a smaller amount available
for investment than at any time in hundreds of years. It's under-owned, under-appreciated,
misunderstood and overlooked by the investment world. It's about as far away from being in a
bubble as it can be, yet is a prime candidate for becoming a future bubble. It has been pre-sold
(shorted) to an extent never witnessed in any other item, which guarantees it must be purchased or
delivered against at some point. Institutions can easily own it for the first time. It is vital for
modern life. It can't go bankrupt or become worthless and can soar in price by many times its
current price. It is easy to buy. All these statements can be verified easily and I can't think of
one valid reason why it shouldn't be bought.

Cook: Thank you for a great interview.
 

Back to Silversnowball

 
Toilet Paper Money 

The history of fiat money, to put it kindly, has been one of failure. In fact, EVERY fiat currency
since the Romans first began the practice in the first century has ended in devaluation and eventual
collapse, of not only the currency, but of the economy that housed the fiat currency as well. Why would it be different here in the U.S.? Well, in actuality, it hasn't been. In fact, in our
short history, we've already had several failed attempts at using paper currency, and it is my
opinion that today's dollars are no different than the continentals issued during the Revolutionary
War. But I will get into that in a moment. In the meantime, I will show you that fiat currencies
have not been successful, and the only aspect of fiat currencies that have stood the test of time
is the inability of political systems to prevent the devaluation and debasement of this toilet paper
money by letting the printing presses run wild. Rome &The Denarius Although Rome didn't actually have paper money, it provided one of the first examples of true
debasement of a currency. The denarius, Rome's coinage of the time, was, essentially, pure silver
at the beginning of the first century A.D. By A.D. 54, Emperor Nero had entered the scene, and the
denarius was approximately 94% silver. By around A.D.100, the denarius silver content was down to 85%. Emperors that succeeded Nero liked the idea of devaluing their currency in order to pay the bills
and increase their own wealth. By 218, the denarius was down to 43% silver, and in 244, Emperor
Philip the Arab had the silver content dropped to 0.05%. Around the time of Rome's collapse, the
denarius contained only 0.02% silver and virtually nobody accepted it as a medium of exchange or a
store of value. China & Flying Money When the Chinese first started using paper money, they called it "flying money," because it could
just fly from your hands. The reason for the issuance of paper money is simple. There was a copper
shortage, so banks had switched to the use of iron coinage. These iron coins became overissued and
fell in value. In the 11th century, a bank in the Szechuan province of China issued paper money in exchange for
the iron coins. Initially, this was fine, because the paper money was exchangeable for gold, silver,
or silk. Eventually, inflation began to take hold, as China was funding an ongoing war with the
Mongols, which it eventually lost. Genghis Khan won this war, but the Mongols didn't assume immediate control over China as they pushed
westward to conquer more lands. Genghis Khan's grandson Kublai Khan united China and assumed the
emperorship. After running into some setbacks with paper currency, Kublai eventually had some success
with fiat money. In fact, Marco Polo said of Kublai Khan and the use of paper currency: "You might say that [Kublai] has the secret of alchemy in perfection" the Khan causes every year to
be made such a vast quantity of this money, which costs him nothing, that it must equal in amount
all the treasure of the world. Even Helicopter Ben would be impressed. Marco Polo went on to say: "This was the most brilliant period in the history of China. Kublai Khan, after subduing and uniting
the whole country and adding Burma, Cochin China, and Tonkin to the empire, entered upon a series of
internal improvements and civil reforms, which raised the country he had conquered to the highest
rank of civilization, power, and progress." Wait a second, I thought we were bashing fiat currencies here. Can anyone say crackup boom? Since
Marco Polo experienced this firsthand, and has been very helpful to us thus far, I think I will
allow him to finish his analysis of China's paper money experiment. Population and trade had greatly increased, but the emissions of paper notes were suffered to
largely outrun both. All the beneficial effects of a currency that is allowed to expand with a
growth of population and trade were now turned into those evil effects that flow from a currency
emitted in excess of such growth. These effects were not slow to develop themselves. The best
families in the empire were ruined, a new set of men came into the control of public affairs, and
the country became the scene of internecine warfare and confusion. I wonder if Keynes read Marco Polo's experiences with Chinese fiat currencies when he said that the
U.S. government should just bury bottles full of money in old mine shafts to spur economic growth. France & Livres, Assignats, and Francs The French have been particularly unsuccessful in their attempts with fiat money. John Law was the first man to introduce paper money to France. The notion of paper money was greatly
helped along by the passing of Louis XIV and the 3 billion livres of debt that he left. When Louis XV was old enough to make his own mistakes, he required that all taxes be paid in paper
money. The currency was backed by coinage until people actually wanted coins. The theme of the day, the new paper currency rapidly became oversupplied until nobody wished to own
the worthless junk anymore and demanded coinage for their currency. Oops. It looks like Law didn't think that anyone would actually want coins ever again. After making
it illegal to export any gold or silver, and the failed attempts by the locals to exchange their
paper currency for something of actual value, the currency collapsed. John Law became the most hated man in France and was forced to flee to Italy. In the latter part of the 18th century, the French government again tried to give paper money
another go. This time, the pieces of garbage they issued were called assignats. By 1795, inflation
of assignats was running at approximately 13,000%. Oops. Then Napoleon stepped on the scene and brought with him the gold franc. One of the good things that
Napoleon realized is that gold is the way of a stable currency, and that's what pretty much ensued
during his reign. After Waterloo had come and gone, the French gave it another go in the 1930s, this time with the
paper franc. It took only 12 years for them to inflate their currency until it lost 99% of its
value. History has proven a couple things about the French: 1) They are quick to surrender and
2) They are very talented at making worthless currency. Weimar Germany & Mark Post-World War I Weimar Germany was one of the greatest periods of hyperinflation that ever existed.
The Treaty of Versailles was essentially a financial punishment placed on Germany to make reparations. The sums of money to be paid by Germany were enormous, and the only way it could make repayment was
by running the printing press. (Huge unpayable debt hmmnn that sounds familiar. I wonder what the
solution in the U.S. will be.) Inflation got so bad in this period that German citizens were literally using stacks of marks to
heat their furnaces. Here is a brief timeline of the marks per one U.S. dollar exchange rate: April 1919: 12 marks November 1921: 263 marks January 1923: 17,000 marks August 1923: 4.621 million marks October 1923: 25.26 billion marks December 1923: 4.2 trillion marks. More Recent Times In recent times, fiat failures have become more common occurrences. For the sake of time, I won't go
into extensive details of all these examples of paper money failures, because there are SO many. But
here you have it: In 1932, Argentina had the eighth largest economy in the world before its currency collapsed. In
1992, Finland, Italy, and Norway had currency shocks that spread through Europe. In 1994, Mexico went through the infamous "Tequila Hangover," which sent the peso tumbling and
spread economic hardships throughout Latin America. In 1997, the Thai baht fell through the floor and the effects spread to Malaysia, the Philippines,
Indonesia, Hong Kong, and South Korea. The Russian ruble was not the currency you wanted your investments denominated in 1998, after its
devaluation brought on economic recession. In the early 21st century, we have seen the Turkish lira experience strokes of hyperinflation
similar to that of the mark of Weimar Germany. In present times, we have Zimbabwe, which was once considered the breadbasket of Africa and was one
of the wealthiest countries on the continent. Now Mugabe's attempts at price controls, combined with
hyperinflation, have the nation unable to supply the most basic essentials such as bread and clean
water. ********************************************************************* Lessons to Be Learned Here in the U.S., I should say the lessons were not learned. There are many consistencies from the
above-mentioned stories that led up to the eventual collapse of the currencies. The scary thing is that the U.S. has some of these above-mentioned characteristics, the ones that
lead to toilet paper money becoming just that. More on that in just a second. I would first like to
give a brief look at the U.S. attempts with paper money in our short history. The first attempt with paper money came in 1690 with the issuance of Colonial notes. The first
Colonial notes were issued in Massachusetts and were redeemable for gold, silver, corn, cattle and
other commodities. The other Colonies quickly jumped on the toilet paper money bandwagon and began issuing their own
paper currencies. Like a broken record, the money quickly became overissued. The lessons of John Law
and others were definitely not learned. It is not good enough just to say that a currency is backed
by commodities. It actually HAS to be backed by commodities. Essentially, it was still a fiat money,
and in a short period of time, Colonials became as good as toilet paper. The next experiment came during the Revolutionary War. Big surprise - the issuance of paper money
was used to finance the war efforts. This time, the currency was called a continental. The crash of the continental was spectacular, and the phrase "not worth a continental" was coined.
This brought on a large distrust for paper currency, and until 1913, toilet paper money in the U.S.
wasn"t used. Enter the infamous Federal Reserve and its monopoly on money and interest rates. Now we have the
greenback. Although the money was "officially" backed by a gold standard until 1971, it wasn't a true gold
standard. When the government found it inconvenient to have a gold standard, it just made it illegal
for U.S. citizens to hold gold or exchange dollars for gold. As reported on Strike-the-root.com: Under the infallible leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt, it was made illegal to own gold.
On March 11, 1933, he issued an order forbidding banks to make gold payments. On April 5, Roosevelt
ordered all citizens to surrender their gold" no person could hold more than $100 in gold coins,
except for collector's coins. He also made it unlawful to export gold for payment abroad, unless
done through the Treasury. The penalty for defying Roosevelt was 10 years in prison and a $250,000
fine.!!!! But the official demise of the dollar was locked into place in 1971 when "Tricky Dick" Nixon
completely severed all ties between the dollar and the gold standard. During the decade that
followed, the U.S. experienced some of the worst inflation in its history, only matched by today's
U.S. monetary and fiscal irresponsibility. The U.S. of A. has all the characteristics set in place that have led to the collapse of every other
fiat currency money in history. We are currently at war, and the financing of this war is extremely inflationary. In fact, if you
look back at our history, since 1914, the U.S has engaged in 16 military conflicts. We have been
involved in some form of violent international accord in 44 of the past 93 years. The overwhelming
majority of military conflicts result in monetary inflation. The U.S. has a debt similar to that of Weimar Germany. All though the reasons for the debt are
completely different, it appears that this Mount Everest of IOUs is going to be impossible to pay
back. I guess the U.S. could just print 10 trillion dollar bills and hand them out, but the
implications of such actions are obvious. We are currently increasing the supply of dollars at a rate of 13% per annum. This over-issuance
of a currency has been the leading indicator of a currency on the brink. So what's in the future for the dollar? Some, myself included, might say that the dollar has already failed. It has lost over 92% of its
value since its initial issuance in 1913. After the revaluation in 1934, the dollar dropped another
41%. In my opinion, it already is toilet paper money, but for the above-mentioned characteristics,
which are alarmingly similar to the circumstances that led up to the eventual collapse of the
dollar's toilet paper predecessors, I believe that we have seen only the tip of the iceberg of the
dollar's inevitable path toward becoming toilet paper money. Regards, Nick Jones

Back to Silversnowball

Subject: take your money and invest in precious metals, coins, gems.

GE unloading MMfunds for .96 cents on the dollar...
Mortgage Woes Damage a GE Bond Fund

        By ANDREW BARY

        A SHORT-TERM INSTITUTIONAL BOND RUN MANAGED by General
        Electric Asset Management apparently has suffered losses
        in mortgage and asset-backed securities and is offering
        investors the option to redeem their holdings at 96 cents
        on the dollar.

        The setback at GE Asset Management's GEAM Trust Enhanced
        Cash Trust is the latest in a series of problems encountered
        by money-market and short-term bond funds from the turmoil
        in the mortgage and asset-securities markets.

        Legg Mason, Wachovia and Bank of America have had to provide 
financial support to their money-market funds to prevent their funds from "breaking the buck," or falling below the
$1 asset value that money funds seek to preserve. The GE fund, totaling $5 billion, is an "enhanced" cash fund, meaning it seeks to provide a slightly higher yield than a money-market fund while preserving principal and maintaining an asset value of $1 per share. The fund has been willing to take more risk than a money-market fund by purchasing floating-rate mortgage and asset securities with high credit ratings. The bulk of the money in the fund comes from GE's pension trust and other GE employee benefit plans. In a Nov. 8 e-mail to institutional holders of the fund, GE Asset Management cited "extreme conditions in the credit markets" and told investors that "it will soon begin to sell certain securities held in the Fund which will result in realized losses and likely bring the Fund's yield to zero." In the e-mail, GE Asset Management said the fund has "sufficient liquidity to redeem all non-GE subscribers at the current net asset value (.96) but there can be no assurance that this will continue to be the case at any point in the future as the difficulties in this market persist." Outside institutional investors therefore face a 4% loss on their holdings. GE said it plans to soon redeem $250 million from the fund and may liquidate additional holdings in the future. Based on information on GE Asset Management's Website, the enhanced cash fund has about 27% of its assets in home-equity asset-backed securities, 23% in residential mortgage securities and the rest in a mix of securities, including credit-card securities and corporate bonds. This information is as of June 30. The 4% loss suffered by outside investors is sizable relative to the added returns that the fund generated relative to short-term investments. The one-year return on the fund through June 30 was 5.49%, versus one-month Libor of 5.39%. In response to the Barron's inquiry, GE Asset Management said in an e-mail statement that it has "ceased taking new investments" in the fund "based on our belief that recent extreme conditions in the credit markets, including liquidity concerns and value dislocations, will continue in the foreseeable future." GE's pension and benefit plans could suffer additional losses in the fund as more securities are liquidated. It's unclear whether GE Asset Management plans to wind down the fund.
Editors comment - Most interesting article. There is real money - gold and silver. There is
paper money - paper. And there are investments like money market funds - digits in a computer
somewhere backed by assets that are deflating. Gold and silver seem much more secure.

Back to Silversnowball

Banking / Federal Reserve System

 

BY FAR, THE SINGLE GREATEST SLEIGHT-OF-HAND SCAM EVER

PERPETRATED ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. !!!

 

 

        Hey, I've got an idea. I'm going to open up a bank

and force everyone to use my paper currency. If I can

get everyone to borrow the paper from me, all I have

to do is make sure I never run out of trees and I can

sit back and collect the interest from now 'til

eternity. But first, I'll have to invent a scheme to

get everyone to stop using Real Money, Gold and

Silver. I know, being that I'm the banker and everyone

already trusts me with their Gold and Silver, I'll

start off by printing Gold and Silver certificates

that people can carry around instead of the metals,

after all, metals are heavy and people can get robbed.

Next, over a long period of time, say 20 years, I'll

replace the certificates with federal reserve notes

(completely WORTHLESS). I'll be rich and America will

be BANKRUPT !! The only problem: Some elite English

Freemason over at the Bank of England has already

thought of it and called it the Federal Reserve

System. Another case of "a day late and a dollar

short." Well since they'll put us in jail if we were

to do it today, we might as well EXPOSE the CRIMINALS

for what they are: THIEVES:    PARASITES with a

PRINTING PRESS. Why does the U.S. Treasury borrow

paper (bills of exchange-borrowed=Debt currency) from

a foreign, private, for-profit Bank, which is in

actuality owned and controlled by the Bank of England.

I, by the way, am not the source of this particular

charge. These are the findings of the American

Congress in a report Titled "Steps Toward A British

Union, A World State & International Strife." Ever

since the Revolutionary War, England has despised

America. Everything believed to the contrary is

Propaganda.

 

        England has wanted to establish a central bank in

America, by which they could control our economy, for

a very long time. Repeatedly, there have been attempts

to do this and repeatedly, they failed. Mostly,

because the American people knew about what Great

Britain wanted to do. But, with the advent of

airplanes and technology today, it seems to most

Americans that this could no longer be the case. What

most people do not realize is that this country would

be a far different place if England hadn't gotten

their way, back in 1913 with the passing of the

Federal Reserve Act. It is a well known fact that

English and European interests were heavily involved

in this takeover. The Rothschilds, acting as agents

for the Bank of England, sent their agents, the

Warburgs and J.P. Morgan to set up the deals and "rig"

it so that they could get the Act passed.

 

        The Goldsmiths were the first bankers in early

England. Primarily because people left their gold with

the goldsmiths for safekeeping. The first paper money

were "Receipts" for the gold deposits. These

represented the gold in storage. These were easier to

carry around, and safer, thus making paper money more

popular. The goldsmiths realized, after a while, that

few people ever came back to trade in their "receipts"

for the gold at any one time. It was at this time that

Goldsmiths realized they could issue more paper than

they had Gold to back it up, thus leading the way to a

cheated system. Then they could loan out more money

than they had, and collect interest on it, as well.

This was the beginning of "Fractional Reserve

Banking", or loaning out more money than there is in

assets on deposit. This way nobody ever noticed their

wealth accumulation. Currently, in the United States,

banks can loan out 10 times the amount they have on

deposit. The Goldsmiths also learned what could happen

when the "Row" the economy by Issuing more money,

then withdrawing that surplus from the economy. When

there is more money, people spend more, and borrow

more. Then when that money is taken out of the

economy, there is no money to pay back the debts with,

and    it costs more to borrow more money. So, there are

more bankruptcies, and re-possessions and the bankers

can buy up everything for pennies on the dollar. This

is exactly what is happening today. But today,

economists who seek to hide these truths from you,

call it the "Business Cycle".

 

        Early philosophers like Aristotle, believed that

usury was bad for society because the purpose of money

was to move goods in society from person to person.

The interest on money slowed all of that down, and

hence, slowed down the progression of society. It put

an unnecessary bourdon on money.

 

        Later, the church had outlawed usury as well, but

as society grew, they passed laws to allow certain

"taxes" on money.

 

        King Henry I of England decided to try to wrestle

the power away from the Goldsmiths around 1100 A.D. He

invented the "Tally Stick" system. This system lasted

726 years until 1826. Notches were carved along side a

wooden stick, indicating various denominations, or

amounts. Then the stick was split down the middle,

with each half holding a record. Then the King would

hold one-half in safekeeping to avoid counterfeiting

and he would "spend" the other half into the kingdom

or economy, and they would circulate as money. As a

matter of fact, shares in the Bank of England were

purchased with a tally stick, by at least one of it's

shareholders. Yak Dung was used in Tibet as money. Now

what do you think of money? Just what it always was,

nothin' but S**T. (Money, it's a Hit, don't give me

none of that do-goody-good bulls**t!)

 

        In Irony though, shortly after the formation of

the Bank of England in 1694, the bank had outlawed the

"Tally-stick" system because it was money outside the

power of the money changers.

 

        In the 1500's , King Henry VIII relaxed the laws

against usury, and the bankers went right to work

again. They made the gold and silver money plentiful

for a few decades. But, when Queen Mary took the

thrown, she tightened the usury laws and the money

changers began hoarding the gold and silver, thus

causing a depression in the economy. When Queen

Elizabeth took the thrown, she was determined to take

the power away from the bankers. She decided to issue

gold and silver coins from the Treasury to take

control over the issuance of money.

 

        Monetary policy played a role in the English

Revolution in 1642, when Oliver Cromwell was financed

by the bankers to overthrow King Charles. This gave

the bankers a chance to consolidate their wealth and

led to the establishment of the "City of London". The

premier financial center of the world. But, later,

conflicts with the Stuart Kings led to an alliance

between these bankers and the Jews of Amsterdam to

finance the invasion of England by William of Orange.

This was the "Glorious Revolution of 1688', as well as

the beginning of the "New World Order".

 

        After a series of wars with France and the

Netherlands, England was in dire need of money and

struck a deal with the International Bankers. England

would charter a Government sanctioned, privately

controlled, "Central Bank", that would print money out

of nothing. It would be called the "Bank of England"

to lead people to believe that it was a bank of

"England", which it wasn't. The bank sold shares to

"Private Investors" and the names of these investors

was never disclosed. They were supposed to put up 1

1/4 Million British Pounds in gold coin, but only

750,000 Pounds was ever received. The Bank was

chartered in 1694 and began loaning out several times

more money than it had received, at interest.

(Fractional Reserve Banking, again.) They would loan

the politicians as much money as they wanted, but they

had to secure the debt by the "direct taxation" on the

people.

 

        (So today, the central bank scam is really a

hidden tax. The government sells bonds to the central

bank to pay for things it does not have the political

will to raise taxes to pay for, but the bonds are

purchased with money the central bank creates out of

nothing. More money in circulation makes your money

worth-less. The government gets as much money as it

needs and the people pay for it with "Inflation".)

 

        Soon there was an abundance of money and the price

of things doubled. Loans were granted for just about

anything. The government debt went from 1 1/4 Million

Pounds in 1694 to 16 Million Pounds by 1698. Then the

economy went through a series of Booms and

Depressions. Just like we are going through today.

 

        50 years after the Bank of England was chartered.

Amschel Moses Baur opened a "Counting House" and put

up a sign with a "Roman Eagle with a Red Shield". This

was to become known as the "House of the Red Shield",

or "House of Rothschilds". His son Amschel Meyer Baur

changed his name to "Rothschild". He learned to loan

money to kings and governments, instead of people.

This was more profitable because the loans were

secured by the "taxes" on the people. Amschel Had 5

sons. His first son Amschel Meyer stayed in Frankfurt.

His second son Soloman went to Vienna, third Nathan,

was sent to London, at age 21, in 1798. Carl, his

forth son, went to Naples, and Jacob, his fifth son,

went to Paris.

 

        In 1785, Mayer Amschel moved his entire family to

a House called the "Greenshield", which they shared

with the "Schiff" family.

 

        The Rothschilds broke into financial dealings with

Royalty through Prince William of Hess Hessell, whom

Rothschild was helping to speculate on precious coins.

But when Napoleon chased William into exile, William

sent 550,000 Pounds to Nathan Rothschild in London,

with instructions to buy Consoles (British Government

Bonds), also called Government Stock, but Rothschild

used the money for his own purposes, speculating on

the conflicts. Price William returned shortly before

Waterloo in 1815 and demanded his money back from

Rothschild. Rothschild gave the Prince all of his

money back, including the interest he would have

earned if he had invested in the Consoles, but

Rothschild kept 100% of the profits that he had earned

playing with the Prince's money. This made Rothschild

very wealthy.

 

        Nathan Rothschild once bragged that in the 17

years he had been in England, he had increased the

original wealth of 20,000 Pounds, given to him by his

father, by over 2500 times. By the mid 1800's the

Rothschilds were one of the wealthiest families in the

world and controlled all the major banks of Europe. (At

this point it would be appropriate to interject an

editorial note: Most people who study conspiracies

think the Rothschilds run the world, and some believe

falsely, that they always have. Others, who are

racist, and anti-Semitic point to this era and try to

use it to "prove" that "Jews" run the world. I have

put together a "Roots of Racism and Anti-Semitism"

Page, which you can view by Clicking Here. This should

tie several ideas in together and explain in part why

this is NOT true, even though it may appear that way

at times).

 

        The Rothschilds financed Cecil Rhodes and his

control over the Diamond Mines in South Africa, as

well as the Harrimans and Vanderbilts and the Railroad

empire, and Andrew Carnegie and the Steel Industry.

After J.P. Morgan's death, it was discovered that he

owned only 19% of J.P. Morgan companies. In 1850,

James Rothschild, the heir of the French branch of the

family was said to be worth 600,000,000 French Francs.

That was 150,000,000 more than all the other bankers

in France combined.

 

        By the mid 1700's, the British governments debt to

the Bank of England was 140,000,000 Pounds, which was

quite a bit. So, they looked to the colonies in

America to "extract" the revenue necessary to pay the

British governments debts to the Bank of England.

 

        Benjamin Franklin was sent to London in 1757. It

was during this time that the colonies began to

experiment with the issuance of their own currency,

called "Colonial Script". This worked well. It was

debt free, not interest bearing.

 

        Benjamin Franklin was called before the Parliament

in London and asked how he could account for the

prosperity in the colonies. Here is what Benjamin

Franklin had to say :

 

        "That is simple. In the colonies, we issue our own

paper money. It is called 'Colonial Script'. We issue

it in proper proportion to make the goods pass easily

from the producers to the consumers. In this manner,

creating ourselves our own paper money, we control

it's purchasing power and we have no interest to pay

to no one."

 

(To read about this exact incident, and what Benjamin

Franklin had to say about it, Click Here!!)

 

        Later, Franklin wrote in his autobiography, "The

colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea

and other matters, had it not been that England took

away from the colonies their money, which created

unemployment and dissatisfaction. The inability of the

colonists to get power to issue their own money

permanently out of the hands of George III and the

International Bankers was the Prime reason for the

Revolutionary War. - There you have it!

 

        Originally, King George was a stockholder of the

Bank of England. Although he lost the war with the

United States, he stood to gain shortly with the

re-establishment of a Central Bank in the United

States. The war, itself, was originally over bills of

exchange. England passed a law making it illegal for

the colonies to issue their own currency. It was called

the "Currency Act of 1764". This caused a great

depression in America. Before this happened, the

colonies were prosperous. Too prosperous for Great

Britain.    Therefore THE CURRENCY ACT OF 1764 WAS THE

PRIMARY CAUSE OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR. Upon learning

that the People of America had learned the "Secret" of

Money, the Bank of England through the Crown declared

war on the Colonies.

 

        Franklin then wrote of the conditions that occurred

after the "Currency Act was passed : "In one year, the

conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity

ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that

the streets of the Colonies were filled with

unemployed"

 

        At the beginning of the War at Lexington and

Concord, in 1775, the Colonies had been drained of all

their Gold and Silver by heavy taxation. The

Continental government had to print money to finance

the war. At the beginning of the war the U.S. money

supply was at 12 Million Dollars, but by the end of

the war, it was 500 Million dollars, thereby making

the colonists money virtually worthless.

 

        In 1781, the Continental Congress was desperate

for funds and met at Independence Hall to appoint their

Financial Superintendent Robert Morris, to head the

"Bank of North America", which was closely modeled

after the Bank of England and was allowed to practice

"Fractional Reserve Banking". Robert Morris had made

lots of money during the war trading war materials.

The banks charter called for private investors to put

up $400,000.00 Capital as the initial investment. But

when Robert Morris was unable to raise up the capital

he used his political influence to have Gold deposited

in the bank that had been loaned to America by France.

Then he loaned this money to himself and his friends

to "re-invest" in shares of the bank. The bank also

held a monopoly over the National Currency. The Value

of American currency fell, and the people realized the

dangers of a central bank. At least for a short time.

The banks charter was not renewed in 1785. The leader

of the effort to kill the bank, William Findley had

this to say about it : "The institution, having no

principle but that of avarice, will never be varied in

it's object...to engross all the wealth , power and

influence of the state". The men behind the "Bank of

North America" were Thomas Wiling (the banks

president), Robert Morris and Alexander Hamilton.

 

In 1787, when the Continental Congress met to adopt

the replacement to the Articles of Confederation,

which would become the Constitution, Jefferson had

this to say about establishing a central bank in

America : "If the American people ever allow private

banks to control the issue of currency, first by

inflation, then by deflation, the banks and

corporations that will grow up around them will

deprive the people of all property until their

children wake up homeless on the continent their

fathers conquered".

 

        Governor Morris was the head of the committee

that wrote the final draft of the Constitution.

Governor Morris, along with Robert Morris, his boss,

and Alexander Hamilton were the one who presented the

plan for the "Bank of North America" to the

Continental Congress previously. During the debate

over the future monetary system of America, Governor

Morris spoke out against the new Central Bank plan. He

knew what was in store and what the bankers wanted in

America. In a letter to James Madison on July 2, 1787,

he wrote : "The rich will strive to establish their

dominion and enslave the rest They always did..They

always will. They will have the same effect here as

elsewhere, if we do not, by the power of government,

keep them in their proper spheres".

 

        Only a few years later, when Hamilton was

Secretary of the Treasury, he helped push a Bank Bill

through Congress to establish the "First Bank of the

United States" in 1791. Thomas Wiling again served as

the banks president. This was the same year that

Rothschild said : "Let me issue and control a nations

currency and I care not who makes its laws". This bank

was given a 20 year charter. Just as with the "Bank of

North America" before it, this bank was given a

monopoly over the currency in America. And just as

with the "Bank of America", the Private Stockholders

really never had to put up the funds on their end.

While 80% of the stock was to be held privately, and

the other 20% purchased by government, it was through

the acquisition of the 20%, and then the Fractional

Reserve banking "tricks", and wha-lah, this somehow

paid for the Private Investors portion, which was

never put up AT ALL. The government put up the initial

$2 Million and through Fractional Reserve banking, the

bank then made loans to its private investors for the

remaining $8 Million Dollars. Over the first 5 years

the government borrowed 8.2 million dollars, and over

the same 5 year, prices rose by 72%. Thomas Jefferson,

as the new Secretary of State, watched with sadness,

and made the following statement "I wish it were

possible to obtain a single amendment to our

Constitution - taking from the federal government

their power of borrowing".

 

        In Paris, the Bank of France was created in 1800,

just like the Bank of England. Napoleon wanted France

to break free from the power of the bankers and the

debt. He said that when the government is dependent on

bankers for money, the bankers, not the leaders of

government, are in control. This is what he said "The

hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money

has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism

and without decency: their sole object is gain".

 

        In 1800, Thomas Jefferson narrowly defeated John

Adams to become the third President. By 1803,

Jefferson and Napoleon had struck a deal. The U.S.

would give Napoleon $3 Million in Gold in exchange for

the Louisiana Territory. Napoleon took this money and

set out about Europe to conquering everything in his

path. But the Bank of England financed every nation in

his path to oppose him, reaping profits from all

angles. Prussia, Austria, and Russia all went heavily

into debt trying to oppose Napoleon. While the French

army was in Russia, Nathan Rothschild, the head of the

London office of the Rothschild family organized a

smuggled shipment through France to finance an attack

by the Duke of Wellington of Spain. This led to Louise

XVIII of France becoming king. Then several years

later, after Napoleon returned from exile, it was said

that he borrowed $5 Million from the Bank of England.

 

        At Waterloo, where Napoleon suffered his final

defeat, Rothschilds had agents located. Rothworth, a

friend of Rothschild, delivered the news of Napoleons

defeat 24 hours before Wellington's own courier.

Upon hearing the news, Nathan took up his position at

the Stock Market. All eyes were on him. People knew

that he had a legendary communications network, and he

would be privy to certain "news". Investors knew that

if Napoleon had won, and Wellington had been defeated,

and Napoleon was loose on the continent again,

Britain's financial future would be uncertain. He

looked down, and at one point he began selling. This

led investors to believe that Napoleon had won and

Wellington had been defeated. Soon, panicked investors

began selling their consuls, (British Gov. Bonds) and

Britain's stock market plummeted, and their prices

started falling. Then, secretly, Rothschild had his

people buy up all these Bonds for only a fraction of

their worth. 100 Years later, The New York Times ran a

story about how Rothschild's grandson had attempted to

get a court order to suppress the release of a book

that documented this incident. The Rothschilds claimed

the book was untrue and libelous. The court rejected

the Rothschild claim and allowed the publication to

proceed.

 

        There is speculation that it was at this precise

moment that the Rothschilds took control of the

British Bond market and ultimately, the Bank of

England.

 

        In 1811, a bill was put forth to renew the charter

of the Bank of the United States. The Legislators of

Pennsylvania and Virginia passed Resolutions asking

congress to veto the bill.    In 1812, Jefferson refused

to renew the Charter, and then England brought on the

war. (The other reason for the war was that the

"Original 13th Amendment" had been ratified in 12 of

the required 13 states, and was in the process of

being finally approved. To read about that, Click

Here!!) Then, a few years later, in 1816, another

Rothschild agent, Nicholas Biddle, chartered the

second Central Bank of the United States. At this time

is was suggested that the Rothschild had control over

the Second Central Bank in the United States.

 

        In 1828, Jackson was elected President.

Immediately, he went to work to get rid of the bankers

people in the U.S. posts. He fired 2,000 of the 11,000

federal government employees. In 1832, when Jackson

was up for re-election, the banker's tried to get an

early renewal bill for the Bank passed. But, Jackson

vetoed the bill and made a speech concerning this

event. He said "It is not our own citizens only who

are to receive the bounty of our government. More than

8 Million of the stock of this bank are held by

foreigners...Is there no danger to our liberty and

independence in a bank that in it's nature has so

little to bond it to our country? Controlling our

currencies, receiving our public moneys, and holding

thousands of our citizens in dependence...would be

more formidable and dangerous than a military power of

the enemy. If government would confine itself to equal

protection, and, as Heaven does it's rains, shower

it's favor alike on the high and the low, the rich and

the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the

act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary

departure from these just principles".

 

        In 1832, when Jackson ran for re-election, he was

the first president to take his campaign on the road.

His slogan was "JACKSON and NO BANK!" Despite the fact

that the bankers poured over $3 Million into Henry

Clay's campaign to defeat Jackson, he still won by a

landslide. When re-elected he stated "The hydra of

corruption is only scotched, not dead". In 1833, he

attempted to remove the government deposits in the

bank, but people in that position refused to do so. He

had to fire two people until, the third person

selected was coming up for appointment, and he was

opposed. Nicholas Biddle made the following bold

statement after this event, "This worthy President

thinks that because he has scalped Indians and

imprisoned judges, he is to have his way with the

bank. He is mistaken."    --    Then he made an even

bolder statement, declaring that the bank would make

money scares to get congress to restore the bank. He

stated "Nothing but widespread suffering will produce

any effect on Congress... Our only safety is in

pursuing a steady course of firm restriction - and I

have no doubt that such a course will ultimately lead

to restoration of the currency and the re charter of

the bank." This is what happened. But, Biddle blamed

it all on Jackson. This led to his censure by

Congress.

 

        In 1834, the House voted against re-chartering the

bank. Then this was followed up by an investigation

into whether the bank had caused the crash. When the

investigators arrived with subpoenas to get the

evidence from Nicholas Biddle, they were denied any

information. They were also refused info. concerning

money he had given to congressmen prior to the vote,

and he refused to testify before the committee.

 

        In 1835, Jackson paid off the final installment

on the national debt. He was the first and only

president to ever do this. This debt was necessitated

by the banks' issuing currency for government bonds

instead of just issuing Treasury notes with such debt.

 

        A few weeks after this, a man by the name of

Richard Lawrence tried to shoot Jackson. Both

revolvers failed and he was arrested and tried. He was

found not guilty by reason of insanity and after his

release had been known to brag to several friends that

wealthy people in Europe had put him up to it and

promised to get him released if he had been caught.

 

        In 1836, Andrew Jackson said "By God, you are a

den of vipers and thieves and I intend to route you

out", and he removed all the government deposits in

the second Bank of the United States, and it

collapsed. To get revenge, England suspended all

American paper and caused the first depression in

America, called the "Panic of 1837". During this

banker instilled "Panic", the Rothschilds bought up

American Securities at $.01 on the Dollar. This money

was used to get the first "puppet" financiers and

"Industrialists" off the ground. This was mainly J.P.

Morgan, who was the Rothschilds "secret" agent" in

America, as well as the Rockefellers.

 

        Then the bankers went to work to start the civil

war. Otto Von Bismark, the chancellor of Germany, who

united the German states just a few years later, had

this to say : "The division of the United States into

federations of equal force was decided long before the

civil war by the high financial powers of Europe. These

bankers were afraid, that the United States, if they

remained as one block, and as one nation, would attain

economic and financial independence, which would upset

their financial domination over the world". (Whew,

quite a statement there!)

 

        Why was Abraham Lincoln assassinated? There is

good reason to believe that the bankers were behind

it. When Lincoln needed money for the war in 1861, and

went with his Secretary of the Treasury Soloman P.

Chase, to get loans, he was offered loans at 24 to 36%

interest. Lincoln refused. He called on his friend

Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago to help him figure out

how to finance the war. After one session, they met,

and Lincoln asked him how it could be done. Here is

Dick's reply : "Why Lincoln, that is easy. Just get

Congress to pass a bill authorizing the printing of

full legal tender Treasury notes... and pay your

soldiers with them, and go ahead and win your war with

them also".

 

        In 1862 and 1863, he printed $450 Million dollars

in interest-free "Green-backs". He stated "The

government should create, issue, and circulate all the

currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending

power of the government and the buying power of

consumers.    --    The privilege of creating and issuing

money is not only the supreme prerogative of

government, but it is the government's greatest

creative opportunity. -- By the adoption of these

principles... the taxpayers will be saved immense sums

of interest. Money will cease to be master and become

the servant of humanity." An editorial in the London

times revealed the bankers attitude at the time, "If

this mischievous financial policy, which has its

origin in North America, shall become indurated down

to a fixture, then that government will furnish its

own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be

without debt. It will have all the money necessary to

carry on it's commerce. It will become prosperous

without precedent in the history of the world. The

brains, and wealth of all countries will go to North

America. That country must be destroyed or it will

destroy every monarchy on the globe".

 

        Shortly before he was assassinated, he made the

following statement : "The money power preys upon the

nation in times of peace, and conspiracies against it

in times of adversity. It is more despotic than

monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish

than bureaucracy."

 

        After Lincoln's death, Otto Von Bismark made the

following statement, "The death of Lincoln was a

disaster for Christendom. There was no man in the

United States great enough to wear his boots. I fear

that foreign bankers with their craftiness and

torturous tricks will entirely control the exuberant

riches of America, and use it systematically to

corrupt modern civilization. They will not hesitate to

plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos in

order that the Earth should become their inheritance."

 

 

        The Founding Fathers were MOST opposed to the

international bankers. In the banking quotes section,

you can read the dozens of statements that they made.

(To Read, Click Here!!)

Many authors over 50 years have written on the Federal

Reserve and it's role in bankrupting our economy so I

will only bring out the most important parts.

 

        Previously, certain beliefs were held by people in

this country, as to how and why our Federal Reserve

had come to run the country. But, recently, with the

advent of much commercial law info. coming down the

"pike" these days, there are many newly revised

theories and ideas about how our country is run and

why it is run that way.

 

        Many people believe that Gold and Silver are the

only valuable commodities with true "Value". They also

believe that our "Paper Money", backed by our belief

in "In God We Trust", is completely worthless and this

has been done intentionally. There is a lot of truth to

that, and I used to believe that wholeheartedly. Now,

I only look at it as a "Half-Truth". Listening to Rice

McLeod on his Seminar Video Tapes, he talks about

letters written from J.P. Morgan to his son. In those

letters J.P. Morgan is explaining to his son why they

crashed the market. He explains it was to "get a hold

of the commodities market". One of the things he was

bringing up is that you cannot "Eat Gold or Silver"

when there is famine and starvation, so what good is

it, really. Now, there is some real truth to this.

Especially for those that are "Stuck" in the Gold and

Silver mind set.

 

        In order to bring about the "Industrial

Revolution", the banks needed to "Float the Economy",

meaning they needed to inflate the economy with

"Value" that doesn't really exist. In order to do

this, you must be dealing with "Paper Currency", which

is more "Flexible". Transfer is easier than with

metals, and now, with "Electronic Funds Transfer", and

more recently "E-Commerce" in whole, could you imagine

sending money to websites that is only gold or silver,

in the mail. This is how you would have to do it to

actually transfer the Gold or Silver. Even that is

changing now, though, with "E-Gold" on the Internet.

But, in the past, in order to "Move Money", you had to

use "Paper". Checks, Drafts, Notes, and Bills of

Exchange.

 

        In Europe, in the 1700's and 1800's, they used

"Bills of Exchange" commonly between bankers and

businessmen. A "Bill of Exchange" would be drawn on

one bank ordering them to "Pay" to another Bank or

another Party, and presented for "Acceptance" or

"Dishonor". This method of doing business without

metals goes back even further to the time of the

Knights Templar's in the 1100's and up to the 1300's.

These "Early Day Bankers" invented the modern day

"Check". They stored their immense treasures of Gold

and Silver in the Temples. If you were a traveler and

you dealt with the Templar's, you could present a check

to them drawn on your account from another Temple.

(Things don't change too much over time, do they? The

Templar's are called the "Masons" today, and the

Temples are called "Banks").

 

        Even before this, going back to Rome, there was a

problem with the money changers. Two early Roman

Emperors tried to put a stop to their practices by

passing usury laws, and limiting land ownership to 500

acres. They were both killed. Julius Caesar returned

to Rome the ability to coin its own money. This made

Rome prosperous and also led to his death, by the

"Money-Changers".

 

       In the time of Jesus written about in the Bible,

Jesus cast the money changers out of the Temple. When

Jews came to Jerusalem to pay their Temple tax, they

could only pay with a half-shekel, which was a

half-ounce of silver. It was the only coin around at

the time that weighed a half-ounce, and did not have a

pagan Emperor on it. So, it was the only money that

the Jews would use at the time. But the money changers

had cornered the market on them and were cutting the

supply, and raising the price to whatever they wanted.

This was the reason Jesus supposedly overthrew the

table of the money changers.

 

        So, in a sense, what they have done is help to

"facilitate the transfer of goods and services" in the

national economy. Not a bad thing, in itself, unless

you consider the fact that they have been keeping the

"Secret" of Banking to themselves. Why are we (the

U.S.) borrowing money from another "Private

Corporation", when we could be issuing it ourselves?

THIS is the Problem. What they have concealed from the

masses is the simple fact of "WHERE "CREDIT" MONEY

COMES FROM!!!    It comes from "Your Signature". Unless

you borrow on somebody else's signature. Then you owe

them. That is what we are doing. Borrowing on other

people's signatures, instead of using our own.

 

        There is NO MONEY in our society today. There is

ONLY "Credits" and "Debits". But, the question will

remain, "Where do they come from?" Well, if you

believe they come from the government, a corporation,

or if you believe they come from somewhere "Outside"

of yourself, you are FOOLING YOURSELF, and you will

remain Locked-Away from the truth. CREDIT IS CREATED

WITH A SIGNATURE!!    You are either a "Creditor", or a

"Debtor", period. 

        Ever since the bankruptcy, they have been borrowing

on OUR Credit, through our Birth Certificates, which

were pledged as the Collateral for the debt, in 1933.

 

        Currently, the FED regulated the "Value" of the

Dollar, geographically, throughout the country.

However, this is only the "Public Side" of the banking

system. All of the money is "Borrowed into

circulation", and therefore carries with it a "Public

Liability". This is a "Negative Charge" (-) . When you

carry this "Negative Charge" around with you, you must

be careful, because you can cause a "short" to occur.

 

        All that "money" or credit is, is electrical

energy. That is why it is called "Currency". Our

life's energy was "pledged", to the "Public Side" of

the government corporation when our Birth Certificates

were "Registered". (See: The Movie - The Matrix / Very Similar) So,

the money borrowed into circulation from our Birth

Certificates represents our Lifeblood "Energy". The

Courts were set up to regulate the flow of this

energy. (Mostly from your pocket into theirs). But,

that is why they are called "Circuit Courts". Because

they regulate the flow of Currency in circulation.

That is why they are always after your pocketbook,

more than actually punishing you or teaching you a

lesson.

 

 

 

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

 

Here is the very best, most important reading on the

Federal Reserve Fraud. -

On May 23, 1933, Congressman Louis T. McFadden brought

formal charges against the Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve Bank system, The Comptroller of the Currency and the

Secretary of United States Treasury for numerous

criminal acts, including but not limited to,

 

           CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, UNLAWFUL CONVERSION, AND

TREASON. -

 

Here is an elementary article on banking. A great way

to begin to understand the problem. - (Great for the

un-informed)

 

I Want The Earth Plus 5%

 

A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence - By Don

Allen -

 

Banking & Federal Reserve Quotes

 

A Brief History of Central Banking in the United

States - By Edward Flaherty -

 

"The City" - From the END of CHAPTER 6 from the book

"DESCENT into SLAVERY", by Des Griffin -

 

Billions for the Bankers - Debt for the People - The

Real Story of the Money-Control Over America - By

Sheldon Emry

 

Conspiracy Theory Gains Currency, Thanks to Town's

Professor Auriti - By YAROSLAV TROFIMOV -

 

How Benjamin Franklin Made New England Prosperous :

 

Jerome Daly, Judge Mahony & The Credit River Decision

 

 

 

 

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

Here is a List of Relevant Book & Video Titles -

 

* THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND : A Second Look at

the Federal Reserve - Edward Griffin - 1998 - 608 P.

 

EMPIRE OF THE CITY - E.C. Knuth - 1946 -

 

BASHED BY THE BANKERS : Byron Dale-

 

BANKING, CURRENCY AND THE MONEY TRUST - Charles A.

Lindbergh Sr. -

 

THE COLLECTIVE SPEECHES OF CONGRESSMAN LOUIS T.

McFADDEN -

 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM : Its' Purposes and Functions -

Comments by Silas W. Adams -

 

* BARBARA VILLIERS OR A HISTORY OF MONETARY CRIMES -

Alexander Del Mar -

 

LINCOLN MONEY MARTYRED-Dr. R.E. Search-

 

* THE MIRACLE ON MAIN STREET - F. Tupper Saussy - 160

P. - 1980 -

 

* THE FEDERAL RESERVE CONSPIRACY - Antony Sutton - 115

P. - 1995 -

 

* AMERICA IN DEPRESSION : The Coming Economic Collapse

- Dr. James R. von Feldt & Dr. Ronald S. von Feldt -

        1993 - 130 P. -

 

* AFTER THE CRASH : Life in the New Great Depression -

Michael Haga - 261 P. - 1996

 

* ON THE HORNS OF THE BEAST : The Federal Reserve and

the New World Order - William Still - 312 P.    -

 

* THE GREAT SNOW JOB : The Story of Taxes and Money,

Fraud and Slavery - Barry Konikov - 174 P. - 1995 -

 

* FINANCIAL TERRORISM : Hijacking America Under the

Threat of Bankruptcy - John McManus - 280 P. - 1993 -

 

* THE DEBT VIRUS: A COMPELLING SOLUTION TO THE WORLD'S

DEBT PROBLEMS - Jacques S. Jailaran,

        M.D.- 1995 -

 

* THE SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE--Eustace

Mullins--191 P.- 1991 -

 

THE RON PAUL MONEY BOOK: The Monetary Writings of

Congressman Ron Paul - 334 P. - 1991 -

 

THE DISPATCH OF THE MERCHANTS - William L. Avery -

A.M. - 82 P. -1977 -

 

* THE FEDERAL RESERVE CONSPIRACY : The Rockefeller

Gold Corner - Dr.Emmanuel M. Josephson - 374 P. -

        1964 -

 

THE MERCHANT BANKERS : An Inside View of the Fabulous

Financial World Personified By The Hambros, The

        Baring Brothers, Siegmund Warburg, the

Rothschilds, The Lehman Brothers, the Deutche Bank,

and the Banca

        Commerciale Italiana - Joseph Wechsberg    - 365 P.

-1966 -

 

MONEY ! : Questions and Answers For The Oppressed

Peoples Of America - Rev.Charles E. Coughlin - 188 P.

- 1935

 

* GOLD FOR SURVIVAL--Antony Sutton--

 

* THE HISTORY OF MONEY IN AMERICA - From the Earliest

Times to the Establishment of the Constitution -

        Alexander Del Mar--1899-

 

MONEY MANIPULATION AND SOCIAL ORDER : Rev. Dennis

Fahey - 107 P. - 1944 -

 

MONEY : The Greatest Hoax On Earth - Inflation Expose

- Merrill Jenkins - 244 P. - 1971 -

 

* LAWFUL MONEY EXPLAINED - (REPRINT)--How to Win Back

Your America Gertrude M.Coogan - 1939 - 67 P.

 

* CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF MONEY SINCE BABYLON -

(REPRINT) - Wickliffe B. Vennard Sr. - 1969 -

                       31 P.-

 

* THE FEDERAL RESERVE HOAX : The Age Of Deception -

(REPRINT) - Wickliffe B. Vennard Sr. - 167 P. -

 

* THE SOLUTION TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE PROBLEM -

(REPRINT)- Wickliffe B. Vennard Sr. - 1966 - 24 P.

 

* LIGHTNING OVER THE TREASURY BUILDING - (REPRINT) -

John R. Elsom - 1941 - 56 P. -

 

* FIFTY YEARS IS ENOUGH : The Case Against the World

Bank & the International Monetary Fund - Kevin Danaher

 

        1994

 

LINES OF CREDIT - ROPES OF BONDAGE : The Story of the

Financiers, Their Fellow Conspirators, and the Plot To

 

        Destroy Western Civilization - Robert Henry

Goldsborough-

 

Videos

 

* "THE NEW WORLD ORDER"-(Fifty Years of Research--5000

Years of History) - Eustace Mullins W/ Bobby Lee..60

        Min

 

EUSTACE MULLINS SPEAKS OUT - Hawaii - 90 Min - $25.00

 

* THE SECRET MONEY MONOPOLY OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

SYSTEM"    Eustace Mullins - Grenada Forum -

        1-19-95 -

 

* THE MAGICAL MONEY MACHINE - Eustace Mullins -

 

* LIBERTY IN THE BALANCE--America, the Fed, and the

IRS - Mosaic Media -

 

* CAPITAL CRIMES : How the Federal Reserve Robs Us

Blind--Bill Still -

 

* THE INTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS CONGRESS AND THE NEW

WORLD BANK - George Hunt -

 

* THE WORLD CONSERVATION BANK REVISITED - George Hunt

- 34 Min. -

 

WHO RUNS THE GLOBAL ECONOMY ? --Cliff Kincaid-

 

* WHO RUNS THE GLOBAL ECONOMY ?" - Cliff Kincaid -

Granada Forum - 12-4-97 -

 

* OFFSHORE FINANCIAL PLANNING - Alan Stang - Grenada

Forum - 2-13-97 -

 

HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD -

 

THE ECONOMIC ROLLOVER : The Collapse Has Begun--Don

McAlvany-

 

THE U.S. MONETARY SYSTEM & RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL

GOVERNMENT - Charles Collins - 2 Hr -

 

* MONTANA FREEMEN : Sweitzer / Peterson-Lien Seminar

and Common Law Course - 1995 - 3 - 2 Hr. Tapes

 

* JOHNNY LIBERTY SPEAKS AT ELIZABETH BRODERICK SEMINAR

- 2-18-96 -

 

THE FREEMEN OF MONTANA : A Threat to the International

Banksters ? - Jack McLamb -

 

 

SilverSnowball.com
© 2007 - 2014 All Rights Reserved

Articles about gold and silver         About .999 4 Bit Silver Divisibles
Back to Silversnowball                  Earnings And Income Disclaimer  

Home | FAQs | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Testimonials  | Contact